response to michael heiser critique of lds divine council - david bokovoy

50
“Ye Really Are Gods”: A Response to Michael Heiser concerning the LDS Use of Psalm 82 and the Gospel of John David E. Bokov oy  F ARMS Rev iew 19/1 (2007): 267–313. 1550-3194 (print), 2156-8049 (online) Review of “You’ve Seen One Elohim , You’ve Seen Them  All? A Cri tiqu e o f Mormonis m’ s Use o f Ps alm 82 (2006), by Michael S. Heiser. Title Author(s) Reference ISSN Abstract

Upload: piratehome1

Post on 13-Apr-2018

251 views

Category:

Documents


5 download

TRANSCRIPT

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 149

ldquoYe Really Are Godsrdquo A Response to Michael Heiserconcerning the LDS Use of Psalm 82 and the Gospel ofJohn

David E Bokovoy

FARMS Review 191 (2007) 267ndash313

1550-3194 (print) 2156-8049 (online)

Review of ldquoYoursquove Seen One Elohim Yoursquove Seen Them All A Critique of Mormonismrsquos Use of Psalm 82rdquo(2006) by Michael S Heiser

Title

Author(s)

Reference

ISSN

Abstract

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 249

ldquoY983141 R983141983137983148983148983161 A983154983141 G983151983140983155rdquo A R983141983155983152983151983150983155983141 983156983151M983145983139983144983137983141983148 H983141983145983155983141983154 983139983151983150983139983141983154983150983145983150983143 983156983144983141 LDS U983155983141

983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 983137983150983140 983156983144983141 G983151983155983152983141983148 983151983142 J983151983144983150

Review of Michael S Heiser ldquoYoursquove Seen One Elohim Yoursquove Seen Them All A Critique

of Mormonismrsquos Apologetic Use of Psalm 82rdquo presented at the 58th annual meeting

of the Evangelical Theological Society in Washington DC on 16 November 2006 now

appearing in this number of the FARMS Review pages 221ndash66

Few topics prove more intriguing to Latter-day Saints than the bib-lical view of the divine council oward the end of his ministry

the Prophet Joseph Smith devoted considerable attention to this con-troversial subject For Joseph the issue of the council of Gods was nomere piece of theological trivia In a discussion concerning his viewsregarding the council the Prophet once taught that when Latter-day Saints ldquobegin to learn this way we begin to learn the only true

God and what kind of a being we have got to worshiprdquo1048580 Since thenineteenth century Joseph Smithrsquos views regarding a divine councilof celestial deities have provided the focus of considerable criticismfor many Bible-believing Christians Yet biblical scholars howeverunwittingly have in recent years followed the Prophetrsquos lead in devot-ing substantial consideration to the role of the divine council in theHebrew Bible

Recent textual and archaeological discoveries have convincedscholars of the fundamental position held by the heavenly council ofdeities within Israelite theology ldquoTe council of God in the Hebrew

1 eachings o the Prophet Joseph Smith comp Joseph Fielding Smith (Salt LakeCity Deseret Book 1976) 349ndash50

David E Bokovoy

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 349

268 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Bible is no noveltyrdquo writes biblical scholar Martti Nissinen ldquoTe oc-

currences are well knownrdquo983044 As prominent Near Eastern archaeologistWilliam Dever has explained this view has affected the scholarly per-ception concerning the development of Israelite monotheism

A generation ago when I was a graduate student biblicalscholars were nearly unanimous in thinking that monothe-ism had been predominant in ancient Israelite religion fromthe beginningmdashnot just as an ldquoidealrdquo but as the reality oday

all that has changed Virtually all mainstream scholars (andeven a few conservatives) acknowledge that true monothe-ism emerged only in the period of the exile in Babylon in the6th century 983138983139 as the canon of the Hebrew Bible was takingshape

I have suggested along with most scholars that the emer-gence of monotheismmdashof exclusive Yahwismmdashwas largely a

response to the tragic experience of the exileo date the most exhaustive study of the biblical view of the divine

council by a Latter-day Saint is Daniel C Petersonrsquos ldquo lsquoYe Are GodsrsquoPsalm 82 and John 10 as Witnesses to the Divine Nature of Human-kindrdquo Peterson provides an impressive analysis of LDS theology andJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in the Gospel of John For Peterson the Latter-day Saint doctrine regarding the divine nature of humanity provides

a strong interpretive crux for understanding Jesusrsquos use of the counciltext ldquoGod has taken his place in the divine council in the midst ofthe gods he holds judgmentrdquo (Psalm 821 New Revised Standard Ver-

2 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets and the Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich alleinStudien zum Kulturkontakt in Kanaan Israel Palaumlstina und Ebirnari uumlr Manred Weippertzum 65 Geburtstag (Vandenhoeck Universitaumltsverlag Freiburg Schweiz 2002) 4 3 William G DeverDid God Have a Wie Archaeology and Folk Religion in AncientIsrael (Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2005) 294ndash95 297

4 Daniel C Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo Psalm 82 and John 10 as Witnesses to theDivine Nature of Humankindrdquo in Te Disciple as Scholar Essays on Scripture and the Ancient World in Honor o Richard Lloyd Anderson ed Stephen D Ricks Donald WParry and Andrew H Hedges (Provo U FARMS 2000) 471ndash594 See David E Boko- voy ldquoHeavenly Councils in the Old estament and Modern Revelationrdquo Religious Educa-tor (forthcoming)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 269

sion NRSV) Recently however Petersonrsquos essay has drawn the atten-

tion of Michael Heiser an evangelical Bible scholar who specializesin the Israelite view concerning the divine council In his critique ofPeterson Heiser takes exception to his analysis of Psalm 82 As a spe-cialist in biblical council imagery Heiser attempts to correct what heperceives as ldquocertain flaws in the LDS understanding and use of Psalm82rdquo (p 222 above) Heiser raises several important issues worthy ofcareful consideration Te following essay is not an exhaustive treat-ment of or response to the issues raised in Heiserrsquos critique Instead itwill provide a general response to Heiserrsquos claims particularly thoseclaims that apply both to LDS thought and to Psalm 82

An LDS View of the Divine Council

In his response to the LDS interpretation of Psalm 82 Heiser cor-rectly notes that Latter-day Saints have a keen interest in the biblical

view of the divine council During his ministry the Prophet JosephSmith provided important doctrinal insights regarding the heavenlyassembly Although his ideas seemed somewhat revolutionary formany Christians in the nineteenth century modern biblical schol-ars today as Heiser himself observes recognize that divine councilsof deities fulfilled a vital role in biblical theology During the Aprilconference of the church in 1844 Joseph Smith testified concerningthe importance of the heavenly council organized before the creationof the earth Concerning ldquothe beginningrdquo Joseph declared that ldquothehead of the Gods called a council of the Gods and they came togetherand concocted a plan to create the world and people itrdquo

In his journal entry for 11 June 1843 Franklin D Richards pro- vided an account of the Prophetrsquos teaching that ldquothe order and ordi-nances of the kingdom were instituted by the priesthood in the councilof heaven before the world wasrdquo Elder Richards later records Josephrsquos

5 eachings o the Prophet Joseph Smith 349 6 Te Words o Joseph Smith Te Contemporary Accounts o the Nauvoo Discourseso the Prophet Joseph ed Andrew F Ehat and Lyndon W Cook (Provo U BYU Reli-gious Studies Center 1980) 215 capitalization and spelling somewhat standardized insuch quotations

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 549

270 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

testimony that ldquoall blessings that were ordained for man by the coun-

cil of heaven were on conditions of obedience to the law thereofrdquoTe Book of Abraham refers to ldquothe intelligences that were organizedbeore the world wasrdquo (Abraham 322) In this council setting Godldquostood among those that were spirits and he saw that they were goodrdquo(Abraham 323) According to the Prophet ldquoevery man who has a call-ing to minister to the inhabitants of the world was ordained to that very purpose in the grand council of heavenrdquo Tough the conceptmay seem odd to some Christians these teachings are not completelyabsent in the Bible

Te notion of God assigning members of his council to assumeimportant positions of administrative responsibility appears in its ear-liest form in Deuteronomy 328 ldquoWhen the Most High apportionedthe nations when he divided humankind he fixed the boundaries ofthe peoples according to the number of the godsrdquo (Deuteronomy 328NRSV) For Latter-day Saints who at least in part associate the coun-

cil with humanity a seemingly parallel notion appears in the councilstory featured in the Book of Abraham

And God saw these souls that they were good and he stoodin the midst of them and he said Tese I will make my rulersfor he stood among those that were spirits and he saw that theywere good and he said unto me Abraham thou art one of themthou wast chosen before thou wast born (Abraham 323)

Peterson argues that in Abraham 322ndash23 ldquowe have God standing inthe midst of premortal spirits who are appointed to be rulers in a scenethat is really a textbook instance of the motif of the divine assemblyTese are premortal human beings Can they truly be called lsquogodsrsquo inany sense Yes they canrdquo For Peterson many of the gods describedin biblical council texts are in fact human beings

Petersonrsquos position is grounded in LDS theology Following thecouncil scene described in Abraham 3 the Book of Abraham contin-

7 Words o Joseph Smith 232 8 Words o Joseph Smith 367 9 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 541ndash42

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 271

ues with a description of the Godsrsquo involvement in creation ldquoAnd then

the Lord said Let us go down And they went down at the beginningand they that is the Gods organized and formed the heavens and theearthrdquo (Abraham 41) In his teachings Joseph Smith appears to pro- vide an interpretive key concerning the identity of these deities

[An] everlasting covenant was made between three per-sonages before the organization of this earth and relates totheir dispensation of things to men on the earth these per-

sonages according to Abrahamrsquos record are called God thefirst the Creator God the second the Redeemer and God thethird the witness or estator10485801048624

Other LDS commentators have suggested additional possibilitiesJoseph Fielding Smith taught that

it is true that Adam helped to form this earth He laboredwith our Savior Jesus Christ I have a strong view or convic-tion that there were others also who assisted them PerhapsNoah and Enoch and why not Joseph Smith and those whowere appointed to be rulers before the earth was formed Weknow that Jesus our Savior was a Spirit when this great workwas done He did all of these mighty works before he taber-nacled in the flesh10485801048580

Bruce R McConkie expressed a similar view ldquoChrist and MaryAdam and Eve Abraham and Sarah and a host of mighty men andequally glorious women comprised that group of lsquothe noble and greatonesrsquo to whom the Lord Jesus said lsquoWe will go down for there is spacethere and we will take of these materials and we will make an earthwhereon these may dwellrsquo (Abraham 322ndash24)rdquo1048580983044 Since the expressionwe will go down is followed in the Book of Abraham with the statementldquothey that is the Gods organized and formed the heavens and the

10 eachings o the Prophet Joseph Smith 190 11 Joseph Fielding Smith Doctrines o Salvation (Salt Lake City Bookcra 1999)174ndash75 12 Bruce R McConkie ldquoEve and the Fallrdquo in Woman (Salt Lake City Deseret Book1979) 59 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 749

272 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

earthrdquo (Abraham 41) it appears that Elder McConkie believed that

these Gods from the heavenly council included premortal humanso some extent therefore the title god is appropriately applied to the

premortal sons and daughters of Heavenly Father

Joseph Smithrsquos view of the divine council suggests that this assem-

bly of deities served a vital administrative role in Godrsquos plan of happi-

ness A journal entry recorded by William Clayton in 1845 provides

evidence for the Prophetrsquos teachings regarding this doctrine

It has been a doctrine taught by this church that we were inthe Grand Council amongst the Gods when the organization

of this world was contemplated and that the laws of govern-

ment were all made and sanctioned by all present and all the

ordinances and ceremonies decreed upon1048580

Significantly the Book of Abraham specifically notes that God ldquostood in

the midst ofrdquo these souls (Abraham 323) Tis reference to God stand-ing amongst divine beings in a heavenly council setting finds important

parallels with biblical tradition including Psalm 821 which refers to

God standing in the council and passing judgment

From an analysis of the legal material in the Hebrew Bible it

appears that in a traditional judicial setting judges sat while plain-

tiffs stood 1048580 Tis important distinction provides a significant clue for

interpreting Moses as judge in Exodus 1813ndash14And it came to pass on the morrow that Moses sat to judge

the people and the people stood by Moses from the morning

unto the evening And when Mosesrsquo father in law saw all that

he did to the people he said What is this thing thou doest to

the people why sittest thou thyself alone and all the people

stand by thee from morning unto even1048580

13 Words o Joseph Smith 84 n 10 14 Hans J Boecker Redeormen des Rechtslebens im Alten estament (NeukirchenNeukirchener Verlag 1964) 85ndash86 15 For additional examples of the practice of sitting for judgment see Judges 45Joel 312 Psalm 1225 Proverbs 208 Daniel 79ndash10

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 273

Biblical scholar Simon Parker has shown that the distinction

between sitting and standing in judicial settings also operates in the bib-lical view of the divine council1048580 Tese nuances were not unique to theWest Semitic world In Mesopotamia ldquoanybody who happened alongand had a mind to could lsquostandrsquomdashthat is participatemdashin the pu∆rum

[ie assembly]rdquo1048580 As Assyriologist Torkild Jacobsen explained theAkkadian words ldquouzuzzu lsquoto standrsquo and yašābu lsquoto sitrsquo are technicalterms for participating in the pu∆rumrdquo1048580 From a Near Eastern perspec-

tive these observations shed considerable light on passages such as Isa-iah 313 where Jehovah ldquostands up to plead a cause He rises to championpeoplesrdquo (Jewish Study Bible JSB)

Petersonrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 suggests that the text reflects thecouncil story depicted in the Book of Abraham Te fact that Psalm821 specifically states that ldquoGod stands in the divine councilrdquo sustainsPetersonrsquos thesis Peterson writes

We need not take Psalm 82rsquos portrayal of judgment andcondemnation within the divine council as literally accurate asrepresenting an actual historical event (although obviously itmight) any more than we are obliged to take as literally true thedepiction of Satan in Job 1ndash2 freely coming and going withinthe heavenly court and even placing wagers with God1048580

With its traditional council imagery Psalm 82 has intrigued biblical

scholars such as Parker who argued that the text originally describedYahwehrsquos rise to supremacy in the assembly9830441048624 Parker in part based hisassessment on the fact that Psalm 82 appears as a section of the Elohis-tic collection wherein the editor(s) reveal a strong propensity towardreplacing divine names such as Yahweh with Elohim

16 See for example 1 Kings 2219 21 Job 16 21 Daniel 79ndash10 see also Simon BParker ldquoTe Beginning of the Reign of GodmdashPsalm 82 as Myth and Liturgyrdquo Revue

Biblique 1024 (1995) 537 17 Torkild Jacobsen ldquoPrimitive Democracy in Ancient Mesopotamiardquo Journal oNear Eastern Studies 23 (1943) 164 18 See Jacobsen ldquoPrimitive Democracyrdquo 164 n 24 19 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 536 20 Parker ldquoBeginning of the Reign of Godrdquo 537

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 949

274 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Parker argued that verses one and five in Psalm 82 served as nar-

rative introductions to Yahwehrsquos council address delivered before hisfather Elyon the head of the council In his analysis Parker convinc-ingly illustrates that Yahweh would have originally appeared in Psalm82 as merely one of the assembled participants of deities ldquoHavingthought that the members of the council were all gods (and therefore justmdashand immortal) Yahweh now recognizes that being incorrigi-bly unjust they will perish like mortals fall like some human poten-taterdquo9830441048580 Parkerrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 works well with Petersonrsquos claimthat the text reflects the story of the grand council from the Books ofAbraham and Moses

In an important part of his critique concerning these issuesHeiser argues against the theory endorsed by biblical scholars such asParker and Mark S Smith that in its earliest stages Israelite religionoriginally perceived Yahweh as a son of El ldquoIn terms of an evaluationof the separateness of El and Yahwehrdquo writes Heiser ldquoLatter-day Saint

scholars have too blithely accepted the positions of Smith Parker andBarker All is not nearly as tidy as they proposerdquo (p 234) Heiser forexample maintains that rather than a separate divine father the Elyonor ldquoGod Most Highrdquo presented in Deuteronomy 328ndash9 is none otherthan Yahweh himself In this proposal Heiserrsquos view stands in directcontrast to Mark Smith who argues that ldquoearly on Yahweh is under-stood as Israelrsquos god in distinction to El Deuteronomy 328ndash9 casts

Yahweh in the role of one of the sons of El here called gtelyocircn Tispassage presents an order in which each deity received its own nationIsrael was the nation that Yahweh receivedrdquo983044983044

Te present form of Deuteronomy seems to support Heiserrsquos argu-ment Rather than a separate deity Elyon and Yahweh might appearas a single reference to the head God of the council In addition to thedivine allotment depicted in Deuteronomy 328 the idea of a series of

minor deities that Yahweh had assigned to govern the various nationsappears in Deuteronomy 419ndash20 Tese verses which discuss the

21 Parker ldquoBeginning of the Reign of Godrdquo 539ndash40 22 Mark S Smith Te Early History o God Yahweh and the Other Deities in AncientIsrael (Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2002) 32

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 275

allotment of the host of heaven to the nations of the world parallel

both the vocabulary and the ideology witnessed in 328ndash9 In Deuter-onomy 329 the author uses the same root hlk featured in 420mdashalbeitas a noun Deuteronomy 419ndash20 specifically identifies Yahweh as thedeity who gave each council deity his allotment

And when you look up to the sky and behold the sun and themoon and the stars the whole heavenly host you must not belured into bowing down to them or serving them Tese the

Lord your God allotted to other peoples everywhere underheaven but you the Lord took and brought out of Egypt thatiron blast furnace to be His very own people as is now thecase (Deuteronomy 419ndash20 Jewish Publication Society JPS)983044

Based upon this evidence Heiserrsquos assessment of the view fea-tured in the current form of Deuteronomy may be correct howeverHeiser ultimately fails to address important evidence recognized by

many contemporary biblical scholars that suggests that Israelite the-ology did in fact evolve in a manner consistent with the basic claimsof Parker and Smith983044 For example David Noel Freedman maintainsthat the combination ldquoYahweh Elohimrdquo or ldquoLord Godrdquo found in theearly chapters of Genesis probably derives from an earlier sentencename given the God of Israel namely ldquoYahweh Elrdquo or ldquoGod createsrdquo983044In a related assessment Mark Smith has argued

Te original god of Israel was El Tis reconstruction maybe inferred from two pieces of information First the name

23 Te Jewish Publication Society edition appears in Adele Berlin and Marc Z Brettlereds Te Jewish Study Bible anakh ranslation (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 24 Of course the fact that Deuteronomy 4 simply reflects the language of Deuter-onomy 32 does not automatically mean that both texts derive from the same author Teauthor of Deuteronomy 4 may have simply created his passages concerning Yahweh tointentionally reflect the language and ideology in Deuteronomy 32 in order to present

Yahweh as the chief council deity Tis very real possibility should be considered byHeiser in further research for an introduction to theological changes reflected through-out the book of Deuteronomy see especially Bernard M Levinson Deuteronomy and theHermeneutics o Legal Innovation (New York Oxford University Press 1997) 25 David Noel Freedman ldquoTe Name of the God of Mosesrdquo Journal o Biblical Lit-erature 793 (1960) 156

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1149

276 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of Israel is not a Yahwistic name with the divine element of

Yahweh but an El name with the element lt ēl Tis fact wouldsuggest that El was the original chief god of the group namedIsrael Second Genesis 4924ndash25 presents a series of El epi-thets separate from the mention of Yahweh in verse 18983044

A detailed response to all the evidence amassed by scholars who view a theological evolution in the Hebrew Bible was beyond thescope of Heiserrsquos essay However notwithstanding the probability that

Heiser is correct in linking Elyon with Yahweh in Deuteronomy thisclaim does not negate the likelihood that in ancient Israel Yahwehwas originally a son of Elyon

In the present form of the biblical text the term [gtElyocircn]is understood to be an epithet for Yahweh the God of IsraelIt is possible however as some have argued that the epithetmay conceal a reference to a separate deity possibly an oldergod with whom Yahweh came to be identified983044

LDS scholars have good reason to accept the historical views of schol-ars such as Parker and Smith

Psalm 82 as the Grand Council

Tough helpful to his analysis ultimately Petersonrsquos claims are

not dependent upon the legitimacy of a Parker Smith historical inter-pretation Petersonrsquos argument for interpreting Psalm 82 as a reflec-tion of the grand council story featured in modern revelation findssupport in Near Eastern tradition In the ancient Near East stories ofthe divine council typically begin with a crisis in which the head Godcalls together the gods of the council to resolve the dilemma Duringthe council a series of proposals are offered Finally a ldquosaviorrdquo steps

forward offering his services to the council Tis savior then receives26 Smith Early History o God 32

27 Eric E Elnes and Patrick D Miller ldquoElyonrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demonsin the Bible ed Karel van der oorn Bob Becking and Pieter W van der Horst (LeidenBrill 1995) 560

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 277

a commission to perform his redemptive role983044 Tis common Near

Eastern pattern is seen for example in the Mesopotamian story ofdivine kingship known as Enuma Elish983044 In this Babylonian myththe head god of the pantheon calls together the gods in a council toresolve a dilemma created by the goddess iamat Following a seriesof proposals Marduk the chief god of Babylon receives a commissionas savior Marduk agrees to perform the role of savior on the condi-tion that his father Ea the head god of the council grant Marduk allpower and glory Te same pattern appears in the Assyrian myth ofAnzu However in this version the god Ninurta agrees to serve ascouncil savior while allowing his father to retain his position withinthe council

Like Enuma Elish and Psalm 82 many of the council stories fromthe ancient Near East portray stories of cosmic revolt in which judg-ment is rendered against divine beings Tis pattern is familiar toLatter-day Saints through the council story provided in the Books of

Moses and Abraham (Moses 41ndash4 and Abraham 322ndash28) Althoughsometimes obscured the same pattern is reflected in council tradi-tions featured in the Hebrew Bible Te story of council crisis forexample appears in the Isaiah Apocalypse

On that day [Yahweh] will punishthe host of heaven in heavenand on earth the kings of the earth (Isaiah 2421 NRSV)

Similar language emerges in Isaiah 271

On that day [Yahweh]with his cruel and great and strong swordwill punish Leviathan the fleeing serpent (NRSV)

28 Tis summary is based upon the pattern identified by Simon B Parker ldquoCoun-cilrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 391ndash98 for a consideration of the divine coun-

cil stories within the Bible as ldquotype scenesrdquo see David M Fleming ldquoTe Divine Councilas ype Scene in the Hebrew Biblerdquo (PhD diss Te Southern Baptist Teological Semi-nary 1989) 29 For an English translation of Enuma Elish see Stephanie Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia Creation the Flood Gilgamesh and Others (New York Oxford UniversityPress 1989) 228ndash77

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1349

278 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

For Latter-day Saints these traditions preserved in texts such as Enuma

Elish the book of Isaiah and Psalm 82 provide a type of retellingmdashalbeit sometimes hiddenmdashof the primordial events concerning thegrand council described in modern revelation

In the ancient Near East members of the divine council oenappear to receive a type of reprimand suggestive of the punishmentgiven Lucifer in LDS scripture

Because that Satan rebelled against me and sought to destroy

the agency of man which I the Lord God had given himand also that I should give unto him mine own power by thepower of mine Only Begotten I caused that he should be castdown And he became Satan yea even the devil the father ofall lies to deceive and to blind men and to lead them captiveat his will even as many as would not hearken unto my voice(Moses 43ndash4)

With the words ldquoHere am I send merdquo Latter-day Saints believeJesus Christ stepped forward in the council crisis and volunteered tosave humanity from the challenges associated with mortal probation(Abraham 327) According to the council story depicted in the Bookof Abraham Lucifer ldquowas angry and kept not his first estate and atthat day many followed aer himrdquo (Abraham 328) In his analysisPeterson does well to draw attention to the fact that Isaiahrsquos refer-

ence to ldquoLucifer son of the morningrdquo in Isaiah 1412 ldquodraws us againinto the astronomical imagery oen connected with the divine assem-blyrdquo1048624 In his own studies Heiser has convincingly argued for a similarposition

Ugaritic regularly refers to heavenly beings as p∆r kkbm (the ldquocongregation of the starsrdquo) language corresponding with כוכ י קר (ldquomorning starsrdquo in parallelism with the ldquosons of

Godrdquo in Job 387) and (the ldquostars of Godrdquo Isa 1413)כוכ י לAside from the context of these references each of whichclearly points to personal beings not astronomical phenom-

30 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 533

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 279

ena it is significant that in the entire ancient near eastern lit-

erary record El is never identified with a heavenly body Tusldquothe stars of Elrdquo points to created beings with divine status1048580

For Latter-day Saints recent archaeological and textual discoverieslike those referred to by Heiser are especially intriguing However asPeterson argues in the quotation provided above (p 273) Latter-daySaints do not need the Bible to express a precise parallel with modernrevelation in order to find support for LDS theology

Te fact that texts such as Psalm 82 somewhat parallel Latter-daySaint teachings is sufficient to argue that a more exact version of thegrand council story such as is witnessed in modern revelation mayhave existed in antiquity However notwithstanding his basic agree-ment with Peterson concerning the fundamental role assumed by thecouncil of deities in the Hebrew Bible Heiser ultimately departs fromPetersonrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 suggesting that the biblical view of

the council contains eight fundamental points that conflict with LDStheology

Heiserrsquos Sixteen Points

Heiser provides a list of sixteen arguments outlining his positionregarding Psalm 82 and the divine council He divides these into eightpoints ldquowith which many evangelicals would probably disagree and

with which many Latter-day Saints would likely agreerdquo followed byeight points ldquowith which many Latter-day Saints would probably dis-agree and with which many evangelicals would likely agreerdquo (pp 222ndash24) Heiserrsquos perspectives regarding Psalm 82 are clearly sound Teyinclude such issues as the inadequacy of the term monotheism as areference to Israelite theology and the biblical use of the word elohim as a literal reference to gods rather than human judges While Heiseris certainly correct in suggesting that his first eight views would proveproblematic for many evangelicals but not for most Mormons Heiserrsquoslist of eight statements on Psalm 82 that he assumes many Latter-day

31 Michael S Heiser ldquoDeuteronomy 328 and the Sons of Godrdquo 15 for an electronic version see thedivinecouncilcomD32BibSacpdf (accessed 8 February 2007)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1549

280 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Saints would disagree with indicates a basic lack of exposure to Latter-

day Saint thoughtHeiser is well versed in biblical studies His work has contrib-uted important insights toward a scholarly view of the essential roleassumed by the divine council in Old estament theology but he isnot a Latter-day Saint However Heiser does not consider in his cri-tique the possibility that most Latter-day Saints including Petersondo not believe that the biblical view of the council mirrors preciselywhat Latter-day Saints accept through modern revelation JosephSmithrsquos revelations proclaim our day as the dispensation of the ful-ness of times ldquoaccording to that which was ordained in the midst ofthe Council of the Eternal God of all other gods before this world wasrdquo(DampC 12132) For Latter-day Saints this final dispensation representsthe time decreed by God and his council in which ldquothose things whichnever have been revealed from the foundation of the world but havebeen kept hid from the wise and prudent shall be revealed unto babes

and sucklings in this the dispensation of the fulness of timesrdquo (DampC12818) Terefore Latter-day Saint scholars acknowledge that an LDSunderstanding of the council does not precisely mirror the perspec-tives manifested in the Bible Tat having been said most Latter-daySaints certainly accept the view advocated by Peterson that the bib-lical perspective of the heavenly council of deities is in greater har-mony with LDS belief than with any other contemporary Christian

tradition A recognition that the Bible though not flawless is inspiredof God allows Latter-day Saints to comfortably engage the views putforth by biblical scholars such as Heiser even when those observa-tions prove threatening to our evangelical counterparts

If certain biblical authors for example did in fact believe asHeiser seems to correctly suggest that Yahweh was ldquonot lsquobirthedrsquointo existence by the lsquoolden godsrsquo described in Ugaritic textsrdquo (p 223)Latter-day Saints would have no problem simply accepting the obser- vation as a biblical view Similarly even though Heiser assumes thatmany Mormons would disagree with his opinion that the Bible pre-sents Yahweh the God of Israel as ldquoontologically uniquerdquo (p 223) inreality many Latter-day Saints recognize that this is precisely the case

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 281

Even within LDS theology God the Father stands out as ontologically

unique inasmuch as he created the spirits of all humanity Modernrevelation describes God with the words ldquofrom eternity to eternity Heis the same and His years never failrdquo (DampC 764)

Yahwehrsquos Ontological Uniqueness

In addition to the evidence Heiser presents for what he calls Yah-wehrsquos ontological uniqueness the name Yahweh itself appears vocal-

ized in the Hebrew Bible as a finite Hiphil verb form Te vocalizationof YHWH as ldquoYahwehrdquo carries a specific nuance since ldquoHebrew gram-mars traditionally represent the Hiphil stem as the causative of the Qal

stemrdquo983044 Frank Moore Cross explains that ldquothe accumulated evidence strongly supports the view that the name Yahweh is a causativeimperfect of the Canaanite-Proto-Hebrew verb hwy lsquoto bersquo rdquo Tere-fore the divine name Yahweh according to this view literally means

ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procreatesrdquo One of the inter-esting points to consider concerning the biblical title Yahweh Sabaoth or ldquoLord of Hostsrdquo is that typically in Hebrew proper names do notappear bound to a genitive nounmdashthat is ldquoJohn of Hostsrdquo or ldquoMary ofEarthrdquo etc Since a proper name cannot traditionally function as abound form in a construct chain Cross interprets the King James titleldquoLord of Hostsrdquo as ldquo lsquohe creates the (divine) hostsrsquo rdquo If correct this

view would lend support to Heiserrsquos argument that ldquoYahweh is said32 Bruce K Waltke and M OrsquoConnor An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax

(Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 1990) 433 33 Frank Moore Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge Harvard Uni- versity Press 1973) 65 34 ldquoA proper noun cannot as a rule be followed by a genitiverdquo Paul Jouumlon A Gram-mar o Biblical Hebrew trans and rev Muraoka (Rome Editrice Pontificio IstitutoBiblico 2000) 2481 Admittedly however textual evidence shows that the rule need notapply to divine names see J A Emerton ldquoNew Light on Israelite Religion Te Implica-

tions of the Inscriptions from Kunti llet lsquoAjrudrdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wis-senschaf 94 (1982) 12ndash13 and especially John H Choi ldquoResheph and YHWH IacuteĔBĀlt Ocirc rdquoVetus estamentum 54 (2004) 17ndash28 I offer this assessment of the title Yahweh Sabaothwhich reflects the views of scholars such as David Noel Freedman and Frank MooreCross as merely an intriguing possibility 35 Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic 65 emphasis added

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1749

282 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo (p 250)

Heiser incorrectly assumes that this apparent biblical teaching con-cerning Yahwehrsquos uniqueness among the gods is not inconsistent withLDS theology

Tough Latter-day Saints view God the Father and Jesus Christas two separate divine beings for the Saints the biblical titles associ-ated with these deities are clearly interchangeable Latter-day Saintshave no problem therefore in associating God the Father with thetitle Yahwehmdashthat is ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procre-atesrdquo Te 1916 official declaration presented by the First Presidency ofthe church states ldquoGod the Eternal Father whom we designate by theexalted name-title Elohim is the literal Parent of our Lord and SaviorJesus Christ and of the spirits of the human racerdquo Clearly howeverthe First Presidencyrsquos move toward designating God the Father as Elo-him and Jesus the Son as Jehovah was primarily a move by churchleaders to create uniformity in Latter-day Saint expression In a recent

Ensign article Keith Meservy observed that ldquoin at least three Old es-tament passages it appears that L983151983154983140 [ie Jehovah] applies to Heav-enly Father not Jesus Christ Ps 1101 Ps 27 Isa 5310rdquo No doubtfor many Latter-day Saints this estimate offered by Meservy couldbe greatly augmented LDS teachings therefore do not preclude theontological uniqueness of God the Father that Heiser witnesses in theHebrew Bible

Yahweh as a Being ldquoSpecies-Uniquerdquo

Certainly Heiser is justified in suggesting that the gods of thedivine council appear inferior to Israelrsquos deity He uses this correctobservation however to build an argument that Israelrsquos God wastherefore somehow ldquospecies-uniquerdquo (p 250) In his discussion con-cerning the biblical evidence for Yahweh being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo

Heiser bases his interpretation on five points of evidence (1) ldquoYahweh36 ldquoTe Father and the Son A Doctrinal Exposition by the First Presidency and the

welverdquo as cited in Messages o the First Presidency o the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints ed James R Clark (Salt Lake City Bookcra 1971) 526 emphasis added 37 Keith H Meservy ldquoLORD = Jehovahrdquo Ensign June 2002 29 n 3

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 283

is said to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo

(2) ldquoYahweh was considered pre-existent to all godsrdquo (3) Yahweh hasthe power to strip the other elohim of their immortality (4) Yahwehalone is referred to in the Bible as ha-elohim and (5) ldquothe other godsare commanded to worship Yahwehrdquo (see pp 250ndash57) Tough eachof Heiserrsquos five points of evidence do in fact appear in the Bible con-trary to Heiserrsquos suggestion none of these observations establishesYahweh as being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo In the Bible Yahweh is the God ofgods but the biblical gods were still biblical gods As Paul Sanders hasexplained according to the Deuteronomic vision ldquothe [Sons of Goddescribed in Deuteronomy 328] are relatively independent they havetheir own dominions like YHWHrdquo

Notwithstanding his acceptance of the importance of the divinecouncil of deities in biblical theology Heiserrsquos critique suffers in partthrough his effort to define Israelrsquos deity as a being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo(p 250) He is correct in drawing attention to the fact that biblical

authors viewed their deity as exceptionally powerful in the councilldquoFor the Lord your God is God of godsrdquo proclaims Deuteronomy 1017ldquoand Lord of lordsrdquo Unfortunately however in identifying Yahweh asa being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo Heiser forces the biblical view of deities intoan image somewhat consistent with radical monotheism Contraryto Heiserrsquos suggestion the creative act in and of itself does not set thecreator apart as an exclusive species Te same point also applies tothe issue Heiser raises concerning primogeniture In other words aman for instance may exist before both his children and his siblingsand though preeminence may render the person ldquouniquerdquo on somelevels prior existence would not in this or in any other case rendera being as ldquospecies-uniquerdquo rue the Bible speaks of gods separatefrom Israelrsquos primary deity as elohim a˙erimmdashthat is ldquoother godsrdquo(see Exodus 203 2313 Deuteronomy 57 614 etc) However as YairHoffman has observed ldquoA survey of the use of a˙erim [ldquootherrdquo] shows

38 Paul Sanders Te Provenance o Deuteronomy 32 (Leiden Brill 1996) 37039 Te term radical monotheism refers to the theological position that only one

divine being exists in the universe Te expression was popularized by ikva Frymer-Kensky In the Wake o the Goddesses Women Culture and the Biblical ransormationo Pagan Myth (New York Free Press 1992) 154

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1949

284 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

that when used attributively with regard to garments days messen-

gers and objects it clearly has a relative meaning something differ-ent yet o the same kind rdquo1048624 Terefore ldquothere is no reason to assumethat in the phrase elohim a˙erim the attribute has a more distinctivemeaningrdquo1048580 When all is said and done the biblical deities like Yah-weh himself were still gods

In addition contrary to Heiserrsquos assertion the simple fact that Elo-him possesses the power to strip the other deities of their immortalityin Psalm 82 does not indicate that these gods are of a different spe-cies than Elohim According to the Psalmistrsquos view Elohim is simplymore powerful than the other gods Analogies from the ancient NearEast illustrate the problematic nature of Heiserrsquos claim In the Babylo-nian story Enuma Elish for instance the primordial mother goddessiamat created the god Qingu as chief deity over iamatrsquos militaryforces As a result of his actions taken against the divine council thedeities of the assembly ldquobound [Qingu] and held him in front of Ea

[and they] imposed the penalty on him and cut off his bloodrdquo983044 Tefact that in Enuma Elish the council could strip Qingu of his immor-tality did not mean that the god Qingu was somehow of a different orlesser divine species In the Sumerian myth of Enlil and Ninlil Enlil(one of the ldquogreat godsrdquo of Mesopotamia) is brought to trial for havingraped the goddess Ninlil As Enlil returned to the city of Nippur hewas arrested by the assembly while walking through the temple court

Te trial commenced immediately In the myth the council pre-sented the verdict that ldquothe sex offender Enlil will leave the townrdquoAccordingly the myth reports that Enlil le Nippur headed towardthe netherworld In his assessment of the story Jacobsen points out

40 Yair Hoffman ldquoTe Conception of lsquoOther Godsrsquo in Deuteronomistic Literaturerdquoin Concepts o the Other in Near Eastern Religions ed Ilai Alon Ithamar Gruenwald andItamar Singer (Leiden Brill 1994) 107 emphasis added 41 Hoffman ldquoConception of Other Godsrdquo 107

42 As cited in Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia 261 43 For a summary of the myth see Gwendolyn Leick A Dictionary o Ancient NearEastern Mythology (London Routledge 1998) 47ndash48 for a translation see TorkildJacobsen Te Harps Tat Once Sumerian Poetry in ranslation (New Haven YaleUniversity Press 1987) 167ndash80 44 Jacobsen Harps 174

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 285

that Enlilrsquos descent to Hades may indicate that the high god in Meso-

potamian mythology was originally sentenced to death As notedby James Ackerman in his dissertation concerning Psalm 82 thesetypes of judgment scenes in which the council determines that godswill die like mortals carry important implications for interpreting thecultural background for the biblical text Contrary to Heiserrsquos inter-pretation none of these stories indicate that the dying gods were of adifferent species or order than the gods who issued the sentence

Near Eastern traditions oen place considerable emphasis on thedying-god motif In no sense however are these dying godsmdashevenwhen resurrectedmdashsomehow depicted as a lesser species Heiserrsquos con-fusion concerning the implications of a biblical statement that Godissued a judgment of death to the deities of the divine council illus-trates the fundamental need for biblical scholars to pursue Assyriol-ogy in connection with their efforts to interpret the Hebrew Bible

Also contrary to Heiserrsquos suggestion the punishment meted out

to usurpers in Near Eastern council stories never indicates that thecriminals derived from some sort of exceptional species Te storyof Athtar from ancient Canaan for instance presents the traditionof Athtarrsquos descent to the underworld following the deityrsquos ascensionto the throne of Baal Te details involved in Athtarrsquos story containimportant thematic elements depicted in ancient Near Eastern storiesof cosmic revolt Athtar seems to share some semblance with Baalrsquos

mortal enemy Mot or ldquoDeathrdquo into whom Baal himself descendsHence Hugh Page notes that Athtarrsquos ldquodescent to the underworld implies that on some level Athtar has placed himself in proxim-ity to or relationship with the only god that Baal proves incapable

45 Torkild Jacobsen ldquoAn Ancient Mesopotamian rial for Homiciderdquo in owardthe Image o ammuz and Other Essays on Mesopotamian History and Culture ed Wil-liam L Moran (Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1970) 207 first published inStudia Biblica et Orientalia vol 3 of Analecta Biblica et Orientalia XII (Rome Pontificio

Istituto Biblico 1959) 130ndash50 46 See James S Ackerman ldquoAn Exegetical Study of Psalm 82rdquo (PhD diss HarvardUniversity 1966) 186ndash93 47 For a recent survey of the issue which includes a survey of previous assessmentssee ryggve N D Mettinger Te Riddle o Resurrection ldquoDying and Rising Godsrdquo in the Ancient Near East (Stockholm Almqvist amp Wiksell 2001)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2149

286 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of defeatingrdquo Athtarrsquos assumption of the throne of Baal followed

by his descent to the underworld indicates that this portion of theBaal cycle from ancient Canaan fits the general category of the cosmic

revolt genre witnessed in texts such as Abraham 3 and Psalm 82

1 Kindly El the Compassionate answers

2 ldquoOne so small cannot race

3 with Baal cannot handle the lance

4 with Daganrsquos son when they test one anotherrdquo

5 Lady Athirat of the Sea answers 6 ldquoLet us enthrone Athtar the Strong

7 Let Athtar the Strong be kingrdquo

8 Ten Athtar the Strong

9 ascended the summit of Sapan

10 He sat upon the throne of Mightiest Baal

11 His feet would not reach its footstool

12 His head would not reach its top 13 Athtar the Strong answered

14 ldquoI cannot rule on the summit of Sapanrdquo

15 Athtar the Strong descended

16 He descended from the throne of Mightiest Baal

17 And he ruled over the underworld god of all of it

18 drew in barrels

19 drew in jars (KU 1649ndash67 translation)

Te fact that Athtar the Strong experienced a type of ldquodeathrdquo in which

he ldquoruled over the underworldrdquo following his descent from Baalrsquos

throne does not suggest that Athtar was a ldquobeing species-uniquerdquo from

the other deities any more than Inanna or Ishtar the Mesopotamian

goddesses who experienced a type of death in the underworld were of

a different species than the gods Ea Enki Marduk and so forth48 Hugh R Page Jr Te Myth o Cosmic Rebellion A Study o Its Reflexes in Ugaritic

and Biblical Literature (Leiden Brill 1996) 92 Pagersquos views concerning the Athtar mythhave been criticized by Gregorio del Olmo Lete ldquoIn Search of the Canaanite Luciferrdquo Aula Orientalis 19 (2001) 125ndash32

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 287

Still in his efforts to present Yahweh as a being species-unique

Heiser correctly draws attention to the other gods of the council whoare commanded to worship Yahweh In his analysis he focuses uponthe call given to the gods in Psalm 291ndash2 ldquoAscribe to Yahweh O sons ofGod ascribe to Yahweh glory and strength Ascribe to Yahweh the gloryof his name worship Yahweh in the splendor of holinessrdquo (as quotedon p 256) While Heiserrsquos observations certainly illustrate that biblicalauthors viewed their deity as uniquemdashthat is exceptionalmdashthroughout

Near Eastern tradition lesser gods regularly appear in a position inwhich they offer praise service and devotion to the higher gods of thecouncil Richard J Clifford explains that in the Phoenician view of theassembly ldquoas elsewhere in the ancient Near East the assemblies are pic-tured as subordinate to individual gods although the assemblyrsquos con-sent seems necessary for important decisionsrdquo Simply because ancienttextsmdashincluding the Biblemdashdepict the members of the assemblies asldquosubordinate to individual godsrdquo this in no way implies that the higher

deities somehow belonged to a separate species Ancient Near Easterntexts such as Mursilirsquos Hymn and Prayer to the Sun-goddess o Arinna (CH 376A) establish the fact that Near Eastern peoples believed thatgods of the same species paid homage to higher deities in a way compa-rable to the biblical view

You O Sun-goddess of Arinna are honored goddess Your

name is honored among names and your divinity is honoredamong gods Furthermore among the gods you are the mosthonored and the greatest Tere is no other god more honoredor greater than you You are the lord of just judgment Youcontrol the kingship of heaven and earth1048624

Holding the position ldquomost honoredrdquo among the gods did not estab-lish Arinna as species-unique Arinna was simply the god before

whom from the authorrsquos perspective the other gods would regularly49 Richard J Clifford ldquoPhoenician Religionrdquo Bulletin o the American Schools o

Oriental Research 279 (1990) 57 50 As cited in Itamar Singer Hittite Prayers (Atlanta Society of Biblical Literature2002) 51

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2349

288 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquofall downrdquo1048580 For the ancients the Near Eastern view of the divine

court clearly reflected or were expressed in terms of earthly realityTerefore just as the high king before whom other humans paid hom-age was still a human being so the god to whom other deities paidhomage was still a god matching in species For biblical authors Yah-weh stood at the head of the hierarchy in Israelite thought Yahwehwas unique as the God of gods but he was not unique in his divinityFrom a biblical perspective Yahweh even shared this divinity withhumanity

Humans as Teomorphic Beings

In his discussion concerning the biblical view regarding theomor-phic humans Peterson draws attention to Paulrsquos New estament ser-mon presented in Acts 1728ndash29

For in him we live and move and have our being as

certain also of your own poets have said For we are also hisoffspring

Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God we oughtnot to think that the Godhead is like unto gold or silver orstone graven by art and manrsquos device

Peterson in part argues for a biblical connection between God andhumanity based on the fact that ldquothe word rendered lsquooffspringrsquo by the

King James translators is the Greek genos which is cognate with theLatin genus and means lsquofamilyrsquo or lsquoracersquo or lsquokindrsquo or even and mostespecially interesting lsquodescendants of a common ancestorrsquo rdquo983044 ForLatter-day Saints human beings are literally the offspring of God andtherefore intrinsically theomorphic Part of the strength of Petersonrsquosessay lies in his recognition that like Latter-day Saints biblical authorsregularly blur the distinction between humanity and divine beings

Not only does Peterson draw attention to the prophetic interactionwith the council as support for his thesis but he also places consider-

51 Singer Hittite Prayers 51 52 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 542ndash43 53 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 289

able emphasis upon the deified dead in the Hebrew Bible and the early

Christian teaching regarding deification Heiser notwithstandingPetersonrsquos evidence rejects the idea that a genus equation of God and

humankind appears in the Bible

For his criticisms of Petersonrsquos views Heiser places considerable

weight on the notion that ldquothe concept of the image of God does not

advance the idea that there is a genus equation of God and human-

kind or that God was once a manrdquo (p 224) On some levels Heiserrsquos

point concerning the word tzelem or ldquoimagerdquo in Genesis 126ndash27is correct Concerning this controversial term Marc Z Brettler has

recently explained

Te word tzelem (ldquoimagerdquo) elsewhere always refers to a

physical representation For example the Book of Ezekiel

uses tzelem when it refers to ldquomen sculptured upon the walls

figures of Chaldeans drawn in vermilionrdquo (2314) or when it

accuses Israel of fornicating with ldquophallic imagesrdquo (1617) Teword oen refers to idols (eg Num 3352 Ezek 720 Amos

526 2 Chron 2317) It always signifies a concrete entity

rather than an abstract one Tis is not surprising since the

Bible (in contrast to most medieval philosophical traditions

both Jewish and Christian) oen depicts God in corporeal

terms

Genesis 126ndash27 suggests that Godrsquos physical likeness is similar to

humanityrsquos but Heiser is correct that the statement does not indicate

that biblical authors viewed humans as gods or that God himself was

once a human However many other texts from the Bible do present a

theomorphic view of humanity Peterson therefore is precisely correct

in stating that ldquothe Latter-day Saint understanding that humans are of

the same genus or species as God is thus clearly biblicalrdquo54 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509ndash28

55 Marc Z Brettler How to Read the Bible (Philadelphia Jewish Publication Society2005) 43ndash44 Hebrew word deleted 56 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 547

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2549

290 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Adam as a Divine Council Member

In addition to associating humanity with the tzelem of God theBible describes the first man as a deified member of the divine council

In the Eden story the Lord took advantage of the wet claylike soil and

ldquoformed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils

the breath of life and man became a living soulrdquo (Genesis 27) In an

important study concerning this imagery Walter Brueggemann has

shown that a biblical connection exists between being raised from the

dust and enthronement ldquoo be taken lsquofrom the dustrsquo means to be

elevated from obscurity to royal office and to return to dust means to

be deprived of that office and returned to obscurityrdquo Imagery such

as that witnessed in 1 Kings 162 supports Brueggemannrsquos interpreta-

tion ldquoForasmuch as I [God] exalted thee [Jehu] out of the dust and

made thee prince over my people Israel rdquo (1 Kings 162) Hence the

notion of the God raising man ldquofrom the dust of the earthrdquo in Genesis

27 in part suggests that Yahweh begins his creative activity by form-

ing a divine king According to Genesis 215 this divine king through

a type of imitatio dei would continue to perform the work of Yahweh

who ldquoplantedrdquo the garden ldquoAnd the Lord God took the man and put

him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep itrdquo In a simi-

lar fashion Mesopotamian kings such as Hammurapi glorified their

efforts through the use of creation and agricultural imageryI encircled [the wall] with a swamp I dug the Euphrates

as far as Sippar (and) made it reach a prosperous quay

I Hammu-rāpi who builds up the land caused Sippar

and Babylon to dwell in peaceful abodes forever What

from [primordial days] no one among the kings had done I

did in a grand fashion for the god Šamaš my lord

57 Walter Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestament-liche Wissenschaf 841 (1972) 1ndash18 58 Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo 2 59 Douglas Frayne Old Babylonian Period (2003ndash1595 BC) (oronto University oforonto Press 1990) 348ndash49

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 291

Te view presented in the Babylonian inscription on the wall

of Sippar reflects the common Near Eastern assumption featured inGenesis 2 of a God king participating in the act of creation from ldquopri-

mordial daysrdquo through structure1048624 As a king Hammurapi assumed

the same role filled by deities who created the universe by giving order

to preexistent chaos In its depiction of Adam as the primordial gar-

dener the Bible relies upon similar imagery

Manrsquos status as the archetypal gardener king in Genesis 2ndash3 con-

tains important parallels with Mesopotamian kingship theory1048580 Sev-eral examples of Mesopotamian iconography feature a depiction of the

tree (or plant) of life over which the king and priests appear pouring

libations In assessing the connection between Mesopotamian kings

and gardeners Geo Widengren cites these statements from the am-

muz text R IV 27 No I

A tamarisk which in the garden has no water to drink

Whose foliage on the plant sends forth no twig

A plant which they water no more in its pot

Whose roots are torn away

A herb which is in the garden has no water to drink

Among the flowers of the garden he sleeps

Among the flowers of the garden he is thrown

According to Widengren ldquothe ree of Life is watered by the kingwho pours out over it the Water of Life which he has in his possession

Te ree of Life constantly needs the Water of Life near which it is

growing in the garden of paradiserdquo983044 Te connection between king

and gardener was widely attested throughout ancient Mesopotamia

60 In his translation Frayne renders the Akkadian word szligi-a-tim as ldquothe pastrdquo Teinscription however clearly relies on creation imagery and I have therefore interpreted

szligiatim as ldquoprimordial daysrdquo in accordance with the information provided in Jeremy BlackAndrew George and Nicholas Postgate A Concise Dictionary o Akkadian (WiesbadenHarrassowitz 2000) 337 61 See Geo Widengren Te King and the ree o Lie in Ancient Near Eastern Reli- gion (Uppsala Uppsala Universitets Aringrsskri 1951) 62 Widengren King and the ree o Lie 15

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2749

292 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Tis portrayal of kingship appears in the birth legend of Sargon

wherein the monarch declaresAkki the waterscooper placed me as his gardenerWhen I was a gardener Ishtar was in love with meTe kingship I exercised during x + 5 years

Tese lines from the tale of Sargon the gardener whom the goddess Ishtarloved seem to provide an especially significant parallel with the biblical view presented in the story of Eden In the words of Nicholas Wyatt ldquotheman in his garden is a symbolic allusion to the king in his sanctuaryrdquo

One of the important connections between humanityrsquos enthrone-ment in the garden and later biblical traditions includes the anointingof an Israelite king in 1 Kings 128ndash40 at the Gihon Spring a rivernamed Gihon was one of the four rivers that flowed out of Eden andround the land of Cush (Genesis 213) Significantly the only otherexplicit reference to the Garden of Eden in the Hebrew Bible appears

in a context that addresses the link between kingship and divinity (seeEzekiel 282ndash13)

Concerning the attestation of biblical rituals that may preserveactual religious rites wherein Israelite kings assumed divinity Wyattargues that

the rituals which transform the status of the earthly kingremoving him from ldquomerely humanrdquo status to that of a sacralfigure to be couched in the form of a narrative about a godcarries with it the hint that the king himself is to be seen astransformed into a god Te enthronement of the king isthus his apotheosis

63 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoInterpreting the Creation and Fall Story in Genesis 2ndash3rdquo Zeit-schrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 931 (1981) 15 64 John van Seters has argued according to the Documentary Hypothesis that the

story of divine kingship in J derives from Babylonian influences and is therefore latepostexilic If P is in part a reaction to the J account then it is difficult to accept vanSetersrsquos dating see John van Seters ldquoTe Creation of Man and the Creation of the KingrdquoZeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 1013 (1989) 333ndash41 65 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinity Some Mythical and Ritual Aspects of WestSemitic Kingshiprdquo Ugarit-Forschungen 31 (1999) 857

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 293

In his exploration of biblical deification Wyatt refers to Psalm 198ndash10

as a possible ritual text transforming the king into a divine beingTe teaching of Yahweh is perfectrestoring the breastTe testimony of Yahweh is certainmaking wise the headTe precepts of Yahweh are uprightrejoicing the heart

Te commandment of Yahweh is puremaking bright the eyesTe speech of Yahweh is ritually purestanding for everTe judgments of Yahweh are truthTey are righteous all togethermore desirable than goldthan much pure goldmore sweet than honeyor the refined combYour servant is indeed illumined by themand in their observance is there great gain

Concerning this possible reference to ritual anointing Wyatt argues

It is true that there is no narrative statement about unc-

tion here oil is not even mentioned But only thus can thesuccessive blessings on various parts of the kingrsquos body beexplained For comparison we should consider the unction ofpriests in Exod 294ndash9 19ndash21 4012ndash5 and Lev 810ndash2 22ndash4where various parts of the priestrsquos body are anointed with oiland blood undoubtedly with some liturgical commentary onthe action such is now narrated in these passages providing

a suitable performative utteranceIf correct Wyattrsquos assessment of Israelite deification proves importantfor an analysis of Adam as divine king in the book of Genesis

66 Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinityrdquo 874ndash75

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2949

294 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

In Genesis chapter 2 Godrsquos initial creative act must be the creation

of man for as a divine king raised ldquofrom the dustrdquo man was specifi-cally formed to assist deity in the creation process God appears as agardener who causes to grow ldquoevery tree that is pleasant to the sightand good for foodrdquo (Genesis 29) Te account declares that the Lordplaced the man in the garden to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo his newly createdoasis (Genesis 215) As a gardener the Lord plants Eden as a gardenerthe Lord mixes the soil to form both man and beast As a gardener the

Lord creates man in his image to perform the work of a God Follow-ing his creation man assumes the role of divine gardenerFrom an ancient Near Eastern perspective the view of Adam as

divine gardener suggests that biblical authors viewed humanity asan earthly extension of the divine council According to the Edenaccount man was immortal (Genesis 217) man had received fromdeity the sacred ldquobreath of liferdquo (Genesis 27) man had been com-missioned to perform the work of a godmdashthat is to till and tend the

divine garden Terefore as an immortal gardener man was alreadyldquolike the godsrdquo prior to partaking of the forbidden fruit

In Mesopotamian myths for example the work of gardening wasassigned to lesser members of the divine council Hence the story ofAtrahasis opens with the following portrayal

When gods were man

Tey did forced labor they bore drudgeryGreat indeed was the drudgery of the godsTe forced labor was heavy the misery too muchTe seven() great Anunna-gods were burdeningTe Igigi-gods with forced labor

Like the account in Genesis the lesser gods of the divine council inAtrahasis were gardeners who did the laborious task of caring for the

canals trees and waterways that sustained the higher gods of the67 For additional examples of Yahweh portrayed in the role of gardener see Num-

bers 246 Psalm 10416 Isaiah 4414 68 Altrahasis II39 1ndash6 translation in Benjamin R Foster Beore the Muses An Anthol-ogy o Akkadian Literature (Bethesda MD CDL 1993) 1159

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 295

assembly Hence Adam as an immortal being clearly reflects the

position of the Igigi in Mesopotamian thought Te questions pre-sented to Job by Eliphaz regarding the primal human seem to share

this notion

Are you the firstborn of the human race

Were you brought forth before the hills

Have you listened in the council of God (Job 157ndash8 NRSV)

As Dexter Callender has observed concerning these questionsldquoTe allusion to the primal human in Job does not give us explicit

details concerning his incorporation into the sacred world It is clear

however that the idea is present in the reference that the primal human

lsquolistenedrsquo in the council of Godrdquo As a member of Godrsquos council man

held a stewardship to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo the deityrsquos garden (Genesis

215) According to the Genesis account when the man and woman

eat from the tree of knowledge God expels the humans from Edenand assigns the cherubim other traditional members of the divine

council to ldquokeeprdquo the garden (Genesis 324) Tis move may suggest

that in biblical thought ldquokeepingrdquo the garden is a task reserved for

members of the divine host As an immortal subordinate assigned an

important council task man however eventually appears in the Gen-

esis account as a being very much like the council deities mentioned

in Psalm 82 who receive the decree of death

I have said Ye are gods and all of you are children of the

most High

But ye shall die like men and fall like one of the princes

(Psalm 826ndash7)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou

shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thoushalt surely die (Genesis 217)

69 Dexter E Callender Jr Adam in Myth and History Ancient Israelite Perspectiveson the Primal Human (Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 2000) 212 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 249

ldquoY983141 R983141983137983148983148983161 A983154983141 G983151983140983155rdquo A R983141983155983152983151983150983155983141 983156983151M983145983139983144983137983141983148 H983141983145983155983141983154 983139983151983150983139983141983154983150983145983150983143 983156983144983141 LDS U983155983141

983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 983137983150983140 983156983144983141 G983151983155983152983141983148 983151983142 J983151983144983150

Review of Michael S Heiser ldquoYoursquove Seen One Elohim Yoursquove Seen Them All A Critique

of Mormonismrsquos Apologetic Use of Psalm 82rdquo presented at the 58th annual meeting

of the Evangelical Theological Society in Washington DC on 16 November 2006 now

appearing in this number of the FARMS Review pages 221ndash66

Few topics prove more intriguing to Latter-day Saints than the bib-lical view of the divine council oward the end of his ministry

the Prophet Joseph Smith devoted considerable attention to this con-troversial subject For Joseph the issue of the council of Gods was nomere piece of theological trivia In a discussion concerning his viewsregarding the council the Prophet once taught that when Latter-day Saints ldquobegin to learn this way we begin to learn the only true

God and what kind of a being we have got to worshiprdquo1048580 Since thenineteenth century Joseph Smithrsquos views regarding a divine councilof celestial deities have provided the focus of considerable criticismfor many Bible-believing Christians Yet biblical scholars howeverunwittingly have in recent years followed the Prophetrsquos lead in devot-ing substantial consideration to the role of the divine council in theHebrew Bible

Recent textual and archaeological discoveries have convincedscholars of the fundamental position held by the heavenly council ofdeities within Israelite theology ldquoTe council of God in the Hebrew

1 eachings o the Prophet Joseph Smith comp Joseph Fielding Smith (Salt LakeCity Deseret Book 1976) 349ndash50

David E Bokovoy

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 349

268 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Bible is no noveltyrdquo writes biblical scholar Martti Nissinen ldquoTe oc-

currences are well knownrdquo983044 As prominent Near Eastern archaeologistWilliam Dever has explained this view has affected the scholarly per-ception concerning the development of Israelite monotheism

A generation ago when I was a graduate student biblicalscholars were nearly unanimous in thinking that monothe-ism had been predominant in ancient Israelite religion fromthe beginningmdashnot just as an ldquoidealrdquo but as the reality oday

all that has changed Virtually all mainstream scholars (andeven a few conservatives) acknowledge that true monothe-ism emerged only in the period of the exile in Babylon in the6th century 983138983139 as the canon of the Hebrew Bible was takingshape

I have suggested along with most scholars that the emer-gence of monotheismmdashof exclusive Yahwismmdashwas largely a

response to the tragic experience of the exileo date the most exhaustive study of the biblical view of the divine

council by a Latter-day Saint is Daniel C Petersonrsquos ldquo lsquoYe Are GodsrsquoPsalm 82 and John 10 as Witnesses to the Divine Nature of Human-kindrdquo Peterson provides an impressive analysis of LDS theology andJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in the Gospel of John For Peterson the Latter-day Saint doctrine regarding the divine nature of humanity provides

a strong interpretive crux for understanding Jesusrsquos use of the counciltext ldquoGod has taken his place in the divine council in the midst ofthe gods he holds judgmentrdquo (Psalm 821 New Revised Standard Ver-

2 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets and the Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich alleinStudien zum Kulturkontakt in Kanaan Israel Palaumlstina und Ebirnari uumlr Manred Weippertzum 65 Geburtstag (Vandenhoeck Universitaumltsverlag Freiburg Schweiz 2002) 4 3 William G DeverDid God Have a Wie Archaeology and Folk Religion in AncientIsrael (Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2005) 294ndash95 297

4 Daniel C Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo Psalm 82 and John 10 as Witnesses to theDivine Nature of Humankindrdquo in Te Disciple as Scholar Essays on Scripture and the Ancient World in Honor o Richard Lloyd Anderson ed Stephen D Ricks Donald WParry and Andrew H Hedges (Provo U FARMS 2000) 471ndash594 See David E Boko- voy ldquoHeavenly Councils in the Old estament and Modern Revelationrdquo Religious Educa-tor (forthcoming)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 269

sion NRSV) Recently however Petersonrsquos essay has drawn the atten-

tion of Michael Heiser an evangelical Bible scholar who specializesin the Israelite view concerning the divine council In his critique ofPeterson Heiser takes exception to his analysis of Psalm 82 As a spe-cialist in biblical council imagery Heiser attempts to correct what heperceives as ldquocertain flaws in the LDS understanding and use of Psalm82rdquo (p 222 above) Heiser raises several important issues worthy ofcareful consideration Te following essay is not an exhaustive treat-ment of or response to the issues raised in Heiserrsquos critique Instead itwill provide a general response to Heiserrsquos claims particularly thoseclaims that apply both to LDS thought and to Psalm 82

An LDS View of the Divine Council

In his response to the LDS interpretation of Psalm 82 Heiser cor-rectly notes that Latter-day Saints have a keen interest in the biblical

view of the divine council During his ministry the Prophet JosephSmith provided important doctrinal insights regarding the heavenlyassembly Although his ideas seemed somewhat revolutionary formany Christians in the nineteenth century modern biblical schol-ars today as Heiser himself observes recognize that divine councilsof deities fulfilled a vital role in biblical theology During the Aprilconference of the church in 1844 Joseph Smith testified concerningthe importance of the heavenly council organized before the creationof the earth Concerning ldquothe beginningrdquo Joseph declared that ldquothehead of the Gods called a council of the Gods and they came togetherand concocted a plan to create the world and people itrdquo

In his journal entry for 11 June 1843 Franklin D Richards pro- vided an account of the Prophetrsquos teaching that ldquothe order and ordi-nances of the kingdom were instituted by the priesthood in the councilof heaven before the world wasrdquo Elder Richards later records Josephrsquos

5 eachings o the Prophet Joseph Smith 349 6 Te Words o Joseph Smith Te Contemporary Accounts o the Nauvoo Discourseso the Prophet Joseph ed Andrew F Ehat and Lyndon W Cook (Provo U BYU Reli-gious Studies Center 1980) 215 capitalization and spelling somewhat standardized insuch quotations

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 549

270 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

testimony that ldquoall blessings that were ordained for man by the coun-

cil of heaven were on conditions of obedience to the law thereofrdquoTe Book of Abraham refers to ldquothe intelligences that were organizedbeore the world wasrdquo (Abraham 322) In this council setting Godldquostood among those that were spirits and he saw that they were goodrdquo(Abraham 323) According to the Prophet ldquoevery man who has a call-ing to minister to the inhabitants of the world was ordained to that very purpose in the grand council of heavenrdquo Tough the conceptmay seem odd to some Christians these teachings are not completelyabsent in the Bible

Te notion of God assigning members of his council to assumeimportant positions of administrative responsibility appears in its ear-liest form in Deuteronomy 328 ldquoWhen the Most High apportionedthe nations when he divided humankind he fixed the boundaries ofthe peoples according to the number of the godsrdquo (Deuteronomy 328NRSV) For Latter-day Saints who at least in part associate the coun-

cil with humanity a seemingly parallel notion appears in the councilstory featured in the Book of Abraham

And God saw these souls that they were good and he stoodin the midst of them and he said Tese I will make my rulersfor he stood among those that were spirits and he saw that theywere good and he said unto me Abraham thou art one of themthou wast chosen before thou wast born (Abraham 323)

Peterson argues that in Abraham 322ndash23 ldquowe have God standing inthe midst of premortal spirits who are appointed to be rulers in a scenethat is really a textbook instance of the motif of the divine assemblyTese are premortal human beings Can they truly be called lsquogodsrsquo inany sense Yes they canrdquo For Peterson many of the gods describedin biblical council texts are in fact human beings

Petersonrsquos position is grounded in LDS theology Following thecouncil scene described in Abraham 3 the Book of Abraham contin-

7 Words o Joseph Smith 232 8 Words o Joseph Smith 367 9 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 541ndash42

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 271

ues with a description of the Godsrsquo involvement in creation ldquoAnd then

the Lord said Let us go down And they went down at the beginningand they that is the Gods organized and formed the heavens and theearthrdquo (Abraham 41) In his teachings Joseph Smith appears to pro- vide an interpretive key concerning the identity of these deities

[An] everlasting covenant was made between three per-sonages before the organization of this earth and relates totheir dispensation of things to men on the earth these per-

sonages according to Abrahamrsquos record are called God thefirst the Creator God the second the Redeemer and God thethird the witness or estator10485801048624

Other LDS commentators have suggested additional possibilitiesJoseph Fielding Smith taught that

it is true that Adam helped to form this earth He laboredwith our Savior Jesus Christ I have a strong view or convic-tion that there were others also who assisted them PerhapsNoah and Enoch and why not Joseph Smith and those whowere appointed to be rulers before the earth was formed Weknow that Jesus our Savior was a Spirit when this great workwas done He did all of these mighty works before he taber-nacled in the flesh10485801048580

Bruce R McConkie expressed a similar view ldquoChrist and MaryAdam and Eve Abraham and Sarah and a host of mighty men andequally glorious women comprised that group of lsquothe noble and greatonesrsquo to whom the Lord Jesus said lsquoWe will go down for there is spacethere and we will take of these materials and we will make an earthwhereon these may dwellrsquo (Abraham 322ndash24)rdquo1048580983044 Since the expressionwe will go down is followed in the Book of Abraham with the statementldquothey that is the Gods organized and formed the heavens and the

10 eachings o the Prophet Joseph Smith 190 11 Joseph Fielding Smith Doctrines o Salvation (Salt Lake City Bookcra 1999)174ndash75 12 Bruce R McConkie ldquoEve and the Fallrdquo in Woman (Salt Lake City Deseret Book1979) 59 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 749

272 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

earthrdquo (Abraham 41) it appears that Elder McConkie believed that

these Gods from the heavenly council included premortal humanso some extent therefore the title god is appropriately applied to the

premortal sons and daughters of Heavenly Father

Joseph Smithrsquos view of the divine council suggests that this assem-

bly of deities served a vital administrative role in Godrsquos plan of happi-

ness A journal entry recorded by William Clayton in 1845 provides

evidence for the Prophetrsquos teachings regarding this doctrine

It has been a doctrine taught by this church that we were inthe Grand Council amongst the Gods when the organization

of this world was contemplated and that the laws of govern-

ment were all made and sanctioned by all present and all the

ordinances and ceremonies decreed upon1048580

Significantly the Book of Abraham specifically notes that God ldquostood in

the midst ofrdquo these souls (Abraham 323) Tis reference to God stand-ing amongst divine beings in a heavenly council setting finds important

parallels with biblical tradition including Psalm 821 which refers to

God standing in the council and passing judgment

From an analysis of the legal material in the Hebrew Bible it

appears that in a traditional judicial setting judges sat while plain-

tiffs stood 1048580 Tis important distinction provides a significant clue for

interpreting Moses as judge in Exodus 1813ndash14And it came to pass on the morrow that Moses sat to judge

the people and the people stood by Moses from the morning

unto the evening And when Mosesrsquo father in law saw all that

he did to the people he said What is this thing thou doest to

the people why sittest thou thyself alone and all the people

stand by thee from morning unto even1048580

13 Words o Joseph Smith 84 n 10 14 Hans J Boecker Redeormen des Rechtslebens im Alten estament (NeukirchenNeukirchener Verlag 1964) 85ndash86 15 For additional examples of the practice of sitting for judgment see Judges 45Joel 312 Psalm 1225 Proverbs 208 Daniel 79ndash10

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 273

Biblical scholar Simon Parker has shown that the distinction

between sitting and standing in judicial settings also operates in the bib-lical view of the divine council1048580 Tese nuances were not unique to theWest Semitic world In Mesopotamia ldquoanybody who happened alongand had a mind to could lsquostandrsquomdashthat is participatemdashin the pu∆rum

[ie assembly]rdquo1048580 As Assyriologist Torkild Jacobsen explained theAkkadian words ldquouzuzzu lsquoto standrsquo and yašābu lsquoto sitrsquo are technicalterms for participating in the pu∆rumrdquo1048580 From a Near Eastern perspec-

tive these observations shed considerable light on passages such as Isa-iah 313 where Jehovah ldquostands up to plead a cause He rises to championpeoplesrdquo (Jewish Study Bible JSB)

Petersonrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 suggests that the text reflects thecouncil story depicted in the Book of Abraham Te fact that Psalm821 specifically states that ldquoGod stands in the divine councilrdquo sustainsPetersonrsquos thesis Peterson writes

We need not take Psalm 82rsquos portrayal of judgment andcondemnation within the divine council as literally accurate asrepresenting an actual historical event (although obviously itmight) any more than we are obliged to take as literally true thedepiction of Satan in Job 1ndash2 freely coming and going withinthe heavenly court and even placing wagers with God1048580

With its traditional council imagery Psalm 82 has intrigued biblical

scholars such as Parker who argued that the text originally describedYahwehrsquos rise to supremacy in the assembly9830441048624 Parker in part based hisassessment on the fact that Psalm 82 appears as a section of the Elohis-tic collection wherein the editor(s) reveal a strong propensity towardreplacing divine names such as Yahweh with Elohim

16 See for example 1 Kings 2219 21 Job 16 21 Daniel 79ndash10 see also Simon BParker ldquoTe Beginning of the Reign of GodmdashPsalm 82 as Myth and Liturgyrdquo Revue

Biblique 1024 (1995) 537 17 Torkild Jacobsen ldquoPrimitive Democracy in Ancient Mesopotamiardquo Journal oNear Eastern Studies 23 (1943) 164 18 See Jacobsen ldquoPrimitive Democracyrdquo 164 n 24 19 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 536 20 Parker ldquoBeginning of the Reign of Godrdquo 537

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 949

274 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Parker argued that verses one and five in Psalm 82 served as nar-

rative introductions to Yahwehrsquos council address delivered before hisfather Elyon the head of the council In his analysis Parker convinc-ingly illustrates that Yahweh would have originally appeared in Psalm82 as merely one of the assembled participants of deities ldquoHavingthought that the members of the council were all gods (and therefore justmdashand immortal) Yahweh now recognizes that being incorrigi-bly unjust they will perish like mortals fall like some human poten-taterdquo9830441048580 Parkerrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 works well with Petersonrsquos claimthat the text reflects the story of the grand council from the Books ofAbraham and Moses

In an important part of his critique concerning these issuesHeiser argues against the theory endorsed by biblical scholars such asParker and Mark S Smith that in its earliest stages Israelite religionoriginally perceived Yahweh as a son of El ldquoIn terms of an evaluationof the separateness of El and Yahwehrdquo writes Heiser ldquoLatter-day Saint

scholars have too blithely accepted the positions of Smith Parker andBarker All is not nearly as tidy as they proposerdquo (p 234) Heiser forexample maintains that rather than a separate divine father the Elyonor ldquoGod Most Highrdquo presented in Deuteronomy 328ndash9 is none otherthan Yahweh himself In this proposal Heiserrsquos view stands in directcontrast to Mark Smith who argues that ldquoearly on Yahweh is under-stood as Israelrsquos god in distinction to El Deuteronomy 328ndash9 casts

Yahweh in the role of one of the sons of El here called gtelyocircn Tispassage presents an order in which each deity received its own nationIsrael was the nation that Yahweh receivedrdquo983044983044

Te present form of Deuteronomy seems to support Heiserrsquos argu-ment Rather than a separate deity Elyon and Yahweh might appearas a single reference to the head God of the council In addition to thedivine allotment depicted in Deuteronomy 328 the idea of a series of

minor deities that Yahweh had assigned to govern the various nationsappears in Deuteronomy 419ndash20 Tese verses which discuss the

21 Parker ldquoBeginning of the Reign of Godrdquo 539ndash40 22 Mark S Smith Te Early History o God Yahweh and the Other Deities in AncientIsrael (Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2002) 32

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 275

allotment of the host of heaven to the nations of the world parallel

both the vocabulary and the ideology witnessed in 328ndash9 In Deuter-onomy 329 the author uses the same root hlk featured in 420mdashalbeitas a noun Deuteronomy 419ndash20 specifically identifies Yahweh as thedeity who gave each council deity his allotment

And when you look up to the sky and behold the sun and themoon and the stars the whole heavenly host you must not belured into bowing down to them or serving them Tese the

Lord your God allotted to other peoples everywhere underheaven but you the Lord took and brought out of Egypt thatiron blast furnace to be His very own people as is now thecase (Deuteronomy 419ndash20 Jewish Publication Society JPS)983044

Based upon this evidence Heiserrsquos assessment of the view fea-tured in the current form of Deuteronomy may be correct howeverHeiser ultimately fails to address important evidence recognized by

many contemporary biblical scholars that suggests that Israelite the-ology did in fact evolve in a manner consistent with the basic claimsof Parker and Smith983044 For example David Noel Freedman maintainsthat the combination ldquoYahweh Elohimrdquo or ldquoLord Godrdquo found in theearly chapters of Genesis probably derives from an earlier sentencename given the God of Israel namely ldquoYahweh Elrdquo or ldquoGod createsrdquo983044In a related assessment Mark Smith has argued

Te original god of Israel was El Tis reconstruction maybe inferred from two pieces of information First the name

23 Te Jewish Publication Society edition appears in Adele Berlin and Marc Z Brettlereds Te Jewish Study Bible anakh ranslation (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 24 Of course the fact that Deuteronomy 4 simply reflects the language of Deuter-onomy 32 does not automatically mean that both texts derive from the same author Teauthor of Deuteronomy 4 may have simply created his passages concerning Yahweh tointentionally reflect the language and ideology in Deuteronomy 32 in order to present

Yahweh as the chief council deity Tis very real possibility should be considered byHeiser in further research for an introduction to theological changes reflected through-out the book of Deuteronomy see especially Bernard M Levinson Deuteronomy and theHermeneutics o Legal Innovation (New York Oxford University Press 1997) 25 David Noel Freedman ldquoTe Name of the God of Mosesrdquo Journal o Biblical Lit-erature 793 (1960) 156

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1149

276 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of Israel is not a Yahwistic name with the divine element of

Yahweh but an El name with the element lt ēl Tis fact wouldsuggest that El was the original chief god of the group namedIsrael Second Genesis 4924ndash25 presents a series of El epi-thets separate from the mention of Yahweh in verse 18983044

A detailed response to all the evidence amassed by scholars who view a theological evolution in the Hebrew Bible was beyond thescope of Heiserrsquos essay However notwithstanding the probability that

Heiser is correct in linking Elyon with Yahweh in Deuteronomy thisclaim does not negate the likelihood that in ancient Israel Yahwehwas originally a son of Elyon

In the present form of the biblical text the term [gtElyocircn]is understood to be an epithet for Yahweh the God of IsraelIt is possible however as some have argued that the epithetmay conceal a reference to a separate deity possibly an oldergod with whom Yahweh came to be identified983044

LDS scholars have good reason to accept the historical views of schol-ars such as Parker and Smith

Psalm 82 as the Grand Council

Tough helpful to his analysis ultimately Petersonrsquos claims are

not dependent upon the legitimacy of a Parker Smith historical inter-pretation Petersonrsquos argument for interpreting Psalm 82 as a reflec-tion of the grand council story featured in modern revelation findssupport in Near Eastern tradition In the ancient Near East stories ofthe divine council typically begin with a crisis in which the head Godcalls together the gods of the council to resolve the dilemma Duringthe council a series of proposals are offered Finally a ldquosaviorrdquo steps

forward offering his services to the council Tis savior then receives26 Smith Early History o God 32

27 Eric E Elnes and Patrick D Miller ldquoElyonrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demonsin the Bible ed Karel van der oorn Bob Becking and Pieter W van der Horst (LeidenBrill 1995) 560

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 277

a commission to perform his redemptive role983044 Tis common Near

Eastern pattern is seen for example in the Mesopotamian story ofdivine kingship known as Enuma Elish983044 In this Babylonian myththe head god of the pantheon calls together the gods in a council toresolve a dilemma created by the goddess iamat Following a seriesof proposals Marduk the chief god of Babylon receives a commissionas savior Marduk agrees to perform the role of savior on the condi-tion that his father Ea the head god of the council grant Marduk allpower and glory Te same pattern appears in the Assyrian myth ofAnzu However in this version the god Ninurta agrees to serve ascouncil savior while allowing his father to retain his position withinthe council

Like Enuma Elish and Psalm 82 many of the council stories fromthe ancient Near East portray stories of cosmic revolt in which judg-ment is rendered against divine beings Tis pattern is familiar toLatter-day Saints through the council story provided in the Books of

Moses and Abraham (Moses 41ndash4 and Abraham 322ndash28) Althoughsometimes obscured the same pattern is reflected in council tradi-tions featured in the Hebrew Bible Te story of council crisis forexample appears in the Isaiah Apocalypse

On that day [Yahweh] will punishthe host of heaven in heavenand on earth the kings of the earth (Isaiah 2421 NRSV)

Similar language emerges in Isaiah 271

On that day [Yahweh]with his cruel and great and strong swordwill punish Leviathan the fleeing serpent (NRSV)

28 Tis summary is based upon the pattern identified by Simon B Parker ldquoCoun-cilrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 391ndash98 for a consideration of the divine coun-

cil stories within the Bible as ldquotype scenesrdquo see David M Fleming ldquoTe Divine Councilas ype Scene in the Hebrew Biblerdquo (PhD diss Te Southern Baptist Teological Semi-nary 1989) 29 For an English translation of Enuma Elish see Stephanie Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia Creation the Flood Gilgamesh and Others (New York Oxford UniversityPress 1989) 228ndash77

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1349

278 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

For Latter-day Saints these traditions preserved in texts such as Enuma

Elish the book of Isaiah and Psalm 82 provide a type of retellingmdashalbeit sometimes hiddenmdashof the primordial events concerning thegrand council described in modern revelation

In the ancient Near East members of the divine council oenappear to receive a type of reprimand suggestive of the punishmentgiven Lucifer in LDS scripture

Because that Satan rebelled against me and sought to destroy

the agency of man which I the Lord God had given himand also that I should give unto him mine own power by thepower of mine Only Begotten I caused that he should be castdown And he became Satan yea even the devil the father ofall lies to deceive and to blind men and to lead them captiveat his will even as many as would not hearken unto my voice(Moses 43ndash4)

With the words ldquoHere am I send merdquo Latter-day Saints believeJesus Christ stepped forward in the council crisis and volunteered tosave humanity from the challenges associated with mortal probation(Abraham 327) According to the council story depicted in the Bookof Abraham Lucifer ldquowas angry and kept not his first estate and atthat day many followed aer himrdquo (Abraham 328) In his analysisPeterson does well to draw attention to the fact that Isaiahrsquos refer-

ence to ldquoLucifer son of the morningrdquo in Isaiah 1412 ldquodraws us againinto the astronomical imagery oen connected with the divine assem-blyrdquo1048624 In his own studies Heiser has convincingly argued for a similarposition

Ugaritic regularly refers to heavenly beings as p∆r kkbm (the ldquocongregation of the starsrdquo) language corresponding with כוכ י קר (ldquomorning starsrdquo in parallelism with the ldquosons of

Godrdquo in Job 387) and (the ldquostars of Godrdquo Isa 1413)כוכ י לAside from the context of these references each of whichclearly points to personal beings not astronomical phenom-

30 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 533

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 279

ena it is significant that in the entire ancient near eastern lit-

erary record El is never identified with a heavenly body Tusldquothe stars of Elrdquo points to created beings with divine status1048580

For Latter-day Saints recent archaeological and textual discoverieslike those referred to by Heiser are especially intriguing However asPeterson argues in the quotation provided above (p 273) Latter-daySaints do not need the Bible to express a precise parallel with modernrevelation in order to find support for LDS theology

Te fact that texts such as Psalm 82 somewhat parallel Latter-daySaint teachings is sufficient to argue that a more exact version of thegrand council story such as is witnessed in modern revelation mayhave existed in antiquity However notwithstanding his basic agree-ment with Peterson concerning the fundamental role assumed by thecouncil of deities in the Hebrew Bible Heiser ultimately departs fromPetersonrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 suggesting that the biblical view of

the council contains eight fundamental points that conflict with LDStheology

Heiserrsquos Sixteen Points

Heiser provides a list of sixteen arguments outlining his positionregarding Psalm 82 and the divine council He divides these into eightpoints ldquowith which many evangelicals would probably disagree and

with which many Latter-day Saints would likely agreerdquo followed byeight points ldquowith which many Latter-day Saints would probably dis-agree and with which many evangelicals would likely agreerdquo (pp 222ndash24) Heiserrsquos perspectives regarding Psalm 82 are clearly sound Teyinclude such issues as the inadequacy of the term monotheism as areference to Israelite theology and the biblical use of the word elohim as a literal reference to gods rather than human judges While Heiseris certainly correct in suggesting that his first eight views would proveproblematic for many evangelicals but not for most Mormons Heiserrsquoslist of eight statements on Psalm 82 that he assumes many Latter-day

31 Michael S Heiser ldquoDeuteronomy 328 and the Sons of Godrdquo 15 for an electronic version see thedivinecouncilcomD32BibSacpdf (accessed 8 February 2007)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1549

280 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Saints would disagree with indicates a basic lack of exposure to Latter-

day Saint thoughtHeiser is well versed in biblical studies His work has contrib-uted important insights toward a scholarly view of the essential roleassumed by the divine council in Old estament theology but he isnot a Latter-day Saint However Heiser does not consider in his cri-tique the possibility that most Latter-day Saints including Petersondo not believe that the biblical view of the council mirrors preciselywhat Latter-day Saints accept through modern revelation JosephSmithrsquos revelations proclaim our day as the dispensation of the ful-ness of times ldquoaccording to that which was ordained in the midst ofthe Council of the Eternal God of all other gods before this world wasrdquo(DampC 12132) For Latter-day Saints this final dispensation representsthe time decreed by God and his council in which ldquothose things whichnever have been revealed from the foundation of the world but havebeen kept hid from the wise and prudent shall be revealed unto babes

and sucklings in this the dispensation of the fulness of timesrdquo (DampC12818) Terefore Latter-day Saint scholars acknowledge that an LDSunderstanding of the council does not precisely mirror the perspec-tives manifested in the Bible Tat having been said most Latter-daySaints certainly accept the view advocated by Peterson that the bib-lical perspective of the heavenly council of deities is in greater har-mony with LDS belief than with any other contemporary Christian

tradition A recognition that the Bible though not flawless is inspiredof God allows Latter-day Saints to comfortably engage the views putforth by biblical scholars such as Heiser even when those observa-tions prove threatening to our evangelical counterparts

If certain biblical authors for example did in fact believe asHeiser seems to correctly suggest that Yahweh was ldquonot lsquobirthedrsquointo existence by the lsquoolden godsrsquo described in Ugaritic textsrdquo (p 223)Latter-day Saints would have no problem simply accepting the obser- vation as a biblical view Similarly even though Heiser assumes thatmany Mormons would disagree with his opinion that the Bible pre-sents Yahweh the God of Israel as ldquoontologically uniquerdquo (p 223) inreality many Latter-day Saints recognize that this is precisely the case

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 281

Even within LDS theology God the Father stands out as ontologically

unique inasmuch as he created the spirits of all humanity Modernrevelation describes God with the words ldquofrom eternity to eternity Heis the same and His years never failrdquo (DampC 764)

Yahwehrsquos Ontological Uniqueness

In addition to the evidence Heiser presents for what he calls Yah-wehrsquos ontological uniqueness the name Yahweh itself appears vocal-

ized in the Hebrew Bible as a finite Hiphil verb form Te vocalizationof YHWH as ldquoYahwehrdquo carries a specific nuance since ldquoHebrew gram-mars traditionally represent the Hiphil stem as the causative of the Qal

stemrdquo983044 Frank Moore Cross explains that ldquothe accumulated evidence strongly supports the view that the name Yahweh is a causativeimperfect of the Canaanite-Proto-Hebrew verb hwy lsquoto bersquo rdquo Tere-fore the divine name Yahweh according to this view literally means

ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procreatesrdquo One of the inter-esting points to consider concerning the biblical title Yahweh Sabaoth or ldquoLord of Hostsrdquo is that typically in Hebrew proper names do notappear bound to a genitive nounmdashthat is ldquoJohn of Hostsrdquo or ldquoMary ofEarthrdquo etc Since a proper name cannot traditionally function as abound form in a construct chain Cross interprets the King James titleldquoLord of Hostsrdquo as ldquo lsquohe creates the (divine) hostsrsquo rdquo If correct this

view would lend support to Heiserrsquos argument that ldquoYahweh is said32 Bruce K Waltke and M OrsquoConnor An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax

(Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 1990) 433 33 Frank Moore Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge Harvard Uni- versity Press 1973) 65 34 ldquoA proper noun cannot as a rule be followed by a genitiverdquo Paul Jouumlon A Gram-mar o Biblical Hebrew trans and rev Muraoka (Rome Editrice Pontificio IstitutoBiblico 2000) 2481 Admittedly however textual evidence shows that the rule need notapply to divine names see J A Emerton ldquoNew Light on Israelite Religion Te Implica-

tions of the Inscriptions from Kunti llet lsquoAjrudrdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wis-senschaf 94 (1982) 12ndash13 and especially John H Choi ldquoResheph and YHWH IacuteĔBĀlt Ocirc rdquoVetus estamentum 54 (2004) 17ndash28 I offer this assessment of the title Yahweh Sabaothwhich reflects the views of scholars such as David Noel Freedman and Frank MooreCross as merely an intriguing possibility 35 Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic 65 emphasis added

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1749

282 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo (p 250)

Heiser incorrectly assumes that this apparent biblical teaching con-cerning Yahwehrsquos uniqueness among the gods is not inconsistent withLDS theology

Tough Latter-day Saints view God the Father and Jesus Christas two separate divine beings for the Saints the biblical titles associ-ated with these deities are clearly interchangeable Latter-day Saintshave no problem therefore in associating God the Father with thetitle Yahwehmdashthat is ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procre-atesrdquo Te 1916 official declaration presented by the First Presidency ofthe church states ldquoGod the Eternal Father whom we designate by theexalted name-title Elohim is the literal Parent of our Lord and SaviorJesus Christ and of the spirits of the human racerdquo Clearly howeverthe First Presidencyrsquos move toward designating God the Father as Elo-him and Jesus the Son as Jehovah was primarily a move by churchleaders to create uniformity in Latter-day Saint expression In a recent

Ensign article Keith Meservy observed that ldquoin at least three Old es-tament passages it appears that L983151983154983140 [ie Jehovah] applies to Heav-enly Father not Jesus Christ Ps 1101 Ps 27 Isa 5310rdquo No doubtfor many Latter-day Saints this estimate offered by Meservy couldbe greatly augmented LDS teachings therefore do not preclude theontological uniqueness of God the Father that Heiser witnesses in theHebrew Bible

Yahweh as a Being ldquoSpecies-Uniquerdquo

Certainly Heiser is justified in suggesting that the gods of thedivine council appear inferior to Israelrsquos deity He uses this correctobservation however to build an argument that Israelrsquos God wastherefore somehow ldquospecies-uniquerdquo (p 250) In his discussion con-cerning the biblical evidence for Yahweh being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo

Heiser bases his interpretation on five points of evidence (1) ldquoYahweh36 ldquoTe Father and the Son A Doctrinal Exposition by the First Presidency and the

welverdquo as cited in Messages o the First Presidency o the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints ed James R Clark (Salt Lake City Bookcra 1971) 526 emphasis added 37 Keith H Meservy ldquoLORD = Jehovahrdquo Ensign June 2002 29 n 3

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 283

is said to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo

(2) ldquoYahweh was considered pre-existent to all godsrdquo (3) Yahweh hasthe power to strip the other elohim of their immortality (4) Yahwehalone is referred to in the Bible as ha-elohim and (5) ldquothe other godsare commanded to worship Yahwehrdquo (see pp 250ndash57) Tough eachof Heiserrsquos five points of evidence do in fact appear in the Bible con-trary to Heiserrsquos suggestion none of these observations establishesYahweh as being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo In the Bible Yahweh is the God ofgods but the biblical gods were still biblical gods As Paul Sanders hasexplained according to the Deuteronomic vision ldquothe [Sons of Goddescribed in Deuteronomy 328] are relatively independent they havetheir own dominions like YHWHrdquo

Notwithstanding his acceptance of the importance of the divinecouncil of deities in biblical theology Heiserrsquos critique suffers in partthrough his effort to define Israelrsquos deity as a being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo(p 250) He is correct in drawing attention to the fact that biblical

authors viewed their deity as exceptionally powerful in the councilldquoFor the Lord your God is God of godsrdquo proclaims Deuteronomy 1017ldquoand Lord of lordsrdquo Unfortunately however in identifying Yahweh asa being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo Heiser forces the biblical view of deities intoan image somewhat consistent with radical monotheism Contraryto Heiserrsquos suggestion the creative act in and of itself does not set thecreator apart as an exclusive species Te same point also applies tothe issue Heiser raises concerning primogeniture In other words aman for instance may exist before both his children and his siblingsand though preeminence may render the person ldquouniquerdquo on somelevels prior existence would not in this or in any other case rendera being as ldquospecies-uniquerdquo rue the Bible speaks of gods separatefrom Israelrsquos primary deity as elohim a˙erimmdashthat is ldquoother godsrdquo(see Exodus 203 2313 Deuteronomy 57 614 etc) However as YairHoffman has observed ldquoA survey of the use of a˙erim [ldquootherrdquo] shows

38 Paul Sanders Te Provenance o Deuteronomy 32 (Leiden Brill 1996) 37039 Te term radical monotheism refers to the theological position that only one

divine being exists in the universe Te expression was popularized by ikva Frymer-Kensky In the Wake o the Goddesses Women Culture and the Biblical ransormationo Pagan Myth (New York Free Press 1992) 154

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1949

284 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

that when used attributively with regard to garments days messen-

gers and objects it clearly has a relative meaning something differ-ent yet o the same kind rdquo1048624 Terefore ldquothere is no reason to assumethat in the phrase elohim a˙erim the attribute has a more distinctivemeaningrdquo1048580 When all is said and done the biblical deities like Yah-weh himself were still gods

In addition contrary to Heiserrsquos assertion the simple fact that Elo-him possesses the power to strip the other deities of their immortalityin Psalm 82 does not indicate that these gods are of a different spe-cies than Elohim According to the Psalmistrsquos view Elohim is simplymore powerful than the other gods Analogies from the ancient NearEast illustrate the problematic nature of Heiserrsquos claim In the Babylo-nian story Enuma Elish for instance the primordial mother goddessiamat created the god Qingu as chief deity over iamatrsquos militaryforces As a result of his actions taken against the divine council thedeities of the assembly ldquobound [Qingu] and held him in front of Ea

[and they] imposed the penalty on him and cut off his bloodrdquo983044 Tefact that in Enuma Elish the council could strip Qingu of his immor-tality did not mean that the god Qingu was somehow of a different orlesser divine species In the Sumerian myth of Enlil and Ninlil Enlil(one of the ldquogreat godsrdquo of Mesopotamia) is brought to trial for havingraped the goddess Ninlil As Enlil returned to the city of Nippur hewas arrested by the assembly while walking through the temple court

Te trial commenced immediately In the myth the council pre-sented the verdict that ldquothe sex offender Enlil will leave the townrdquoAccordingly the myth reports that Enlil le Nippur headed towardthe netherworld In his assessment of the story Jacobsen points out

40 Yair Hoffman ldquoTe Conception of lsquoOther Godsrsquo in Deuteronomistic Literaturerdquoin Concepts o the Other in Near Eastern Religions ed Ilai Alon Ithamar Gruenwald andItamar Singer (Leiden Brill 1994) 107 emphasis added 41 Hoffman ldquoConception of Other Godsrdquo 107

42 As cited in Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia 261 43 For a summary of the myth see Gwendolyn Leick A Dictionary o Ancient NearEastern Mythology (London Routledge 1998) 47ndash48 for a translation see TorkildJacobsen Te Harps Tat Once Sumerian Poetry in ranslation (New Haven YaleUniversity Press 1987) 167ndash80 44 Jacobsen Harps 174

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 285

that Enlilrsquos descent to Hades may indicate that the high god in Meso-

potamian mythology was originally sentenced to death As notedby James Ackerman in his dissertation concerning Psalm 82 thesetypes of judgment scenes in which the council determines that godswill die like mortals carry important implications for interpreting thecultural background for the biblical text Contrary to Heiserrsquos inter-pretation none of these stories indicate that the dying gods were of adifferent species or order than the gods who issued the sentence

Near Eastern traditions oen place considerable emphasis on thedying-god motif In no sense however are these dying godsmdashevenwhen resurrectedmdashsomehow depicted as a lesser species Heiserrsquos con-fusion concerning the implications of a biblical statement that Godissued a judgment of death to the deities of the divine council illus-trates the fundamental need for biblical scholars to pursue Assyriol-ogy in connection with their efforts to interpret the Hebrew Bible

Also contrary to Heiserrsquos suggestion the punishment meted out

to usurpers in Near Eastern council stories never indicates that thecriminals derived from some sort of exceptional species Te storyof Athtar from ancient Canaan for instance presents the traditionof Athtarrsquos descent to the underworld following the deityrsquos ascensionto the throne of Baal Te details involved in Athtarrsquos story containimportant thematic elements depicted in ancient Near Eastern storiesof cosmic revolt Athtar seems to share some semblance with Baalrsquos

mortal enemy Mot or ldquoDeathrdquo into whom Baal himself descendsHence Hugh Page notes that Athtarrsquos ldquodescent to the underworld implies that on some level Athtar has placed himself in proxim-ity to or relationship with the only god that Baal proves incapable

45 Torkild Jacobsen ldquoAn Ancient Mesopotamian rial for Homiciderdquo in owardthe Image o ammuz and Other Essays on Mesopotamian History and Culture ed Wil-liam L Moran (Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1970) 207 first published inStudia Biblica et Orientalia vol 3 of Analecta Biblica et Orientalia XII (Rome Pontificio

Istituto Biblico 1959) 130ndash50 46 See James S Ackerman ldquoAn Exegetical Study of Psalm 82rdquo (PhD diss HarvardUniversity 1966) 186ndash93 47 For a recent survey of the issue which includes a survey of previous assessmentssee ryggve N D Mettinger Te Riddle o Resurrection ldquoDying and Rising Godsrdquo in the Ancient Near East (Stockholm Almqvist amp Wiksell 2001)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2149

286 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of defeatingrdquo Athtarrsquos assumption of the throne of Baal followed

by his descent to the underworld indicates that this portion of theBaal cycle from ancient Canaan fits the general category of the cosmic

revolt genre witnessed in texts such as Abraham 3 and Psalm 82

1 Kindly El the Compassionate answers

2 ldquoOne so small cannot race

3 with Baal cannot handle the lance

4 with Daganrsquos son when they test one anotherrdquo

5 Lady Athirat of the Sea answers 6 ldquoLet us enthrone Athtar the Strong

7 Let Athtar the Strong be kingrdquo

8 Ten Athtar the Strong

9 ascended the summit of Sapan

10 He sat upon the throne of Mightiest Baal

11 His feet would not reach its footstool

12 His head would not reach its top 13 Athtar the Strong answered

14 ldquoI cannot rule on the summit of Sapanrdquo

15 Athtar the Strong descended

16 He descended from the throne of Mightiest Baal

17 And he ruled over the underworld god of all of it

18 drew in barrels

19 drew in jars (KU 1649ndash67 translation)

Te fact that Athtar the Strong experienced a type of ldquodeathrdquo in which

he ldquoruled over the underworldrdquo following his descent from Baalrsquos

throne does not suggest that Athtar was a ldquobeing species-uniquerdquo from

the other deities any more than Inanna or Ishtar the Mesopotamian

goddesses who experienced a type of death in the underworld were of

a different species than the gods Ea Enki Marduk and so forth48 Hugh R Page Jr Te Myth o Cosmic Rebellion A Study o Its Reflexes in Ugaritic

and Biblical Literature (Leiden Brill 1996) 92 Pagersquos views concerning the Athtar mythhave been criticized by Gregorio del Olmo Lete ldquoIn Search of the Canaanite Luciferrdquo Aula Orientalis 19 (2001) 125ndash32

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 287

Still in his efforts to present Yahweh as a being species-unique

Heiser correctly draws attention to the other gods of the council whoare commanded to worship Yahweh In his analysis he focuses uponthe call given to the gods in Psalm 291ndash2 ldquoAscribe to Yahweh O sons ofGod ascribe to Yahweh glory and strength Ascribe to Yahweh the gloryof his name worship Yahweh in the splendor of holinessrdquo (as quotedon p 256) While Heiserrsquos observations certainly illustrate that biblicalauthors viewed their deity as uniquemdashthat is exceptionalmdashthroughout

Near Eastern tradition lesser gods regularly appear in a position inwhich they offer praise service and devotion to the higher gods of thecouncil Richard J Clifford explains that in the Phoenician view of theassembly ldquoas elsewhere in the ancient Near East the assemblies are pic-tured as subordinate to individual gods although the assemblyrsquos con-sent seems necessary for important decisionsrdquo Simply because ancienttextsmdashincluding the Biblemdashdepict the members of the assemblies asldquosubordinate to individual godsrdquo this in no way implies that the higher

deities somehow belonged to a separate species Ancient Near Easterntexts such as Mursilirsquos Hymn and Prayer to the Sun-goddess o Arinna (CH 376A) establish the fact that Near Eastern peoples believed thatgods of the same species paid homage to higher deities in a way compa-rable to the biblical view

You O Sun-goddess of Arinna are honored goddess Your

name is honored among names and your divinity is honoredamong gods Furthermore among the gods you are the mosthonored and the greatest Tere is no other god more honoredor greater than you You are the lord of just judgment Youcontrol the kingship of heaven and earth1048624

Holding the position ldquomost honoredrdquo among the gods did not estab-lish Arinna as species-unique Arinna was simply the god before

whom from the authorrsquos perspective the other gods would regularly49 Richard J Clifford ldquoPhoenician Religionrdquo Bulletin o the American Schools o

Oriental Research 279 (1990) 57 50 As cited in Itamar Singer Hittite Prayers (Atlanta Society of Biblical Literature2002) 51

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2349

288 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquofall downrdquo1048580 For the ancients the Near Eastern view of the divine

court clearly reflected or were expressed in terms of earthly realityTerefore just as the high king before whom other humans paid hom-age was still a human being so the god to whom other deities paidhomage was still a god matching in species For biblical authors Yah-weh stood at the head of the hierarchy in Israelite thought Yahwehwas unique as the God of gods but he was not unique in his divinityFrom a biblical perspective Yahweh even shared this divinity withhumanity

Humans as Teomorphic Beings

In his discussion concerning the biblical view regarding theomor-phic humans Peterson draws attention to Paulrsquos New estament ser-mon presented in Acts 1728ndash29

For in him we live and move and have our being as

certain also of your own poets have said For we are also hisoffspring

Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God we oughtnot to think that the Godhead is like unto gold or silver orstone graven by art and manrsquos device

Peterson in part argues for a biblical connection between God andhumanity based on the fact that ldquothe word rendered lsquooffspringrsquo by the

King James translators is the Greek genos which is cognate with theLatin genus and means lsquofamilyrsquo or lsquoracersquo or lsquokindrsquo or even and mostespecially interesting lsquodescendants of a common ancestorrsquo rdquo983044 ForLatter-day Saints human beings are literally the offspring of God andtherefore intrinsically theomorphic Part of the strength of Petersonrsquosessay lies in his recognition that like Latter-day Saints biblical authorsregularly blur the distinction between humanity and divine beings

Not only does Peterson draw attention to the prophetic interactionwith the council as support for his thesis but he also places consider-

51 Singer Hittite Prayers 51 52 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 542ndash43 53 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 289

able emphasis upon the deified dead in the Hebrew Bible and the early

Christian teaching regarding deification Heiser notwithstandingPetersonrsquos evidence rejects the idea that a genus equation of God and

humankind appears in the Bible

For his criticisms of Petersonrsquos views Heiser places considerable

weight on the notion that ldquothe concept of the image of God does not

advance the idea that there is a genus equation of God and human-

kind or that God was once a manrdquo (p 224) On some levels Heiserrsquos

point concerning the word tzelem or ldquoimagerdquo in Genesis 126ndash27is correct Concerning this controversial term Marc Z Brettler has

recently explained

Te word tzelem (ldquoimagerdquo) elsewhere always refers to a

physical representation For example the Book of Ezekiel

uses tzelem when it refers to ldquomen sculptured upon the walls

figures of Chaldeans drawn in vermilionrdquo (2314) or when it

accuses Israel of fornicating with ldquophallic imagesrdquo (1617) Teword oen refers to idols (eg Num 3352 Ezek 720 Amos

526 2 Chron 2317) It always signifies a concrete entity

rather than an abstract one Tis is not surprising since the

Bible (in contrast to most medieval philosophical traditions

both Jewish and Christian) oen depicts God in corporeal

terms

Genesis 126ndash27 suggests that Godrsquos physical likeness is similar to

humanityrsquos but Heiser is correct that the statement does not indicate

that biblical authors viewed humans as gods or that God himself was

once a human However many other texts from the Bible do present a

theomorphic view of humanity Peterson therefore is precisely correct

in stating that ldquothe Latter-day Saint understanding that humans are of

the same genus or species as God is thus clearly biblicalrdquo54 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509ndash28

55 Marc Z Brettler How to Read the Bible (Philadelphia Jewish Publication Society2005) 43ndash44 Hebrew word deleted 56 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 547

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2549

290 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Adam as a Divine Council Member

In addition to associating humanity with the tzelem of God theBible describes the first man as a deified member of the divine council

In the Eden story the Lord took advantage of the wet claylike soil and

ldquoformed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils

the breath of life and man became a living soulrdquo (Genesis 27) In an

important study concerning this imagery Walter Brueggemann has

shown that a biblical connection exists between being raised from the

dust and enthronement ldquoo be taken lsquofrom the dustrsquo means to be

elevated from obscurity to royal office and to return to dust means to

be deprived of that office and returned to obscurityrdquo Imagery such

as that witnessed in 1 Kings 162 supports Brueggemannrsquos interpreta-

tion ldquoForasmuch as I [God] exalted thee [Jehu] out of the dust and

made thee prince over my people Israel rdquo (1 Kings 162) Hence the

notion of the God raising man ldquofrom the dust of the earthrdquo in Genesis

27 in part suggests that Yahweh begins his creative activity by form-

ing a divine king According to Genesis 215 this divine king through

a type of imitatio dei would continue to perform the work of Yahweh

who ldquoplantedrdquo the garden ldquoAnd the Lord God took the man and put

him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep itrdquo In a simi-

lar fashion Mesopotamian kings such as Hammurapi glorified their

efforts through the use of creation and agricultural imageryI encircled [the wall] with a swamp I dug the Euphrates

as far as Sippar (and) made it reach a prosperous quay

I Hammu-rāpi who builds up the land caused Sippar

and Babylon to dwell in peaceful abodes forever What

from [primordial days] no one among the kings had done I

did in a grand fashion for the god Šamaš my lord

57 Walter Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestament-liche Wissenschaf 841 (1972) 1ndash18 58 Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo 2 59 Douglas Frayne Old Babylonian Period (2003ndash1595 BC) (oronto University oforonto Press 1990) 348ndash49

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 291

Te view presented in the Babylonian inscription on the wall

of Sippar reflects the common Near Eastern assumption featured inGenesis 2 of a God king participating in the act of creation from ldquopri-

mordial daysrdquo through structure1048624 As a king Hammurapi assumed

the same role filled by deities who created the universe by giving order

to preexistent chaos In its depiction of Adam as the primordial gar-

dener the Bible relies upon similar imagery

Manrsquos status as the archetypal gardener king in Genesis 2ndash3 con-

tains important parallels with Mesopotamian kingship theory1048580 Sev-eral examples of Mesopotamian iconography feature a depiction of the

tree (or plant) of life over which the king and priests appear pouring

libations In assessing the connection between Mesopotamian kings

and gardeners Geo Widengren cites these statements from the am-

muz text R IV 27 No I

A tamarisk which in the garden has no water to drink

Whose foliage on the plant sends forth no twig

A plant which they water no more in its pot

Whose roots are torn away

A herb which is in the garden has no water to drink

Among the flowers of the garden he sleeps

Among the flowers of the garden he is thrown

According to Widengren ldquothe ree of Life is watered by the kingwho pours out over it the Water of Life which he has in his possession

Te ree of Life constantly needs the Water of Life near which it is

growing in the garden of paradiserdquo983044 Te connection between king

and gardener was widely attested throughout ancient Mesopotamia

60 In his translation Frayne renders the Akkadian word szligi-a-tim as ldquothe pastrdquo Teinscription however clearly relies on creation imagery and I have therefore interpreted

szligiatim as ldquoprimordial daysrdquo in accordance with the information provided in Jeremy BlackAndrew George and Nicholas Postgate A Concise Dictionary o Akkadian (WiesbadenHarrassowitz 2000) 337 61 See Geo Widengren Te King and the ree o Lie in Ancient Near Eastern Reli- gion (Uppsala Uppsala Universitets Aringrsskri 1951) 62 Widengren King and the ree o Lie 15

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2749

292 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Tis portrayal of kingship appears in the birth legend of Sargon

wherein the monarch declaresAkki the waterscooper placed me as his gardenerWhen I was a gardener Ishtar was in love with meTe kingship I exercised during x + 5 years

Tese lines from the tale of Sargon the gardener whom the goddess Ishtarloved seem to provide an especially significant parallel with the biblical view presented in the story of Eden In the words of Nicholas Wyatt ldquotheman in his garden is a symbolic allusion to the king in his sanctuaryrdquo

One of the important connections between humanityrsquos enthrone-ment in the garden and later biblical traditions includes the anointingof an Israelite king in 1 Kings 128ndash40 at the Gihon Spring a rivernamed Gihon was one of the four rivers that flowed out of Eden andround the land of Cush (Genesis 213) Significantly the only otherexplicit reference to the Garden of Eden in the Hebrew Bible appears

in a context that addresses the link between kingship and divinity (seeEzekiel 282ndash13)

Concerning the attestation of biblical rituals that may preserveactual religious rites wherein Israelite kings assumed divinity Wyattargues that

the rituals which transform the status of the earthly kingremoving him from ldquomerely humanrdquo status to that of a sacralfigure to be couched in the form of a narrative about a godcarries with it the hint that the king himself is to be seen astransformed into a god Te enthronement of the king isthus his apotheosis

63 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoInterpreting the Creation and Fall Story in Genesis 2ndash3rdquo Zeit-schrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 931 (1981) 15 64 John van Seters has argued according to the Documentary Hypothesis that the

story of divine kingship in J derives from Babylonian influences and is therefore latepostexilic If P is in part a reaction to the J account then it is difficult to accept vanSetersrsquos dating see John van Seters ldquoTe Creation of Man and the Creation of the KingrdquoZeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 1013 (1989) 333ndash41 65 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinity Some Mythical and Ritual Aspects of WestSemitic Kingshiprdquo Ugarit-Forschungen 31 (1999) 857

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 293

In his exploration of biblical deification Wyatt refers to Psalm 198ndash10

as a possible ritual text transforming the king into a divine beingTe teaching of Yahweh is perfectrestoring the breastTe testimony of Yahweh is certainmaking wise the headTe precepts of Yahweh are uprightrejoicing the heart

Te commandment of Yahweh is puremaking bright the eyesTe speech of Yahweh is ritually purestanding for everTe judgments of Yahweh are truthTey are righteous all togethermore desirable than goldthan much pure goldmore sweet than honeyor the refined combYour servant is indeed illumined by themand in their observance is there great gain

Concerning this possible reference to ritual anointing Wyatt argues

It is true that there is no narrative statement about unc-

tion here oil is not even mentioned But only thus can thesuccessive blessings on various parts of the kingrsquos body beexplained For comparison we should consider the unction ofpriests in Exod 294ndash9 19ndash21 4012ndash5 and Lev 810ndash2 22ndash4where various parts of the priestrsquos body are anointed with oiland blood undoubtedly with some liturgical commentary onthe action such is now narrated in these passages providing

a suitable performative utteranceIf correct Wyattrsquos assessment of Israelite deification proves importantfor an analysis of Adam as divine king in the book of Genesis

66 Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinityrdquo 874ndash75

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2949

294 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

In Genesis chapter 2 Godrsquos initial creative act must be the creation

of man for as a divine king raised ldquofrom the dustrdquo man was specifi-cally formed to assist deity in the creation process God appears as agardener who causes to grow ldquoevery tree that is pleasant to the sightand good for foodrdquo (Genesis 29) Te account declares that the Lordplaced the man in the garden to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo his newly createdoasis (Genesis 215) As a gardener the Lord plants Eden as a gardenerthe Lord mixes the soil to form both man and beast As a gardener the

Lord creates man in his image to perform the work of a God Follow-ing his creation man assumes the role of divine gardenerFrom an ancient Near Eastern perspective the view of Adam as

divine gardener suggests that biblical authors viewed humanity asan earthly extension of the divine council According to the Edenaccount man was immortal (Genesis 217) man had received fromdeity the sacred ldquobreath of liferdquo (Genesis 27) man had been com-missioned to perform the work of a godmdashthat is to till and tend the

divine garden Terefore as an immortal gardener man was alreadyldquolike the godsrdquo prior to partaking of the forbidden fruit

In Mesopotamian myths for example the work of gardening wasassigned to lesser members of the divine council Hence the story ofAtrahasis opens with the following portrayal

When gods were man

Tey did forced labor they bore drudgeryGreat indeed was the drudgery of the godsTe forced labor was heavy the misery too muchTe seven() great Anunna-gods were burdeningTe Igigi-gods with forced labor

Like the account in Genesis the lesser gods of the divine council inAtrahasis were gardeners who did the laborious task of caring for the

canals trees and waterways that sustained the higher gods of the67 For additional examples of Yahweh portrayed in the role of gardener see Num-

bers 246 Psalm 10416 Isaiah 4414 68 Altrahasis II39 1ndash6 translation in Benjamin R Foster Beore the Muses An Anthol-ogy o Akkadian Literature (Bethesda MD CDL 1993) 1159

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 295

assembly Hence Adam as an immortal being clearly reflects the

position of the Igigi in Mesopotamian thought Te questions pre-sented to Job by Eliphaz regarding the primal human seem to share

this notion

Are you the firstborn of the human race

Were you brought forth before the hills

Have you listened in the council of God (Job 157ndash8 NRSV)

As Dexter Callender has observed concerning these questionsldquoTe allusion to the primal human in Job does not give us explicit

details concerning his incorporation into the sacred world It is clear

however that the idea is present in the reference that the primal human

lsquolistenedrsquo in the council of Godrdquo As a member of Godrsquos council man

held a stewardship to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo the deityrsquos garden (Genesis

215) According to the Genesis account when the man and woman

eat from the tree of knowledge God expels the humans from Edenand assigns the cherubim other traditional members of the divine

council to ldquokeeprdquo the garden (Genesis 324) Tis move may suggest

that in biblical thought ldquokeepingrdquo the garden is a task reserved for

members of the divine host As an immortal subordinate assigned an

important council task man however eventually appears in the Gen-

esis account as a being very much like the council deities mentioned

in Psalm 82 who receive the decree of death

I have said Ye are gods and all of you are children of the

most High

But ye shall die like men and fall like one of the princes

(Psalm 826ndash7)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou

shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thoushalt surely die (Genesis 217)

69 Dexter E Callender Jr Adam in Myth and History Ancient Israelite Perspectiveson the Primal Human (Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 2000) 212 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 349

268 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Bible is no noveltyrdquo writes biblical scholar Martti Nissinen ldquoTe oc-

currences are well knownrdquo983044 As prominent Near Eastern archaeologistWilliam Dever has explained this view has affected the scholarly per-ception concerning the development of Israelite monotheism

A generation ago when I was a graduate student biblicalscholars were nearly unanimous in thinking that monothe-ism had been predominant in ancient Israelite religion fromthe beginningmdashnot just as an ldquoidealrdquo but as the reality oday

all that has changed Virtually all mainstream scholars (andeven a few conservatives) acknowledge that true monothe-ism emerged only in the period of the exile in Babylon in the6th century 983138983139 as the canon of the Hebrew Bible was takingshape

I have suggested along with most scholars that the emer-gence of monotheismmdashof exclusive Yahwismmdashwas largely a

response to the tragic experience of the exileo date the most exhaustive study of the biblical view of the divine

council by a Latter-day Saint is Daniel C Petersonrsquos ldquo lsquoYe Are GodsrsquoPsalm 82 and John 10 as Witnesses to the Divine Nature of Human-kindrdquo Peterson provides an impressive analysis of LDS theology andJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in the Gospel of John For Peterson the Latter-day Saint doctrine regarding the divine nature of humanity provides

a strong interpretive crux for understanding Jesusrsquos use of the counciltext ldquoGod has taken his place in the divine council in the midst ofthe gods he holds judgmentrdquo (Psalm 821 New Revised Standard Ver-

2 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets and the Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich alleinStudien zum Kulturkontakt in Kanaan Israel Palaumlstina und Ebirnari uumlr Manred Weippertzum 65 Geburtstag (Vandenhoeck Universitaumltsverlag Freiburg Schweiz 2002) 4 3 William G DeverDid God Have a Wie Archaeology and Folk Religion in AncientIsrael (Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2005) 294ndash95 297

4 Daniel C Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo Psalm 82 and John 10 as Witnesses to theDivine Nature of Humankindrdquo in Te Disciple as Scholar Essays on Scripture and the Ancient World in Honor o Richard Lloyd Anderson ed Stephen D Ricks Donald WParry and Andrew H Hedges (Provo U FARMS 2000) 471ndash594 See David E Boko- voy ldquoHeavenly Councils in the Old estament and Modern Revelationrdquo Religious Educa-tor (forthcoming)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 269

sion NRSV) Recently however Petersonrsquos essay has drawn the atten-

tion of Michael Heiser an evangelical Bible scholar who specializesin the Israelite view concerning the divine council In his critique ofPeterson Heiser takes exception to his analysis of Psalm 82 As a spe-cialist in biblical council imagery Heiser attempts to correct what heperceives as ldquocertain flaws in the LDS understanding and use of Psalm82rdquo (p 222 above) Heiser raises several important issues worthy ofcareful consideration Te following essay is not an exhaustive treat-ment of or response to the issues raised in Heiserrsquos critique Instead itwill provide a general response to Heiserrsquos claims particularly thoseclaims that apply both to LDS thought and to Psalm 82

An LDS View of the Divine Council

In his response to the LDS interpretation of Psalm 82 Heiser cor-rectly notes that Latter-day Saints have a keen interest in the biblical

view of the divine council During his ministry the Prophet JosephSmith provided important doctrinal insights regarding the heavenlyassembly Although his ideas seemed somewhat revolutionary formany Christians in the nineteenth century modern biblical schol-ars today as Heiser himself observes recognize that divine councilsof deities fulfilled a vital role in biblical theology During the Aprilconference of the church in 1844 Joseph Smith testified concerningthe importance of the heavenly council organized before the creationof the earth Concerning ldquothe beginningrdquo Joseph declared that ldquothehead of the Gods called a council of the Gods and they came togetherand concocted a plan to create the world and people itrdquo

In his journal entry for 11 June 1843 Franklin D Richards pro- vided an account of the Prophetrsquos teaching that ldquothe order and ordi-nances of the kingdom were instituted by the priesthood in the councilof heaven before the world wasrdquo Elder Richards later records Josephrsquos

5 eachings o the Prophet Joseph Smith 349 6 Te Words o Joseph Smith Te Contemporary Accounts o the Nauvoo Discourseso the Prophet Joseph ed Andrew F Ehat and Lyndon W Cook (Provo U BYU Reli-gious Studies Center 1980) 215 capitalization and spelling somewhat standardized insuch quotations

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 549

270 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

testimony that ldquoall blessings that were ordained for man by the coun-

cil of heaven were on conditions of obedience to the law thereofrdquoTe Book of Abraham refers to ldquothe intelligences that were organizedbeore the world wasrdquo (Abraham 322) In this council setting Godldquostood among those that were spirits and he saw that they were goodrdquo(Abraham 323) According to the Prophet ldquoevery man who has a call-ing to minister to the inhabitants of the world was ordained to that very purpose in the grand council of heavenrdquo Tough the conceptmay seem odd to some Christians these teachings are not completelyabsent in the Bible

Te notion of God assigning members of his council to assumeimportant positions of administrative responsibility appears in its ear-liest form in Deuteronomy 328 ldquoWhen the Most High apportionedthe nations when he divided humankind he fixed the boundaries ofthe peoples according to the number of the godsrdquo (Deuteronomy 328NRSV) For Latter-day Saints who at least in part associate the coun-

cil with humanity a seemingly parallel notion appears in the councilstory featured in the Book of Abraham

And God saw these souls that they were good and he stoodin the midst of them and he said Tese I will make my rulersfor he stood among those that were spirits and he saw that theywere good and he said unto me Abraham thou art one of themthou wast chosen before thou wast born (Abraham 323)

Peterson argues that in Abraham 322ndash23 ldquowe have God standing inthe midst of premortal spirits who are appointed to be rulers in a scenethat is really a textbook instance of the motif of the divine assemblyTese are premortal human beings Can they truly be called lsquogodsrsquo inany sense Yes they canrdquo For Peterson many of the gods describedin biblical council texts are in fact human beings

Petersonrsquos position is grounded in LDS theology Following thecouncil scene described in Abraham 3 the Book of Abraham contin-

7 Words o Joseph Smith 232 8 Words o Joseph Smith 367 9 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 541ndash42

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 271

ues with a description of the Godsrsquo involvement in creation ldquoAnd then

the Lord said Let us go down And they went down at the beginningand they that is the Gods organized and formed the heavens and theearthrdquo (Abraham 41) In his teachings Joseph Smith appears to pro- vide an interpretive key concerning the identity of these deities

[An] everlasting covenant was made between three per-sonages before the organization of this earth and relates totheir dispensation of things to men on the earth these per-

sonages according to Abrahamrsquos record are called God thefirst the Creator God the second the Redeemer and God thethird the witness or estator10485801048624

Other LDS commentators have suggested additional possibilitiesJoseph Fielding Smith taught that

it is true that Adam helped to form this earth He laboredwith our Savior Jesus Christ I have a strong view or convic-tion that there were others also who assisted them PerhapsNoah and Enoch and why not Joseph Smith and those whowere appointed to be rulers before the earth was formed Weknow that Jesus our Savior was a Spirit when this great workwas done He did all of these mighty works before he taber-nacled in the flesh10485801048580

Bruce R McConkie expressed a similar view ldquoChrist and MaryAdam and Eve Abraham and Sarah and a host of mighty men andequally glorious women comprised that group of lsquothe noble and greatonesrsquo to whom the Lord Jesus said lsquoWe will go down for there is spacethere and we will take of these materials and we will make an earthwhereon these may dwellrsquo (Abraham 322ndash24)rdquo1048580983044 Since the expressionwe will go down is followed in the Book of Abraham with the statementldquothey that is the Gods organized and formed the heavens and the

10 eachings o the Prophet Joseph Smith 190 11 Joseph Fielding Smith Doctrines o Salvation (Salt Lake City Bookcra 1999)174ndash75 12 Bruce R McConkie ldquoEve and the Fallrdquo in Woman (Salt Lake City Deseret Book1979) 59 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 749

272 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

earthrdquo (Abraham 41) it appears that Elder McConkie believed that

these Gods from the heavenly council included premortal humanso some extent therefore the title god is appropriately applied to the

premortal sons and daughters of Heavenly Father

Joseph Smithrsquos view of the divine council suggests that this assem-

bly of deities served a vital administrative role in Godrsquos plan of happi-

ness A journal entry recorded by William Clayton in 1845 provides

evidence for the Prophetrsquos teachings regarding this doctrine

It has been a doctrine taught by this church that we were inthe Grand Council amongst the Gods when the organization

of this world was contemplated and that the laws of govern-

ment were all made and sanctioned by all present and all the

ordinances and ceremonies decreed upon1048580

Significantly the Book of Abraham specifically notes that God ldquostood in

the midst ofrdquo these souls (Abraham 323) Tis reference to God stand-ing amongst divine beings in a heavenly council setting finds important

parallels with biblical tradition including Psalm 821 which refers to

God standing in the council and passing judgment

From an analysis of the legal material in the Hebrew Bible it

appears that in a traditional judicial setting judges sat while plain-

tiffs stood 1048580 Tis important distinction provides a significant clue for

interpreting Moses as judge in Exodus 1813ndash14And it came to pass on the morrow that Moses sat to judge

the people and the people stood by Moses from the morning

unto the evening And when Mosesrsquo father in law saw all that

he did to the people he said What is this thing thou doest to

the people why sittest thou thyself alone and all the people

stand by thee from morning unto even1048580

13 Words o Joseph Smith 84 n 10 14 Hans J Boecker Redeormen des Rechtslebens im Alten estament (NeukirchenNeukirchener Verlag 1964) 85ndash86 15 For additional examples of the practice of sitting for judgment see Judges 45Joel 312 Psalm 1225 Proverbs 208 Daniel 79ndash10

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 273

Biblical scholar Simon Parker has shown that the distinction

between sitting and standing in judicial settings also operates in the bib-lical view of the divine council1048580 Tese nuances were not unique to theWest Semitic world In Mesopotamia ldquoanybody who happened alongand had a mind to could lsquostandrsquomdashthat is participatemdashin the pu∆rum

[ie assembly]rdquo1048580 As Assyriologist Torkild Jacobsen explained theAkkadian words ldquouzuzzu lsquoto standrsquo and yašābu lsquoto sitrsquo are technicalterms for participating in the pu∆rumrdquo1048580 From a Near Eastern perspec-

tive these observations shed considerable light on passages such as Isa-iah 313 where Jehovah ldquostands up to plead a cause He rises to championpeoplesrdquo (Jewish Study Bible JSB)

Petersonrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 suggests that the text reflects thecouncil story depicted in the Book of Abraham Te fact that Psalm821 specifically states that ldquoGod stands in the divine councilrdquo sustainsPetersonrsquos thesis Peterson writes

We need not take Psalm 82rsquos portrayal of judgment andcondemnation within the divine council as literally accurate asrepresenting an actual historical event (although obviously itmight) any more than we are obliged to take as literally true thedepiction of Satan in Job 1ndash2 freely coming and going withinthe heavenly court and even placing wagers with God1048580

With its traditional council imagery Psalm 82 has intrigued biblical

scholars such as Parker who argued that the text originally describedYahwehrsquos rise to supremacy in the assembly9830441048624 Parker in part based hisassessment on the fact that Psalm 82 appears as a section of the Elohis-tic collection wherein the editor(s) reveal a strong propensity towardreplacing divine names such as Yahweh with Elohim

16 See for example 1 Kings 2219 21 Job 16 21 Daniel 79ndash10 see also Simon BParker ldquoTe Beginning of the Reign of GodmdashPsalm 82 as Myth and Liturgyrdquo Revue

Biblique 1024 (1995) 537 17 Torkild Jacobsen ldquoPrimitive Democracy in Ancient Mesopotamiardquo Journal oNear Eastern Studies 23 (1943) 164 18 See Jacobsen ldquoPrimitive Democracyrdquo 164 n 24 19 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 536 20 Parker ldquoBeginning of the Reign of Godrdquo 537

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 949

274 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Parker argued that verses one and five in Psalm 82 served as nar-

rative introductions to Yahwehrsquos council address delivered before hisfather Elyon the head of the council In his analysis Parker convinc-ingly illustrates that Yahweh would have originally appeared in Psalm82 as merely one of the assembled participants of deities ldquoHavingthought that the members of the council were all gods (and therefore justmdashand immortal) Yahweh now recognizes that being incorrigi-bly unjust they will perish like mortals fall like some human poten-taterdquo9830441048580 Parkerrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 works well with Petersonrsquos claimthat the text reflects the story of the grand council from the Books ofAbraham and Moses

In an important part of his critique concerning these issuesHeiser argues against the theory endorsed by biblical scholars such asParker and Mark S Smith that in its earliest stages Israelite religionoriginally perceived Yahweh as a son of El ldquoIn terms of an evaluationof the separateness of El and Yahwehrdquo writes Heiser ldquoLatter-day Saint

scholars have too blithely accepted the positions of Smith Parker andBarker All is not nearly as tidy as they proposerdquo (p 234) Heiser forexample maintains that rather than a separate divine father the Elyonor ldquoGod Most Highrdquo presented in Deuteronomy 328ndash9 is none otherthan Yahweh himself In this proposal Heiserrsquos view stands in directcontrast to Mark Smith who argues that ldquoearly on Yahweh is under-stood as Israelrsquos god in distinction to El Deuteronomy 328ndash9 casts

Yahweh in the role of one of the sons of El here called gtelyocircn Tispassage presents an order in which each deity received its own nationIsrael was the nation that Yahweh receivedrdquo983044983044

Te present form of Deuteronomy seems to support Heiserrsquos argu-ment Rather than a separate deity Elyon and Yahweh might appearas a single reference to the head God of the council In addition to thedivine allotment depicted in Deuteronomy 328 the idea of a series of

minor deities that Yahweh had assigned to govern the various nationsappears in Deuteronomy 419ndash20 Tese verses which discuss the

21 Parker ldquoBeginning of the Reign of Godrdquo 539ndash40 22 Mark S Smith Te Early History o God Yahweh and the Other Deities in AncientIsrael (Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2002) 32

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 275

allotment of the host of heaven to the nations of the world parallel

both the vocabulary and the ideology witnessed in 328ndash9 In Deuter-onomy 329 the author uses the same root hlk featured in 420mdashalbeitas a noun Deuteronomy 419ndash20 specifically identifies Yahweh as thedeity who gave each council deity his allotment

And when you look up to the sky and behold the sun and themoon and the stars the whole heavenly host you must not belured into bowing down to them or serving them Tese the

Lord your God allotted to other peoples everywhere underheaven but you the Lord took and brought out of Egypt thatiron blast furnace to be His very own people as is now thecase (Deuteronomy 419ndash20 Jewish Publication Society JPS)983044

Based upon this evidence Heiserrsquos assessment of the view fea-tured in the current form of Deuteronomy may be correct howeverHeiser ultimately fails to address important evidence recognized by

many contemporary biblical scholars that suggests that Israelite the-ology did in fact evolve in a manner consistent with the basic claimsof Parker and Smith983044 For example David Noel Freedman maintainsthat the combination ldquoYahweh Elohimrdquo or ldquoLord Godrdquo found in theearly chapters of Genesis probably derives from an earlier sentencename given the God of Israel namely ldquoYahweh Elrdquo or ldquoGod createsrdquo983044In a related assessment Mark Smith has argued

Te original god of Israel was El Tis reconstruction maybe inferred from two pieces of information First the name

23 Te Jewish Publication Society edition appears in Adele Berlin and Marc Z Brettlereds Te Jewish Study Bible anakh ranslation (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 24 Of course the fact that Deuteronomy 4 simply reflects the language of Deuter-onomy 32 does not automatically mean that both texts derive from the same author Teauthor of Deuteronomy 4 may have simply created his passages concerning Yahweh tointentionally reflect the language and ideology in Deuteronomy 32 in order to present

Yahweh as the chief council deity Tis very real possibility should be considered byHeiser in further research for an introduction to theological changes reflected through-out the book of Deuteronomy see especially Bernard M Levinson Deuteronomy and theHermeneutics o Legal Innovation (New York Oxford University Press 1997) 25 David Noel Freedman ldquoTe Name of the God of Mosesrdquo Journal o Biblical Lit-erature 793 (1960) 156

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1149

276 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of Israel is not a Yahwistic name with the divine element of

Yahweh but an El name with the element lt ēl Tis fact wouldsuggest that El was the original chief god of the group namedIsrael Second Genesis 4924ndash25 presents a series of El epi-thets separate from the mention of Yahweh in verse 18983044

A detailed response to all the evidence amassed by scholars who view a theological evolution in the Hebrew Bible was beyond thescope of Heiserrsquos essay However notwithstanding the probability that

Heiser is correct in linking Elyon with Yahweh in Deuteronomy thisclaim does not negate the likelihood that in ancient Israel Yahwehwas originally a son of Elyon

In the present form of the biblical text the term [gtElyocircn]is understood to be an epithet for Yahweh the God of IsraelIt is possible however as some have argued that the epithetmay conceal a reference to a separate deity possibly an oldergod with whom Yahweh came to be identified983044

LDS scholars have good reason to accept the historical views of schol-ars such as Parker and Smith

Psalm 82 as the Grand Council

Tough helpful to his analysis ultimately Petersonrsquos claims are

not dependent upon the legitimacy of a Parker Smith historical inter-pretation Petersonrsquos argument for interpreting Psalm 82 as a reflec-tion of the grand council story featured in modern revelation findssupport in Near Eastern tradition In the ancient Near East stories ofthe divine council typically begin with a crisis in which the head Godcalls together the gods of the council to resolve the dilemma Duringthe council a series of proposals are offered Finally a ldquosaviorrdquo steps

forward offering his services to the council Tis savior then receives26 Smith Early History o God 32

27 Eric E Elnes and Patrick D Miller ldquoElyonrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demonsin the Bible ed Karel van der oorn Bob Becking and Pieter W van der Horst (LeidenBrill 1995) 560

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 277

a commission to perform his redemptive role983044 Tis common Near

Eastern pattern is seen for example in the Mesopotamian story ofdivine kingship known as Enuma Elish983044 In this Babylonian myththe head god of the pantheon calls together the gods in a council toresolve a dilemma created by the goddess iamat Following a seriesof proposals Marduk the chief god of Babylon receives a commissionas savior Marduk agrees to perform the role of savior on the condi-tion that his father Ea the head god of the council grant Marduk allpower and glory Te same pattern appears in the Assyrian myth ofAnzu However in this version the god Ninurta agrees to serve ascouncil savior while allowing his father to retain his position withinthe council

Like Enuma Elish and Psalm 82 many of the council stories fromthe ancient Near East portray stories of cosmic revolt in which judg-ment is rendered against divine beings Tis pattern is familiar toLatter-day Saints through the council story provided in the Books of

Moses and Abraham (Moses 41ndash4 and Abraham 322ndash28) Althoughsometimes obscured the same pattern is reflected in council tradi-tions featured in the Hebrew Bible Te story of council crisis forexample appears in the Isaiah Apocalypse

On that day [Yahweh] will punishthe host of heaven in heavenand on earth the kings of the earth (Isaiah 2421 NRSV)

Similar language emerges in Isaiah 271

On that day [Yahweh]with his cruel and great and strong swordwill punish Leviathan the fleeing serpent (NRSV)

28 Tis summary is based upon the pattern identified by Simon B Parker ldquoCoun-cilrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 391ndash98 for a consideration of the divine coun-

cil stories within the Bible as ldquotype scenesrdquo see David M Fleming ldquoTe Divine Councilas ype Scene in the Hebrew Biblerdquo (PhD diss Te Southern Baptist Teological Semi-nary 1989) 29 For an English translation of Enuma Elish see Stephanie Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia Creation the Flood Gilgamesh and Others (New York Oxford UniversityPress 1989) 228ndash77

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1349

278 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

For Latter-day Saints these traditions preserved in texts such as Enuma

Elish the book of Isaiah and Psalm 82 provide a type of retellingmdashalbeit sometimes hiddenmdashof the primordial events concerning thegrand council described in modern revelation

In the ancient Near East members of the divine council oenappear to receive a type of reprimand suggestive of the punishmentgiven Lucifer in LDS scripture

Because that Satan rebelled against me and sought to destroy

the agency of man which I the Lord God had given himand also that I should give unto him mine own power by thepower of mine Only Begotten I caused that he should be castdown And he became Satan yea even the devil the father ofall lies to deceive and to blind men and to lead them captiveat his will even as many as would not hearken unto my voice(Moses 43ndash4)

With the words ldquoHere am I send merdquo Latter-day Saints believeJesus Christ stepped forward in the council crisis and volunteered tosave humanity from the challenges associated with mortal probation(Abraham 327) According to the council story depicted in the Bookof Abraham Lucifer ldquowas angry and kept not his first estate and atthat day many followed aer himrdquo (Abraham 328) In his analysisPeterson does well to draw attention to the fact that Isaiahrsquos refer-

ence to ldquoLucifer son of the morningrdquo in Isaiah 1412 ldquodraws us againinto the astronomical imagery oen connected with the divine assem-blyrdquo1048624 In his own studies Heiser has convincingly argued for a similarposition

Ugaritic regularly refers to heavenly beings as p∆r kkbm (the ldquocongregation of the starsrdquo) language corresponding with כוכ י קר (ldquomorning starsrdquo in parallelism with the ldquosons of

Godrdquo in Job 387) and (the ldquostars of Godrdquo Isa 1413)כוכ י לAside from the context of these references each of whichclearly points to personal beings not astronomical phenom-

30 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 533

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 279

ena it is significant that in the entire ancient near eastern lit-

erary record El is never identified with a heavenly body Tusldquothe stars of Elrdquo points to created beings with divine status1048580

For Latter-day Saints recent archaeological and textual discoverieslike those referred to by Heiser are especially intriguing However asPeterson argues in the quotation provided above (p 273) Latter-daySaints do not need the Bible to express a precise parallel with modernrevelation in order to find support for LDS theology

Te fact that texts such as Psalm 82 somewhat parallel Latter-daySaint teachings is sufficient to argue that a more exact version of thegrand council story such as is witnessed in modern revelation mayhave existed in antiquity However notwithstanding his basic agree-ment with Peterson concerning the fundamental role assumed by thecouncil of deities in the Hebrew Bible Heiser ultimately departs fromPetersonrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 suggesting that the biblical view of

the council contains eight fundamental points that conflict with LDStheology

Heiserrsquos Sixteen Points

Heiser provides a list of sixteen arguments outlining his positionregarding Psalm 82 and the divine council He divides these into eightpoints ldquowith which many evangelicals would probably disagree and

with which many Latter-day Saints would likely agreerdquo followed byeight points ldquowith which many Latter-day Saints would probably dis-agree and with which many evangelicals would likely agreerdquo (pp 222ndash24) Heiserrsquos perspectives regarding Psalm 82 are clearly sound Teyinclude such issues as the inadequacy of the term monotheism as areference to Israelite theology and the biblical use of the word elohim as a literal reference to gods rather than human judges While Heiseris certainly correct in suggesting that his first eight views would proveproblematic for many evangelicals but not for most Mormons Heiserrsquoslist of eight statements on Psalm 82 that he assumes many Latter-day

31 Michael S Heiser ldquoDeuteronomy 328 and the Sons of Godrdquo 15 for an electronic version see thedivinecouncilcomD32BibSacpdf (accessed 8 February 2007)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1549

280 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Saints would disagree with indicates a basic lack of exposure to Latter-

day Saint thoughtHeiser is well versed in biblical studies His work has contrib-uted important insights toward a scholarly view of the essential roleassumed by the divine council in Old estament theology but he isnot a Latter-day Saint However Heiser does not consider in his cri-tique the possibility that most Latter-day Saints including Petersondo not believe that the biblical view of the council mirrors preciselywhat Latter-day Saints accept through modern revelation JosephSmithrsquos revelations proclaim our day as the dispensation of the ful-ness of times ldquoaccording to that which was ordained in the midst ofthe Council of the Eternal God of all other gods before this world wasrdquo(DampC 12132) For Latter-day Saints this final dispensation representsthe time decreed by God and his council in which ldquothose things whichnever have been revealed from the foundation of the world but havebeen kept hid from the wise and prudent shall be revealed unto babes

and sucklings in this the dispensation of the fulness of timesrdquo (DampC12818) Terefore Latter-day Saint scholars acknowledge that an LDSunderstanding of the council does not precisely mirror the perspec-tives manifested in the Bible Tat having been said most Latter-daySaints certainly accept the view advocated by Peterson that the bib-lical perspective of the heavenly council of deities is in greater har-mony with LDS belief than with any other contemporary Christian

tradition A recognition that the Bible though not flawless is inspiredof God allows Latter-day Saints to comfortably engage the views putforth by biblical scholars such as Heiser even when those observa-tions prove threatening to our evangelical counterparts

If certain biblical authors for example did in fact believe asHeiser seems to correctly suggest that Yahweh was ldquonot lsquobirthedrsquointo existence by the lsquoolden godsrsquo described in Ugaritic textsrdquo (p 223)Latter-day Saints would have no problem simply accepting the obser- vation as a biblical view Similarly even though Heiser assumes thatmany Mormons would disagree with his opinion that the Bible pre-sents Yahweh the God of Israel as ldquoontologically uniquerdquo (p 223) inreality many Latter-day Saints recognize that this is precisely the case

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 281

Even within LDS theology God the Father stands out as ontologically

unique inasmuch as he created the spirits of all humanity Modernrevelation describes God with the words ldquofrom eternity to eternity Heis the same and His years never failrdquo (DampC 764)

Yahwehrsquos Ontological Uniqueness

In addition to the evidence Heiser presents for what he calls Yah-wehrsquos ontological uniqueness the name Yahweh itself appears vocal-

ized in the Hebrew Bible as a finite Hiphil verb form Te vocalizationof YHWH as ldquoYahwehrdquo carries a specific nuance since ldquoHebrew gram-mars traditionally represent the Hiphil stem as the causative of the Qal

stemrdquo983044 Frank Moore Cross explains that ldquothe accumulated evidence strongly supports the view that the name Yahweh is a causativeimperfect of the Canaanite-Proto-Hebrew verb hwy lsquoto bersquo rdquo Tere-fore the divine name Yahweh according to this view literally means

ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procreatesrdquo One of the inter-esting points to consider concerning the biblical title Yahweh Sabaoth or ldquoLord of Hostsrdquo is that typically in Hebrew proper names do notappear bound to a genitive nounmdashthat is ldquoJohn of Hostsrdquo or ldquoMary ofEarthrdquo etc Since a proper name cannot traditionally function as abound form in a construct chain Cross interprets the King James titleldquoLord of Hostsrdquo as ldquo lsquohe creates the (divine) hostsrsquo rdquo If correct this

view would lend support to Heiserrsquos argument that ldquoYahweh is said32 Bruce K Waltke and M OrsquoConnor An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax

(Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 1990) 433 33 Frank Moore Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge Harvard Uni- versity Press 1973) 65 34 ldquoA proper noun cannot as a rule be followed by a genitiverdquo Paul Jouumlon A Gram-mar o Biblical Hebrew trans and rev Muraoka (Rome Editrice Pontificio IstitutoBiblico 2000) 2481 Admittedly however textual evidence shows that the rule need notapply to divine names see J A Emerton ldquoNew Light on Israelite Religion Te Implica-

tions of the Inscriptions from Kunti llet lsquoAjrudrdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wis-senschaf 94 (1982) 12ndash13 and especially John H Choi ldquoResheph and YHWH IacuteĔBĀlt Ocirc rdquoVetus estamentum 54 (2004) 17ndash28 I offer this assessment of the title Yahweh Sabaothwhich reflects the views of scholars such as David Noel Freedman and Frank MooreCross as merely an intriguing possibility 35 Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic 65 emphasis added

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1749

282 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo (p 250)

Heiser incorrectly assumes that this apparent biblical teaching con-cerning Yahwehrsquos uniqueness among the gods is not inconsistent withLDS theology

Tough Latter-day Saints view God the Father and Jesus Christas two separate divine beings for the Saints the biblical titles associ-ated with these deities are clearly interchangeable Latter-day Saintshave no problem therefore in associating God the Father with thetitle Yahwehmdashthat is ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procre-atesrdquo Te 1916 official declaration presented by the First Presidency ofthe church states ldquoGod the Eternal Father whom we designate by theexalted name-title Elohim is the literal Parent of our Lord and SaviorJesus Christ and of the spirits of the human racerdquo Clearly howeverthe First Presidencyrsquos move toward designating God the Father as Elo-him and Jesus the Son as Jehovah was primarily a move by churchleaders to create uniformity in Latter-day Saint expression In a recent

Ensign article Keith Meservy observed that ldquoin at least three Old es-tament passages it appears that L983151983154983140 [ie Jehovah] applies to Heav-enly Father not Jesus Christ Ps 1101 Ps 27 Isa 5310rdquo No doubtfor many Latter-day Saints this estimate offered by Meservy couldbe greatly augmented LDS teachings therefore do not preclude theontological uniqueness of God the Father that Heiser witnesses in theHebrew Bible

Yahweh as a Being ldquoSpecies-Uniquerdquo

Certainly Heiser is justified in suggesting that the gods of thedivine council appear inferior to Israelrsquos deity He uses this correctobservation however to build an argument that Israelrsquos God wastherefore somehow ldquospecies-uniquerdquo (p 250) In his discussion con-cerning the biblical evidence for Yahweh being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo

Heiser bases his interpretation on five points of evidence (1) ldquoYahweh36 ldquoTe Father and the Son A Doctrinal Exposition by the First Presidency and the

welverdquo as cited in Messages o the First Presidency o the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints ed James R Clark (Salt Lake City Bookcra 1971) 526 emphasis added 37 Keith H Meservy ldquoLORD = Jehovahrdquo Ensign June 2002 29 n 3

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 283

is said to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo

(2) ldquoYahweh was considered pre-existent to all godsrdquo (3) Yahweh hasthe power to strip the other elohim of their immortality (4) Yahwehalone is referred to in the Bible as ha-elohim and (5) ldquothe other godsare commanded to worship Yahwehrdquo (see pp 250ndash57) Tough eachof Heiserrsquos five points of evidence do in fact appear in the Bible con-trary to Heiserrsquos suggestion none of these observations establishesYahweh as being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo In the Bible Yahweh is the God ofgods but the biblical gods were still biblical gods As Paul Sanders hasexplained according to the Deuteronomic vision ldquothe [Sons of Goddescribed in Deuteronomy 328] are relatively independent they havetheir own dominions like YHWHrdquo

Notwithstanding his acceptance of the importance of the divinecouncil of deities in biblical theology Heiserrsquos critique suffers in partthrough his effort to define Israelrsquos deity as a being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo(p 250) He is correct in drawing attention to the fact that biblical

authors viewed their deity as exceptionally powerful in the councilldquoFor the Lord your God is God of godsrdquo proclaims Deuteronomy 1017ldquoand Lord of lordsrdquo Unfortunately however in identifying Yahweh asa being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo Heiser forces the biblical view of deities intoan image somewhat consistent with radical monotheism Contraryto Heiserrsquos suggestion the creative act in and of itself does not set thecreator apart as an exclusive species Te same point also applies tothe issue Heiser raises concerning primogeniture In other words aman for instance may exist before both his children and his siblingsand though preeminence may render the person ldquouniquerdquo on somelevels prior existence would not in this or in any other case rendera being as ldquospecies-uniquerdquo rue the Bible speaks of gods separatefrom Israelrsquos primary deity as elohim a˙erimmdashthat is ldquoother godsrdquo(see Exodus 203 2313 Deuteronomy 57 614 etc) However as YairHoffman has observed ldquoA survey of the use of a˙erim [ldquootherrdquo] shows

38 Paul Sanders Te Provenance o Deuteronomy 32 (Leiden Brill 1996) 37039 Te term radical monotheism refers to the theological position that only one

divine being exists in the universe Te expression was popularized by ikva Frymer-Kensky In the Wake o the Goddesses Women Culture and the Biblical ransormationo Pagan Myth (New York Free Press 1992) 154

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1949

284 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

that when used attributively with regard to garments days messen-

gers and objects it clearly has a relative meaning something differ-ent yet o the same kind rdquo1048624 Terefore ldquothere is no reason to assumethat in the phrase elohim a˙erim the attribute has a more distinctivemeaningrdquo1048580 When all is said and done the biblical deities like Yah-weh himself were still gods

In addition contrary to Heiserrsquos assertion the simple fact that Elo-him possesses the power to strip the other deities of their immortalityin Psalm 82 does not indicate that these gods are of a different spe-cies than Elohim According to the Psalmistrsquos view Elohim is simplymore powerful than the other gods Analogies from the ancient NearEast illustrate the problematic nature of Heiserrsquos claim In the Babylo-nian story Enuma Elish for instance the primordial mother goddessiamat created the god Qingu as chief deity over iamatrsquos militaryforces As a result of his actions taken against the divine council thedeities of the assembly ldquobound [Qingu] and held him in front of Ea

[and they] imposed the penalty on him and cut off his bloodrdquo983044 Tefact that in Enuma Elish the council could strip Qingu of his immor-tality did not mean that the god Qingu was somehow of a different orlesser divine species In the Sumerian myth of Enlil and Ninlil Enlil(one of the ldquogreat godsrdquo of Mesopotamia) is brought to trial for havingraped the goddess Ninlil As Enlil returned to the city of Nippur hewas arrested by the assembly while walking through the temple court

Te trial commenced immediately In the myth the council pre-sented the verdict that ldquothe sex offender Enlil will leave the townrdquoAccordingly the myth reports that Enlil le Nippur headed towardthe netherworld In his assessment of the story Jacobsen points out

40 Yair Hoffman ldquoTe Conception of lsquoOther Godsrsquo in Deuteronomistic Literaturerdquoin Concepts o the Other in Near Eastern Religions ed Ilai Alon Ithamar Gruenwald andItamar Singer (Leiden Brill 1994) 107 emphasis added 41 Hoffman ldquoConception of Other Godsrdquo 107

42 As cited in Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia 261 43 For a summary of the myth see Gwendolyn Leick A Dictionary o Ancient NearEastern Mythology (London Routledge 1998) 47ndash48 for a translation see TorkildJacobsen Te Harps Tat Once Sumerian Poetry in ranslation (New Haven YaleUniversity Press 1987) 167ndash80 44 Jacobsen Harps 174

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 285

that Enlilrsquos descent to Hades may indicate that the high god in Meso-

potamian mythology was originally sentenced to death As notedby James Ackerman in his dissertation concerning Psalm 82 thesetypes of judgment scenes in which the council determines that godswill die like mortals carry important implications for interpreting thecultural background for the biblical text Contrary to Heiserrsquos inter-pretation none of these stories indicate that the dying gods were of adifferent species or order than the gods who issued the sentence

Near Eastern traditions oen place considerable emphasis on thedying-god motif In no sense however are these dying godsmdashevenwhen resurrectedmdashsomehow depicted as a lesser species Heiserrsquos con-fusion concerning the implications of a biblical statement that Godissued a judgment of death to the deities of the divine council illus-trates the fundamental need for biblical scholars to pursue Assyriol-ogy in connection with their efforts to interpret the Hebrew Bible

Also contrary to Heiserrsquos suggestion the punishment meted out

to usurpers in Near Eastern council stories never indicates that thecriminals derived from some sort of exceptional species Te storyof Athtar from ancient Canaan for instance presents the traditionof Athtarrsquos descent to the underworld following the deityrsquos ascensionto the throne of Baal Te details involved in Athtarrsquos story containimportant thematic elements depicted in ancient Near Eastern storiesof cosmic revolt Athtar seems to share some semblance with Baalrsquos

mortal enemy Mot or ldquoDeathrdquo into whom Baal himself descendsHence Hugh Page notes that Athtarrsquos ldquodescent to the underworld implies that on some level Athtar has placed himself in proxim-ity to or relationship with the only god that Baal proves incapable

45 Torkild Jacobsen ldquoAn Ancient Mesopotamian rial for Homiciderdquo in owardthe Image o ammuz and Other Essays on Mesopotamian History and Culture ed Wil-liam L Moran (Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1970) 207 first published inStudia Biblica et Orientalia vol 3 of Analecta Biblica et Orientalia XII (Rome Pontificio

Istituto Biblico 1959) 130ndash50 46 See James S Ackerman ldquoAn Exegetical Study of Psalm 82rdquo (PhD diss HarvardUniversity 1966) 186ndash93 47 For a recent survey of the issue which includes a survey of previous assessmentssee ryggve N D Mettinger Te Riddle o Resurrection ldquoDying and Rising Godsrdquo in the Ancient Near East (Stockholm Almqvist amp Wiksell 2001)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2149

286 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of defeatingrdquo Athtarrsquos assumption of the throne of Baal followed

by his descent to the underworld indicates that this portion of theBaal cycle from ancient Canaan fits the general category of the cosmic

revolt genre witnessed in texts such as Abraham 3 and Psalm 82

1 Kindly El the Compassionate answers

2 ldquoOne so small cannot race

3 with Baal cannot handle the lance

4 with Daganrsquos son when they test one anotherrdquo

5 Lady Athirat of the Sea answers 6 ldquoLet us enthrone Athtar the Strong

7 Let Athtar the Strong be kingrdquo

8 Ten Athtar the Strong

9 ascended the summit of Sapan

10 He sat upon the throne of Mightiest Baal

11 His feet would not reach its footstool

12 His head would not reach its top 13 Athtar the Strong answered

14 ldquoI cannot rule on the summit of Sapanrdquo

15 Athtar the Strong descended

16 He descended from the throne of Mightiest Baal

17 And he ruled over the underworld god of all of it

18 drew in barrels

19 drew in jars (KU 1649ndash67 translation)

Te fact that Athtar the Strong experienced a type of ldquodeathrdquo in which

he ldquoruled over the underworldrdquo following his descent from Baalrsquos

throne does not suggest that Athtar was a ldquobeing species-uniquerdquo from

the other deities any more than Inanna or Ishtar the Mesopotamian

goddesses who experienced a type of death in the underworld were of

a different species than the gods Ea Enki Marduk and so forth48 Hugh R Page Jr Te Myth o Cosmic Rebellion A Study o Its Reflexes in Ugaritic

and Biblical Literature (Leiden Brill 1996) 92 Pagersquos views concerning the Athtar mythhave been criticized by Gregorio del Olmo Lete ldquoIn Search of the Canaanite Luciferrdquo Aula Orientalis 19 (2001) 125ndash32

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 287

Still in his efforts to present Yahweh as a being species-unique

Heiser correctly draws attention to the other gods of the council whoare commanded to worship Yahweh In his analysis he focuses uponthe call given to the gods in Psalm 291ndash2 ldquoAscribe to Yahweh O sons ofGod ascribe to Yahweh glory and strength Ascribe to Yahweh the gloryof his name worship Yahweh in the splendor of holinessrdquo (as quotedon p 256) While Heiserrsquos observations certainly illustrate that biblicalauthors viewed their deity as uniquemdashthat is exceptionalmdashthroughout

Near Eastern tradition lesser gods regularly appear in a position inwhich they offer praise service and devotion to the higher gods of thecouncil Richard J Clifford explains that in the Phoenician view of theassembly ldquoas elsewhere in the ancient Near East the assemblies are pic-tured as subordinate to individual gods although the assemblyrsquos con-sent seems necessary for important decisionsrdquo Simply because ancienttextsmdashincluding the Biblemdashdepict the members of the assemblies asldquosubordinate to individual godsrdquo this in no way implies that the higher

deities somehow belonged to a separate species Ancient Near Easterntexts such as Mursilirsquos Hymn and Prayer to the Sun-goddess o Arinna (CH 376A) establish the fact that Near Eastern peoples believed thatgods of the same species paid homage to higher deities in a way compa-rable to the biblical view

You O Sun-goddess of Arinna are honored goddess Your

name is honored among names and your divinity is honoredamong gods Furthermore among the gods you are the mosthonored and the greatest Tere is no other god more honoredor greater than you You are the lord of just judgment Youcontrol the kingship of heaven and earth1048624

Holding the position ldquomost honoredrdquo among the gods did not estab-lish Arinna as species-unique Arinna was simply the god before

whom from the authorrsquos perspective the other gods would regularly49 Richard J Clifford ldquoPhoenician Religionrdquo Bulletin o the American Schools o

Oriental Research 279 (1990) 57 50 As cited in Itamar Singer Hittite Prayers (Atlanta Society of Biblical Literature2002) 51

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2349

288 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquofall downrdquo1048580 For the ancients the Near Eastern view of the divine

court clearly reflected or were expressed in terms of earthly realityTerefore just as the high king before whom other humans paid hom-age was still a human being so the god to whom other deities paidhomage was still a god matching in species For biblical authors Yah-weh stood at the head of the hierarchy in Israelite thought Yahwehwas unique as the God of gods but he was not unique in his divinityFrom a biblical perspective Yahweh even shared this divinity withhumanity

Humans as Teomorphic Beings

In his discussion concerning the biblical view regarding theomor-phic humans Peterson draws attention to Paulrsquos New estament ser-mon presented in Acts 1728ndash29

For in him we live and move and have our being as

certain also of your own poets have said For we are also hisoffspring

Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God we oughtnot to think that the Godhead is like unto gold or silver orstone graven by art and manrsquos device

Peterson in part argues for a biblical connection between God andhumanity based on the fact that ldquothe word rendered lsquooffspringrsquo by the

King James translators is the Greek genos which is cognate with theLatin genus and means lsquofamilyrsquo or lsquoracersquo or lsquokindrsquo or even and mostespecially interesting lsquodescendants of a common ancestorrsquo rdquo983044 ForLatter-day Saints human beings are literally the offspring of God andtherefore intrinsically theomorphic Part of the strength of Petersonrsquosessay lies in his recognition that like Latter-day Saints biblical authorsregularly blur the distinction between humanity and divine beings

Not only does Peterson draw attention to the prophetic interactionwith the council as support for his thesis but he also places consider-

51 Singer Hittite Prayers 51 52 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 542ndash43 53 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 289

able emphasis upon the deified dead in the Hebrew Bible and the early

Christian teaching regarding deification Heiser notwithstandingPetersonrsquos evidence rejects the idea that a genus equation of God and

humankind appears in the Bible

For his criticisms of Petersonrsquos views Heiser places considerable

weight on the notion that ldquothe concept of the image of God does not

advance the idea that there is a genus equation of God and human-

kind or that God was once a manrdquo (p 224) On some levels Heiserrsquos

point concerning the word tzelem or ldquoimagerdquo in Genesis 126ndash27is correct Concerning this controversial term Marc Z Brettler has

recently explained

Te word tzelem (ldquoimagerdquo) elsewhere always refers to a

physical representation For example the Book of Ezekiel

uses tzelem when it refers to ldquomen sculptured upon the walls

figures of Chaldeans drawn in vermilionrdquo (2314) or when it

accuses Israel of fornicating with ldquophallic imagesrdquo (1617) Teword oen refers to idols (eg Num 3352 Ezek 720 Amos

526 2 Chron 2317) It always signifies a concrete entity

rather than an abstract one Tis is not surprising since the

Bible (in contrast to most medieval philosophical traditions

both Jewish and Christian) oen depicts God in corporeal

terms

Genesis 126ndash27 suggests that Godrsquos physical likeness is similar to

humanityrsquos but Heiser is correct that the statement does not indicate

that biblical authors viewed humans as gods or that God himself was

once a human However many other texts from the Bible do present a

theomorphic view of humanity Peterson therefore is precisely correct

in stating that ldquothe Latter-day Saint understanding that humans are of

the same genus or species as God is thus clearly biblicalrdquo54 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509ndash28

55 Marc Z Brettler How to Read the Bible (Philadelphia Jewish Publication Society2005) 43ndash44 Hebrew word deleted 56 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 547

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2549

290 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Adam as a Divine Council Member

In addition to associating humanity with the tzelem of God theBible describes the first man as a deified member of the divine council

In the Eden story the Lord took advantage of the wet claylike soil and

ldquoformed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils

the breath of life and man became a living soulrdquo (Genesis 27) In an

important study concerning this imagery Walter Brueggemann has

shown that a biblical connection exists between being raised from the

dust and enthronement ldquoo be taken lsquofrom the dustrsquo means to be

elevated from obscurity to royal office and to return to dust means to

be deprived of that office and returned to obscurityrdquo Imagery such

as that witnessed in 1 Kings 162 supports Brueggemannrsquos interpreta-

tion ldquoForasmuch as I [God] exalted thee [Jehu] out of the dust and

made thee prince over my people Israel rdquo (1 Kings 162) Hence the

notion of the God raising man ldquofrom the dust of the earthrdquo in Genesis

27 in part suggests that Yahweh begins his creative activity by form-

ing a divine king According to Genesis 215 this divine king through

a type of imitatio dei would continue to perform the work of Yahweh

who ldquoplantedrdquo the garden ldquoAnd the Lord God took the man and put

him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep itrdquo In a simi-

lar fashion Mesopotamian kings such as Hammurapi glorified their

efforts through the use of creation and agricultural imageryI encircled [the wall] with a swamp I dug the Euphrates

as far as Sippar (and) made it reach a prosperous quay

I Hammu-rāpi who builds up the land caused Sippar

and Babylon to dwell in peaceful abodes forever What

from [primordial days] no one among the kings had done I

did in a grand fashion for the god Šamaš my lord

57 Walter Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestament-liche Wissenschaf 841 (1972) 1ndash18 58 Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo 2 59 Douglas Frayne Old Babylonian Period (2003ndash1595 BC) (oronto University oforonto Press 1990) 348ndash49

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 291

Te view presented in the Babylonian inscription on the wall

of Sippar reflects the common Near Eastern assumption featured inGenesis 2 of a God king participating in the act of creation from ldquopri-

mordial daysrdquo through structure1048624 As a king Hammurapi assumed

the same role filled by deities who created the universe by giving order

to preexistent chaos In its depiction of Adam as the primordial gar-

dener the Bible relies upon similar imagery

Manrsquos status as the archetypal gardener king in Genesis 2ndash3 con-

tains important parallels with Mesopotamian kingship theory1048580 Sev-eral examples of Mesopotamian iconography feature a depiction of the

tree (or plant) of life over which the king and priests appear pouring

libations In assessing the connection between Mesopotamian kings

and gardeners Geo Widengren cites these statements from the am-

muz text R IV 27 No I

A tamarisk which in the garden has no water to drink

Whose foliage on the plant sends forth no twig

A plant which they water no more in its pot

Whose roots are torn away

A herb which is in the garden has no water to drink

Among the flowers of the garden he sleeps

Among the flowers of the garden he is thrown

According to Widengren ldquothe ree of Life is watered by the kingwho pours out over it the Water of Life which he has in his possession

Te ree of Life constantly needs the Water of Life near which it is

growing in the garden of paradiserdquo983044 Te connection between king

and gardener was widely attested throughout ancient Mesopotamia

60 In his translation Frayne renders the Akkadian word szligi-a-tim as ldquothe pastrdquo Teinscription however clearly relies on creation imagery and I have therefore interpreted

szligiatim as ldquoprimordial daysrdquo in accordance with the information provided in Jeremy BlackAndrew George and Nicholas Postgate A Concise Dictionary o Akkadian (WiesbadenHarrassowitz 2000) 337 61 See Geo Widengren Te King and the ree o Lie in Ancient Near Eastern Reli- gion (Uppsala Uppsala Universitets Aringrsskri 1951) 62 Widengren King and the ree o Lie 15

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2749

292 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Tis portrayal of kingship appears in the birth legend of Sargon

wherein the monarch declaresAkki the waterscooper placed me as his gardenerWhen I was a gardener Ishtar was in love with meTe kingship I exercised during x + 5 years

Tese lines from the tale of Sargon the gardener whom the goddess Ishtarloved seem to provide an especially significant parallel with the biblical view presented in the story of Eden In the words of Nicholas Wyatt ldquotheman in his garden is a symbolic allusion to the king in his sanctuaryrdquo

One of the important connections between humanityrsquos enthrone-ment in the garden and later biblical traditions includes the anointingof an Israelite king in 1 Kings 128ndash40 at the Gihon Spring a rivernamed Gihon was one of the four rivers that flowed out of Eden andround the land of Cush (Genesis 213) Significantly the only otherexplicit reference to the Garden of Eden in the Hebrew Bible appears

in a context that addresses the link between kingship and divinity (seeEzekiel 282ndash13)

Concerning the attestation of biblical rituals that may preserveactual religious rites wherein Israelite kings assumed divinity Wyattargues that

the rituals which transform the status of the earthly kingremoving him from ldquomerely humanrdquo status to that of a sacralfigure to be couched in the form of a narrative about a godcarries with it the hint that the king himself is to be seen astransformed into a god Te enthronement of the king isthus his apotheosis

63 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoInterpreting the Creation and Fall Story in Genesis 2ndash3rdquo Zeit-schrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 931 (1981) 15 64 John van Seters has argued according to the Documentary Hypothesis that the

story of divine kingship in J derives from Babylonian influences and is therefore latepostexilic If P is in part a reaction to the J account then it is difficult to accept vanSetersrsquos dating see John van Seters ldquoTe Creation of Man and the Creation of the KingrdquoZeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 1013 (1989) 333ndash41 65 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinity Some Mythical and Ritual Aspects of WestSemitic Kingshiprdquo Ugarit-Forschungen 31 (1999) 857

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 293

In his exploration of biblical deification Wyatt refers to Psalm 198ndash10

as a possible ritual text transforming the king into a divine beingTe teaching of Yahweh is perfectrestoring the breastTe testimony of Yahweh is certainmaking wise the headTe precepts of Yahweh are uprightrejoicing the heart

Te commandment of Yahweh is puremaking bright the eyesTe speech of Yahweh is ritually purestanding for everTe judgments of Yahweh are truthTey are righteous all togethermore desirable than goldthan much pure goldmore sweet than honeyor the refined combYour servant is indeed illumined by themand in their observance is there great gain

Concerning this possible reference to ritual anointing Wyatt argues

It is true that there is no narrative statement about unc-

tion here oil is not even mentioned But only thus can thesuccessive blessings on various parts of the kingrsquos body beexplained For comparison we should consider the unction ofpriests in Exod 294ndash9 19ndash21 4012ndash5 and Lev 810ndash2 22ndash4where various parts of the priestrsquos body are anointed with oiland blood undoubtedly with some liturgical commentary onthe action such is now narrated in these passages providing

a suitable performative utteranceIf correct Wyattrsquos assessment of Israelite deification proves importantfor an analysis of Adam as divine king in the book of Genesis

66 Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinityrdquo 874ndash75

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2949

294 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

In Genesis chapter 2 Godrsquos initial creative act must be the creation

of man for as a divine king raised ldquofrom the dustrdquo man was specifi-cally formed to assist deity in the creation process God appears as agardener who causes to grow ldquoevery tree that is pleasant to the sightand good for foodrdquo (Genesis 29) Te account declares that the Lordplaced the man in the garden to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo his newly createdoasis (Genesis 215) As a gardener the Lord plants Eden as a gardenerthe Lord mixes the soil to form both man and beast As a gardener the

Lord creates man in his image to perform the work of a God Follow-ing his creation man assumes the role of divine gardenerFrom an ancient Near Eastern perspective the view of Adam as

divine gardener suggests that biblical authors viewed humanity asan earthly extension of the divine council According to the Edenaccount man was immortal (Genesis 217) man had received fromdeity the sacred ldquobreath of liferdquo (Genesis 27) man had been com-missioned to perform the work of a godmdashthat is to till and tend the

divine garden Terefore as an immortal gardener man was alreadyldquolike the godsrdquo prior to partaking of the forbidden fruit

In Mesopotamian myths for example the work of gardening wasassigned to lesser members of the divine council Hence the story ofAtrahasis opens with the following portrayal

When gods were man

Tey did forced labor they bore drudgeryGreat indeed was the drudgery of the godsTe forced labor was heavy the misery too muchTe seven() great Anunna-gods were burdeningTe Igigi-gods with forced labor

Like the account in Genesis the lesser gods of the divine council inAtrahasis were gardeners who did the laborious task of caring for the

canals trees and waterways that sustained the higher gods of the67 For additional examples of Yahweh portrayed in the role of gardener see Num-

bers 246 Psalm 10416 Isaiah 4414 68 Altrahasis II39 1ndash6 translation in Benjamin R Foster Beore the Muses An Anthol-ogy o Akkadian Literature (Bethesda MD CDL 1993) 1159

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 295

assembly Hence Adam as an immortal being clearly reflects the

position of the Igigi in Mesopotamian thought Te questions pre-sented to Job by Eliphaz regarding the primal human seem to share

this notion

Are you the firstborn of the human race

Were you brought forth before the hills

Have you listened in the council of God (Job 157ndash8 NRSV)

As Dexter Callender has observed concerning these questionsldquoTe allusion to the primal human in Job does not give us explicit

details concerning his incorporation into the sacred world It is clear

however that the idea is present in the reference that the primal human

lsquolistenedrsquo in the council of Godrdquo As a member of Godrsquos council man

held a stewardship to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo the deityrsquos garden (Genesis

215) According to the Genesis account when the man and woman

eat from the tree of knowledge God expels the humans from Edenand assigns the cherubim other traditional members of the divine

council to ldquokeeprdquo the garden (Genesis 324) Tis move may suggest

that in biblical thought ldquokeepingrdquo the garden is a task reserved for

members of the divine host As an immortal subordinate assigned an

important council task man however eventually appears in the Gen-

esis account as a being very much like the council deities mentioned

in Psalm 82 who receive the decree of death

I have said Ye are gods and all of you are children of the

most High

But ye shall die like men and fall like one of the princes

(Psalm 826ndash7)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou

shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thoushalt surely die (Genesis 217)

69 Dexter E Callender Jr Adam in Myth and History Ancient Israelite Perspectiveson the Primal Human (Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 2000) 212 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 269

sion NRSV) Recently however Petersonrsquos essay has drawn the atten-

tion of Michael Heiser an evangelical Bible scholar who specializesin the Israelite view concerning the divine council In his critique ofPeterson Heiser takes exception to his analysis of Psalm 82 As a spe-cialist in biblical council imagery Heiser attempts to correct what heperceives as ldquocertain flaws in the LDS understanding and use of Psalm82rdquo (p 222 above) Heiser raises several important issues worthy ofcareful consideration Te following essay is not an exhaustive treat-ment of or response to the issues raised in Heiserrsquos critique Instead itwill provide a general response to Heiserrsquos claims particularly thoseclaims that apply both to LDS thought and to Psalm 82

An LDS View of the Divine Council

In his response to the LDS interpretation of Psalm 82 Heiser cor-rectly notes that Latter-day Saints have a keen interest in the biblical

view of the divine council During his ministry the Prophet JosephSmith provided important doctrinal insights regarding the heavenlyassembly Although his ideas seemed somewhat revolutionary formany Christians in the nineteenth century modern biblical schol-ars today as Heiser himself observes recognize that divine councilsof deities fulfilled a vital role in biblical theology During the Aprilconference of the church in 1844 Joseph Smith testified concerningthe importance of the heavenly council organized before the creationof the earth Concerning ldquothe beginningrdquo Joseph declared that ldquothehead of the Gods called a council of the Gods and they came togetherand concocted a plan to create the world and people itrdquo

In his journal entry for 11 June 1843 Franklin D Richards pro- vided an account of the Prophetrsquos teaching that ldquothe order and ordi-nances of the kingdom were instituted by the priesthood in the councilof heaven before the world wasrdquo Elder Richards later records Josephrsquos

5 eachings o the Prophet Joseph Smith 349 6 Te Words o Joseph Smith Te Contemporary Accounts o the Nauvoo Discourseso the Prophet Joseph ed Andrew F Ehat and Lyndon W Cook (Provo U BYU Reli-gious Studies Center 1980) 215 capitalization and spelling somewhat standardized insuch quotations

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 549

270 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

testimony that ldquoall blessings that were ordained for man by the coun-

cil of heaven were on conditions of obedience to the law thereofrdquoTe Book of Abraham refers to ldquothe intelligences that were organizedbeore the world wasrdquo (Abraham 322) In this council setting Godldquostood among those that were spirits and he saw that they were goodrdquo(Abraham 323) According to the Prophet ldquoevery man who has a call-ing to minister to the inhabitants of the world was ordained to that very purpose in the grand council of heavenrdquo Tough the conceptmay seem odd to some Christians these teachings are not completelyabsent in the Bible

Te notion of God assigning members of his council to assumeimportant positions of administrative responsibility appears in its ear-liest form in Deuteronomy 328 ldquoWhen the Most High apportionedthe nations when he divided humankind he fixed the boundaries ofthe peoples according to the number of the godsrdquo (Deuteronomy 328NRSV) For Latter-day Saints who at least in part associate the coun-

cil with humanity a seemingly parallel notion appears in the councilstory featured in the Book of Abraham

And God saw these souls that they were good and he stoodin the midst of them and he said Tese I will make my rulersfor he stood among those that were spirits and he saw that theywere good and he said unto me Abraham thou art one of themthou wast chosen before thou wast born (Abraham 323)

Peterson argues that in Abraham 322ndash23 ldquowe have God standing inthe midst of premortal spirits who are appointed to be rulers in a scenethat is really a textbook instance of the motif of the divine assemblyTese are premortal human beings Can they truly be called lsquogodsrsquo inany sense Yes they canrdquo For Peterson many of the gods describedin biblical council texts are in fact human beings

Petersonrsquos position is grounded in LDS theology Following thecouncil scene described in Abraham 3 the Book of Abraham contin-

7 Words o Joseph Smith 232 8 Words o Joseph Smith 367 9 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 541ndash42

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 271

ues with a description of the Godsrsquo involvement in creation ldquoAnd then

the Lord said Let us go down And they went down at the beginningand they that is the Gods organized and formed the heavens and theearthrdquo (Abraham 41) In his teachings Joseph Smith appears to pro- vide an interpretive key concerning the identity of these deities

[An] everlasting covenant was made between three per-sonages before the organization of this earth and relates totheir dispensation of things to men on the earth these per-

sonages according to Abrahamrsquos record are called God thefirst the Creator God the second the Redeemer and God thethird the witness or estator10485801048624

Other LDS commentators have suggested additional possibilitiesJoseph Fielding Smith taught that

it is true that Adam helped to form this earth He laboredwith our Savior Jesus Christ I have a strong view or convic-tion that there were others also who assisted them PerhapsNoah and Enoch and why not Joseph Smith and those whowere appointed to be rulers before the earth was formed Weknow that Jesus our Savior was a Spirit when this great workwas done He did all of these mighty works before he taber-nacled in the flesh10485801048580

Bruce R McConkie expressed a similar view ldquoChrist and MaryAdam and Eve Abraham and Sarah and a host of mighty men andequally glorious women comprised that group of lsquothe noble and greatonesrsquo to whom the Lord Jesus said lsquoWe will go down for there is spacethere and we will take of these materials and we will make an earthwhereon these may dwellrsquo (Abraham 322ndash24)rdquo1048580983044 Since the expressionwe will go down is followed in the Book of Abraham with the statementldquothey that is the Gods organized and formed the heavens and the

10 eachings o the Prophet Joseph Smith 190 11 Joseph Fielding Smith Doctrines o Salvation (Salt Lake City Bookcra 1999)174ndash75 12 Bruce R McConkie ldquoEve and the Fallrdquo in Woman (Salt Lake City Deseret Book1979) 59 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 749

272 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

earthrdquo (Abraham 41) it appears that Elder McConkie believed that

these Gods from the heavenly council included premortal humanso some extent therefore the title god is appropriately applied to the

premortal sons and daughters of Heavenly Father

Joseph Smithrsquos view of the divine council suggests that this assem-

bly of deities served a vital administrative role in Godrsquos plan of happi-

ness A journal entry recorded by William Clayton in 1845 provides

evidence for the Prophetrsquos teachings regarding this doctrine

It has been a doctrine taught by this church that we were inthe Grand Council amongst the Gods when the organization

of this world was contemplated and that the laws of govern-

ment were all made and sanctioned by all present and all the

ordinances and ceremonies decreed upon1048580

Significantly the Book of Abraham specifically notes that God ldquostood in

the midst ofrdquo these souls (Abraham 323) Tis reference to God stand-ing amongst divine beings in a heavenly council setting finds important

parallels with biblical tradition including Psalm 821 which refers to

God standing in the council and passing judgment

From an analysis of the legal material in the Hebrew Bible it

appears that in a traditional judicial setting judges sat while plain-

tiffs stood 1048580 Tis important distinction provides a significant clue for

interpreting Moses as judge in Exodus 1813ndash14And it came to pass on the morrow that Moses sat to judge

the people and the people stood by Moses from the morning

unto the evening And when Mosesrsquo father in law saw all that

he did to the people he said What is this thing thou doest to

the people why sittest thou thyself alone and all the people

stand by thee from morning unto even1048580

13 Words o Joseph Smith 84 n 10 14 Hans J Boecker Redeormen des Rechtslebens im Alten estament (NeukirchenNeukirchener Verlag 1964) 85ndash86 15 For additional examples of the practice of sitting for judgment see Judges 45Joel 312 Psalm 1225 Proverbs 208 Daniel 79ndash10

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 273

Biblical scholar Simon Parker has shown that the distinction

between sitting and standing in judicial settings also operates in the bib-lical view of the divine council1048580 Tese nuances were not unique to theWest Semitic world In Mesopotamia ldquoanybody who happened alongand had a mind to could lsquostandrsquomdashthat is participatemdashin the pu∆rum

[ie assembly]rdquo1048580 As Assyriologist Torkild Jacobsen explained theAkkadian words ldquouzuzzu lsquoto standrsquo and yašābu lsquoto sitrsquo are technicalterms for participating in the pu∆rumrdquo1048580 From a Near Eastern perspec-

tive these observations shed considerable light on passages such as Isa-iah 313 where Jehovah ldquostands up to plead a cause He rises to championpeoplesrdquo (Jewish Study Bible JSB)

Petersonrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 suggests that the text reflects thecouncil story depicted in the Book of Abraham Te fact that Psalm821 specifically states that ldquoGod stands in the divine councilrdquo sustainsPetersonrsquos thesis Peterson writes

We need not take Psalm 82rsquos portrayal of judgment andcondemnation within the divine council as literally accurate asrepresenting an actual historical event (although obviously itmight) any more than we are obliged to take as literally true thedepiction of Satan in Job 1ndash2 freely coming and going withinthe heavenly court and even placing wagers with God1048580

With its traditional council imagery Psalm 82 has intrigued biblical

scholars such as Parker who argued that the text originally describedYahwehrsquos rise to supremacy in the assembly9830441048624 Parker in part based hisassessment on the fact that Psalm 82 appears as a section of the Elohis-tic collection wherein the editor(s) reveal a strong propensity towardreplacing divine names such as Yahweh with Elohim

16 See for example 1 Kings 2219 21 Job 16 21 Daniel 79ndash10 see also Simon BParker ldquoTe Beginning of the Reign of GodmdashPsalm 82 as Myth and Liturgyrdquo Revue

Biblique 1024 (1995) 537 17 Torkild Jacobsen ldquoPrimitive Democracy in Ancient Mesopotamiardquo Journal oNear Eastern Studies 23 (1943) 164 18 See Jacobsen ldquoPrimitive Democracyrdquo 164 n 24 19 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 536 20 Parker ldquoBeginning of the Reign of Godrdquo 537

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 949

274 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Parker argued that verses one and five in Psalm 82 served as nar-

rative introductions to Yahwehrsquos council address delivered before hisfather Elyon the head of the council In his analysis Parker convinc-ingly illustrates that Yahweh would have originally appeared in Psalm82 as merely one of the assembled participants of deities ldquoHavingthought that the members of the council were all gods (and therefore justmdashand immortal) Yahweh now recognizes that being incorrigi-bly unjust they will perish like mortals fall like some human poten-taterdquo9830441048580 Parkerrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 works well with Petersonrsquos claimthat the text reflects the story of the grand council from the Books ofAbraham and Moses

In an important part of his critique concerning these issuesHeiser argues against the theory endorsed by biblical scholars such asParker and Mark S Smith that in its earliest stages Israelite religionoriginally perceived Yahweh as a son of El ldquoIn terms of an evaluationof the separateness of El and Yahwehrdquo writes Heiser ldquoLatter-day Saint

scholars have too blithely accepted the positions of Smith Parker andBarker All is not nearly as tidy as they proposerdquo (p 234) Heiser forexample maintains that rather than a separate divine father the Elyonor ldquoGod Most Highrdquo presented in Deuteronomy 328ndash9 is none otherthan Yahweh himself In this proposal Heiserrsquos view stands in directcontrast to Mark Smith who argues that ldquoearly on Yahweh is under-stood as Israelrsquos god in distinction to El Deuteronomy 328ndash9 casts

Yahweh in the role of one of the sons of El here called gtelyocircn Tispassage presents an order in which each deity received its own nationIsrael was the nation that Yahweh receivedrdquo983044983044

Te present form of Deuteronomy seems to support Heiserrsquos argu-ment Rather than a separate deity Elyon and Yahweh might appearas a single reference to the head God of the council In addition to thedivine allotment depicted in Deuteronomy 328 the idea of a series of

minor deities that Yahweh had assigned to govern the various nationsappears in Deuteronomy 419ndash20 Tese verses which discuss the

21 Parker ldquoBeginning of the Reign of Godrdquo 539ndash40 22 Mark S Smith Te Early History o God Yahweh and the Other Deities in AncientIsrael (Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2002) 32

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 275

allotment of the host of heaven to the nations of the world parallel

both the vocabulary and the ideology witnessed in 328ndash9 In Deuter-onomy 329 the author uses the same root hlk featured in 420mdashalbeitas a noun Deuteronomy 419ndash20 specifically identifies Yahweh as thedeity who gave each council deity his allotment

And when you look up to the sky and behold the sun and themoon and the stars the whole heavenly host you must not belured into bowing down to them or serving them Tese the

Lord your God allotted to other peoples everywhere underheaven but you the Lord took and brought out of Egypt thatiron blast furnace to be His very own people as is now thecase (Deuteronomy 419ndash20 Jewish Publication Society JPS)983044

Based upon this evidence Heiserrsquos assessment of the view fea-tured in the current form of Deuteronomy may be correct howeverHeiser ultimately fails to address important evidence recognized by

many contemporary biblical scholars that suggests that Israelite the-ology did in fact evolve in a manner consistent with the basic claimsof Parker and Smith983044 For example David Noel Freedman maintainsthat the combination ldquoYahweh Elohimrdquo or ldquoLord Godrdquo found in theearly chapters of Genesis probably derives from an earlier sentencename given the God of Israel namely ldquoYahweh Elrdquo or ldquoGod createsrdquo983044In a related assessment Mark Smith has argued

Te original god of Israel was El Tis reconstruction maybe inferred from two pieces of information First the name

23 Te Jewish Publication Society edition appears in Adele Berlin and Marc Z Brettlereds Te Jewish Study Bible anakh ranslation (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 24 Of course the fact that Deuteronomy 4 simply reflects the language of Deuter-onomy 32 does not automatically mean that both texts derive from the same author Teauthor of Deuteronomy 4 may have simply created his passages concerning Yahweh tointentionally reflect the language and ideology in Deuteronomy 32 in order to present

Yahweh as the chief council deity Tis very real possibility should be considered byHeiser in further research for an introduction to theological changes reflected through-out the book of Deuteronomy see especially Bernard M Levinson Deuteronomy and theHermeneutics o Legal Innovation (New York Oxford University Press 1997) 25 David Noel Freedman ldquoTe Name of the God of Mosesrdquo Journal o Biblical Lit-erature 793 (1960) 156

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1149

276 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of Israel is not a Yahwistic name with the divine element of

Yahweh but an El name with the element lt ēl Tis fact wouldsuggest that El was the original chief god of the group namedIsrael Second Genesis 4924ndash25 presents a series of El epi-thets separate from the mention of Yahweh in verse 18983044

A detailed response to all the evidence amassed by scholars who view a theological evolution in the Hebrew Bible was beyond thescope of Heiserrsquos essay However notwithstanding the probability that

Heiser is correct in linking Elyon with Yahweh in Deuteronomy thisclaim does not negate the likelihood that in ancient Israel Yahwehwas originally a son of Elyon

In the present form of the biblical text the term [gtElyocircn]is understood to be an epithet for Yahweh the God of IsraelIt is possible however as some have argued that the epithetmay conceal a reference to a separate deity possibly an oldergod with whom Yahweh came to be identified983044

LDS scholars have good reason to accept the historical views of schol-ars such as Parker and Smith

Psalm 82 as the Grand Council

Tough helpful to his analysis ultimately Petersonrsquos claims are

not dependent upon the legitimacy of a Parker Smith historical inter-pretation Petersonrsquos argument for interpreting Psalm 82 as a reflec-tion of the grand council story featured in modern revelation findssupport in Near Eastern tradition In the ancient Near East stories ofthe divine council typically begin with a crisis in which the head Godcalls together the gods of the council to resolve the dilemma Duringthe council a series of proposals are offered Finally a ldquosaviorrdquo steps

forward offering his services to the council Tis savior then receives26 Smith Early History o God 32

27 Eric E Elnes and Patrick D Miller ldquoElyonrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demonsin the Bible ed Karel van der oorn Bob Becking and Pieter W van der Horst (LeidenBrill 1995) 560

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 277

a commission to perform his redemptive role983044 Tis common Near

Eastern pattern is seen for example in the Mesopotamian story ofdivine kingship known as Enuma Elish983044 In this Babylonian myththe head god of the pantheon calls together the gods in a council toresolve a dilemma created by the goddess iamat Following a seriesof proposals Marduk the chief god of Babylon receives a commissionas savior Marduk agrees to perform the role of savior on the condi-tion that his father Ea the head god of the council grant Marduk allpower and glory Te same pattern appears in the Assyrian myth ofAnzu However in this version the god Ninurta agrees to serve ascouncil savior while allowing his father to retain his position withinthe council

Like Enuma Elish and Psalm 82 many of the council stories fromthe ancient Near East portray stories of cosmic revolt in which judg-ment is rendered against divine beings Tis pattern is familiar toLatter-day Saints through the council story provided in the Books of

Moses and Abraham (Moses 41ndash4 and Abraham 322ndash28) Althoughsometimes obscured the same pattern is reflected in council tradi-tions featured in the Hebrew Bible Te story of council crisis forexample appears in the Isaiah Apocalypse

On that day [Yahweh] will punishthe host of heaven in heavenand on earth the kings of the earth (Isaiah 2421 NRSV)

Similar language emerges in Isaiah 271

On that day [Yahweh]with his cruel and great and strong swordwill punish Leviathan the fleeing serpent (NRSV)

28 Tis summary is based upon the pattern identified by Simon B Parker ldquoCoun-cilrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 391ndash98 for a consideration of the divine coun-

cil stories within the Bible as ldquotype scenesrdquo see David M Fleming ldquoTe Divine Councilas ype Scene in the Hebrew Biblerdquo (PhD diss Te Southern Baptist Teological Semi-nary 1989) 29 For an English translation of Enuma Elish see Stephanie Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia Creation the Flood Gilgamesh and Others (New York Oxford UniversityPress 1989) 228ndash77

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1349

278 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

For Latter-day Saints these traditions preserved in texts such as Enuma

Elish the book of Isaiah and Psalm 82 provide a type of retellingmdashalbeit sometimes hiddenmdashof the primordial events concerning thegrand council described in modern revelation

In the ancient Near East members of the divine council oenappear to receive a type of reprimand suggestive of the punishmentgiven Lucifer in LDS scripture

Because that Satan rebelled against me and sought to destroy

the agency of man which I the Lord God had given himand also that I should give unto him mine own power by thepower of mine Only Begotten I caused that he should be castdown And he became Satan yea even the devil the father ofall lies to deceive and to blind men and to lead them captiveat his will even as many as would not hearken unto my voice(Moses 43ndash4)

With the words ldquoHere am I send merdquo Latter-day Saints believeJesus Christ stepped forward in the council crisis and volunteered tosave humanity from the challenges associated with mortal probation(Abraham 327) According to the council story depicted in the Bookof Abraham Lucifer ldquowas angry and kept not his first estate and atthat day many followed aer himrdquo (Abraham 328) In his analysisPeterson does well to draw attention to the fact that Isaiahrsquos refer-

ence to ldquoLucifer son of the morningrdquo in Isaiah 1412 ldquodraws us againinto the astronomical imagery oen connected with the divine assem-blyrdquo1048624 In his own studies Heiser has convincingly argued for a similarposition

Ugaritic regularly refers to heavenly beings as p∆r kkbm (the ldquocongregation of the starsrdquo) language corresponding with כוכ י קר (ldquomorning starsrdquo in parallelism with the ldquosons of

Godrdquo in Job 387) and (the ldquostars of Godrdquo Isa 1413)כוכ י לAside from the context of these references each of whichclearly points to personal beings not astronomical phenom-

30 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 533

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 279

ena it is significant that in the entire ancient near eastern lit-

erary record El is never identified with a heavenly body Tusldquothe stars of Elrdquo points to created beings with divine status1048580

For Latter-day Saints recent archaeological and textual discoverieslike those referred to by Heiser are especially intriguing However asPeterson argues in the quotation provided above (p 273) Latter-daySaints do not need the Bible to express a precise parallel with modernrevelation in order to find support for LDS theology

Te fact that texts such as Psalm 82 somewhat parallel Latter-daySaint teachings is sufficient to argue that a more exact version of thegrand council story such as is witnessed in modern revelation mayhave existed in antiquity However notwithstanding his basic agree-ment with Peterson concerning the fundamental role assumed by thecouncil of deities in the Hebrew Bible Heiser ultimately departs fromPetersonrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 suggesting that the biblical view of

the council contains eight fundamental points that conflict with LDStheology

Heiserrsquos Sixteen Points

Heiser provides a list of sixteen arguments outlining his positionregarding Psalm 82 and the divine council He divides these into eightpoints ldquowith which many evangelicals would probably disagree and

with which many Latter-day Saints would likely agreerdquo followed byeight points ldquowith which many Latter-day Saints would probably dis-agree and with which many evangelicals would likely agreerdquo (pp 222ndash24) Heiserrsquos perspectives regarding Psalm 82 are clearly sound Teyinclude such issues as the inadequacy of the term monotheism as areference to Israelite theology and the biblical use of the word elohim as a literal reference to gods rather than human judges While Heiseris certainly correct in suggesting that his first eight views would proveproblematic for many evangelicals but not for most Mormons Heiserrsquoslist of eight statements on Psalm 82 that he assumes many Latter-day

31 Michael S Heiser ldquoDeuteronomy 328 and the Sons of Godrdquo 15 for an electronic version see thedivinecouncilcomD32BibSacpdf (accessed 8 February 2007)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1549

280 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Saints would disagree with indicates a basic lack of exposure to Latter-

day Saint thoughtHeiser is well versed in biblical studies His work has contrib-uted important insights toward a scholarly view of the essential roleassumed by the divine council in Old estament theology but he isnot a Latter-day Saint However Heiser does not consider in his cri-tique the possibility that most Latter-day Saints including Petersondo not believe that the biblical view of the council mirrors preciselywhat Latter-day Saints accept through modern revelation JosephSmithrsquos revelations proclaim our day as the dispensation of the ful-ness of times ldquoaccording to that which was ordained in the midst ofthe Council of the Eternal God of all other gods before this world wasrdquo(DampC 12132) For Latter-day Saints this final dispensation representsthe time decreed by God and his council in which ldquothose things whichnever have been revealed from the foundation of the world but havebeen kept hid from the wise and prudent shall be revealed unto babes

and sucklings in this the dispensation of the fulness of timesrdquo (DampC12818) Terefore Latter-day Saint scholars acknowledge that an LDSunderstanding of the council does not precisely mirror the perspec-tives manifested in the Bible Tat having been said most Latter-daySaints certainly accept the view advocated by Peterson that the bib-lical perspective of the heavenly council of deities is in greater har-mony with LDS belief than with any other contemporary Christian

tradition A recognition that the Bible though not flawless is inspiredof God allows Latter-day Saints to comfortably engage the views putforth by biblical scholars such as Heiser even when those observa-tions prove threatening to our evangelical counterparts

If certain biblical authors for example did in fact believe asHeiser seems to correctly suggest that Yahweh was ldquonot lsquobirthedrsquointo existence by the lsquoolden godsrsquo described in Ugaritic textsrdquo (p 223)Latter-day Saints would have no problem simply accepting the obser- vation as a biblical view Similarly even though Heiser assumes thatmany Mormons would disagree with his opinion that the Bible pre-sents Yahweh the God of Israel as ldquoontologically uniquerdquo (p 223) inreality many Latter-day Saints recognize that this is precisely the case

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 281

Even within LDS theology God the Father stands out as ontologically

unique inasmuch as he created the spirits of all humanity Modernrevelation describes God with the words ldquofrom eternity to eternity Heis the same and His years never failrdquo (DampC 764)

Yahwehrsquos Ontological Uniqueness

In addition to the evidence Heiser presents for what he calls Yah-wehrsquos ontological uniqueness the name Yahweh itself appears vocal-

ized in the Hebrew Bible as a finite Hiphil verb form Te vocalizationof YHWH as ldquoYahwehrdquo carries a specific nuance since ldquoHebrew gram-mars traditionally represent the Hiphil stem as the causative of the Qal

stemrdquo983044 Frank Moore Cross explains that ldquothe accumulated evidence strongly supports the view that the name Yahweh is a causativeimperfect of the Canaanite-Proto-Hebrew verb hwy lsquoto bersquo rdquo Tere-fore the divine name Yahweh according to this view literally means

ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procreatesrdquo One of the inter-esting points to consider concerning the biblical title Yahweh Sabaoth or ldquoLord of Hostsrdquo is that typically in Hebrew proper names do notappear bound to a genitive nounmdashthat is ldquoJohn of Hostsrdquo or ldquoMary ofEarthrdquo etc Since a proper name cannot traditionally function as abound form in a construct chain Cross interprets the King James titleldquoLord of Hostsrdquo as ldquo lsquohe creates the (divine) hostsrsquo rdquo If correct this

view would lend support to Heiserrsquos argument that ldquoYahweh is said32 Bruce K Waltke and M OrsquoConnor An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax

(Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 1990) 433 33 Frank Moore Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge Harvard Uni- versity Press 1973) 65 34 ldquoA proper noun cannot as a rule be followed by a genitiverdquo Paul Jouumlon A Gram-mar o Biblical Hebrew trans and rev Muraoka (Rome Editrice Pontificio IstitutoBiblico 2000) 2481 Admittedly however textual evidence shows that the rule need notapply to divine names see J A Emerton ldquoNew Light on Israelite Religion Te Implica-

tions of the Inscriptions from Kunti llet lsquoAjrudrdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wis-senschaf 94 (1982) 12ndash13 and especially John H Choi ldquoResheph and YHWH IacuteĔBĀlt Ocirc rdquoVetus estamentum 54 (2004) 17ndash28 I offer this assessment of the title Yahweh Sabaothwhich reflects the views of scholars such as David Noel Freedman and Frank MooreCross as merely an intriguing possibility 35 Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic 65 emphasis added

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1749

282 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo (p 250)

Heiser incorrectly assumes that this apparent biblical teaching con-cerning Yahwehrsquos uniqueness among the gods is not inconsistent withLDS theology

Tough Latter-day Saints view God the Father and Jesus Christas two separate divine beings for the Saints the biblical titles associ-ated with these deities are clearly interchangeable Latter-day Saintshave no problem therefore in associating God the Father with thetitle Yahwehmdashthat is ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procre-atesrdquo Te 1916 official declaration presented by the First Presidency ofthe church states ldquoGod the Eternal Father whom we designate by theexalted name-title Elohim is the literal Parent of our Lord and SaviorJesus Christ and of the spirits of the human racerdquo Clearly howeverthe First Presidencyrsquos move toward designating God the Father as Elo-him and Jesus the Son as Jehovah was primarily a move by churchleaders to create uniformity in Latter-day Saint expression In a recent

Ensign article Keith Meservy observed that ldquoin at least three Old es-tament passages it appears that L983151983154983140 [ie Jehovah] applies to Heav-enly Father not Jesus Christ Ps 1101 Ps 27 Isa 5310rdquo No doubtfor many Latter-day Saints this estimate offered by Meservy couldbe greatly augmented LDS teachings therefore do not preclude theontological uniqueness of God the Father that Heiser witnesses in theHebrew Bible

Yahweh as a Being ldquoSpecies-Uniquerdquo

Certainly Heiser is justified in suggesting that the gods of thedivine council appear inferior to Israelrsquos deity He uses this correctobservation however to build an argument that Israelrsquos God wastherefore somehow ldquospecies-uniquerdquo (p 250) In his discussion con-cerning the biblical evidence for Yahweh being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo

Heiser bases his interpretation on five points of evidence (1) ldquoYahweh36 ldquoTe Father and the Son A Doctrinal Exposition by the First Presidency and the

welverdquo as cited in Messages o the First Presidency o the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints ed James R Clark (Salt Lake City Bookcra 1971) 526 emphasis added 37 Keith H Meservy ldquoLORD = Jehovahrdquo Ensign June 2002 29 n 3

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 283

is said to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo

(2) ldquoYahweh was considered pre-existent to all godsrdquo (3) Yahweh hasthe power to strip the other elohim of their immortality (4) Yahwehalone is referred to in the Bible as ha-elohim and (5) ldquothe other godsare commanded to worship Yahwehrdquo (see pp 250ndash57) Tough eachof Heiserrsquos five points of evidence do in fact appear in the Bible con-trary to Heiserrsquos suggestion none of these observations establishesYahweh as being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo In the Bible Yahweh is the God ofgods but the biblical gods were still biblical gods As Paul Sanders hasexplained according to the Deuteronomic vision ldquothe [Sons of Goddescribed in Deuteronomy 328] are relatively independent they havetheir own dominions like YHWHrdquo

Notwithstanding his acceptance of the importance of the divinecouncil of deities in biblical theology Heiserrsquos critique suffers in partthrough his effort to define Israelrsquos deity as a being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo(p 250) He is correct in drawing attention to the fact that biblical

authors viewed their deity as exceptionally powerful in the councilldquoFor the Lord your God is God of godsrdquo proclaims Deuteronomy 1017ldquoand Lord of lordsrdquo Unfortunately however in identifying Yahweh asa being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo Heiser forces the biblical view of deities intoan image somewhat consistent with radical monotheism Contraryto Heiserrsquos suggestion the creative act in and of itself does not set thecreator apart as an exclusive species Te same point also applies tothe issue Heiser raises concerning primogeniture In other words aman for instance may exist before both his children and his siblingsand though preeminence may render the person ldquouniquerdquo on somelevels prior existence would not in this or in any other case rendera being as ldquospecies-uniquerdquo rue the Bible speaks of gods separatefrom Israelrsquos primary deity as elohim a˙erimmdashthat is ldquoother godsrdquo(see Exodus 203 2313 Deuteronomy 57 614 etc) However as YairHoffman has observed ldquoA survey of the use of a˙erim [ldquootherrdquo] shows

38 Paul Sanders Te Provenance o Deuteronomy 32 (Leiden Brill 1996) 37039 Te term radical monotheism refers to the theological position that only one

divine being exists in the universe Te expression was popularized by ikva Frymer-Kensky In the Wake o the Goddesses Women Culture and the Biblical ransormationo Pagan Myth (New York Free Press 1992) 154

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1949

284 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

that when used attributively with regard to garments days messen-

gers and objects it clearly has a relative meaning something differ-ent yet o the same kind rdquo1048624 Terefore ldquothere is no reason to assumethat in the phrase elohim a˙erim the attribute has a more distinctivemeaningrdquo1048580 When all is said and done the biblical deities like Yah-weh himself were still gods

In addition contrary to Heiserrsquos assertion the simple fact that Elo-him possesses the power to strip the other deities of their immortalityin Psalm 82 does not indicate that these gods are of a different spe-cies than Elohim According to the Psalmistrsquos view Elohim is simplymore powerful than the other gods Analogies from the ancient NearEast illustrate the problematic nature of Heiserrsquos claim In the Babylo-nian story Enuma Elish for instance the primordial mother goddessiamat created the god Qingu as chief deity over iamatrsquos militaryforces As a result of his actions taken against the divine council thedeities of the assembly ldquobound [Qingu] and held him in front of Ea

[and they] imposed the penalty on him and cut off his bloodrdquo983044 Tefact that in Enuma Elish the council could strip Qingu of his immor-tality did not mean that the god Qingu was somehow of a different orlesser divine species In the Sumerian myth of Enlil and Ninlil Enlil(one of the ldquogreat godsrdquo of Mesopotamia) is brought to trial for havingraped the goddess Ninlil As Enlil returned to the city of Nippur hewas arrested by the assembly while walking through the temple court

Te trial commenced immediately In the myth the council pre-sented the verdict that ldquothe sex offender Enlil will leave the townrdquoAccordingly the myth reports that Enlil le Nippur headed towardthe netherworld In his assessment of the story Jacobsen points out

40 Yair Hoffman ldquoTe Conception of lsquoOther Godsrsquo in Deuteronomistic Literaturerdquoin Concepts o the Other in Near Eastern Religions ed Ilai Alon Ithamar Gruenwald andItamar Singer (Leiden Brill 1994) 107 emphasis added 41 Hoffman ldquoConception of Other Godsrdquo 107

42 As cited in Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia 261 43 For a summary of the myth see Gwendolyn Leick A Dictionary o Ancient NearEastern Mythology (London Routledge 1998) 47ndash48 for a translation see TorkildJacobsen Te Harps Tat Once Sumerian Poetry in ranslation (New Haven YaleUniversity Press 1987) 167ndash80 44 Jacobsen Harps 174

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 285

that Enlilrsquos descent to Hades may indicate that the high god in Meso-

potamian mythology was originally sentenced to death As notedby James Ackerman in his dissertation concerning Psalm 82 thesetypes of judgment scenes in which the council determines that godswill die like mortals carry important implications for interpreting thecultural background for the biblical text Contrary to Heiserrsquos inter-pretation none of these stories indicate that the dying gods were of adifferent species or order than the gods who issued the sentence

Near Eastern traditions oen place considerable emphasis on thedying-god motif In no sense however are these dying godsmdashevenwhen resurrectedmdashsomehow depicted as a lesser species Heiserrsquos con-fusion concerning the implications of a biblical statement that Godissued a judgment of death to the deities of the divine council illus-trates the fundamental need for biblical scholars to pursue Assyriol-ogy in connection with their efforts to interpret the Hebrew Bible

Also contrary to Heiserrsquos suggestion the punishment meted out

to usurpers in Near Eastern council stories never indicates that thecriminals derived from some sort of exceptional species Te storyof Athtar from ancient Canaan for instance presents the traditionof Athtarrsquos descent to the underworld following the deityrsquos ascensionto the throne of Baal Te details involved in Athtarrsquos story containimportant thematic elements depicted in ancient Near Eastern storiesof cosmic revolt Athtar seems to share some semblance with Baalrsquos

mortal enemy Mot or ldquoDeathrdquo into whom Baal himself descendsHence Hugh Page notes that Athtarrsquos ldquodescent to the underworld implies that on some level Athtar has placed himself in proxim-ity to or relationship with the only god that Baal proves incapable

45 Torkild Jacobsen ldquoAn Ancient Mesopotamian rial for Homiciderdquo in owardthe Image o ammuz and Other Essays on Mesopotamian History and Culture ed Wil-liam L Moran (Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1970) 207 first published inStudia Biblica et Orientalia vol 3 of Analecta Biblica et Orientalia XII (Rome Pontificio

Istituto Biblico 1959) 130ndash50 46 See James S Ackerman ldquoAn Exegetical Study of Psalm 82rdquo (PhD diss HarvardUniversity 1966) 186ndash93 47 For a recent survey of the issue which includes a survey of previous assessmentssee ryggve N D Mettinger Te Riddle o Resurrection ldquoDying and Rising Godsrdquo in the Ancient Near East (Stockholm Almqvist amp Wiksell 2001)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2149

286 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of defeatingrdquo Athtarrsquos assumption of the throne of Baal followed

by his descent to the underworld indicates that this portion of theBaal cycle from ancient Canaan fits the general category of the cosmic

revolt genre witnessed in texts such as Abraham 3 and Psalm 82

1 Kindly El the Compassionate answers

2 ldquoOne so small cannot race

3 with Baal cannot handle the lance

4 with Daganrsquos son when they test one anotherrdquo

5 Lady Athirat of the Sea answers 6 ldquoLet us enthrone Athtar the Strong

7 Let Athtar the Strong be kingrdquo

8 Ten Athtar the Strong

9 ascended the summit of Sapan

10 He sat upon the throne of Mightiest Baal

11 His feet would not reach its footstool

12 His head would not reach its top 13 Athtar the Strong answered

14 ldquoI cannot rule on the summit of Sapanrdquo

15 Athtar the Strong descended

16 He descended from the throne of Mightiest Baal

17 And he ruled over the underworld god of all of it

18 drew in barrels

19 drew in jars (KU 1649ndash67 translation)

Te fact that Athtar the Strong experienced a type of ldquodeathrdquo in which

he ldquoruled over the underworldrdquo following his descent from Baalrsquos

throne does not suggest that Athtar was a ldquobeing species-uniquerdquo from

the other deities any more than Inanna or Ishtar the Mesopotamian

goddesses who experienced a type of death in the underworld were of

a different species than the gods Ea Enki Marduk and so forth48 Hugh R Page Jr Te Myth o Cosmic Rebellion A Study o Its Reflexes in Ugaritic

and Biblical Literature (Leiden Brill 1996) 92 Pagersquos views concerning the Athtar mythhave been criticized by Gregorio del Olmo Lete ldquoIn Search of the Canaanite Luciferrdquo Aula Orientalis 19 (2001) 125ndash32

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 287

Still in his efforts to present Yahweh as a being species-unique

Heiser correctly draws attention to the other gods of the council whoare commanded to worship Yahweh In his analysis he focuses uponthe call given to the gods in Psalm 291ndash2 ldquoAscribe to Yahweh O sons ofGod ascribe to Yahweh glory and strength Ascribe to Yahweh the gloryof his name worship Yahweh in the splendor of holinessrdquo (as quotedon p 256) While Heiserrsquos observations certainly illustrate that biblicalauthors viewed their deity as uniquemdashthat is exceptionalmdashthroughout

Near Eastern tradition lesser gods regularly appear in a position inwhich they offer praise service and devotion to the higher gods of thecouncil Richard J Clifford explains that in the Phoenician view of theassembly ldquoas elsewhere in the ancient Near East the assemblies are pic-tured as subordinate to individual gods although the assemblyrsquos con-sent seems necessary for important decisionsrdquo Simply because ancienttextsmdashincluding the Biblemdashdepict the members of the assemblies asldquosubordinate to individual godsrdquo this in no way implies that the higher

deities somehow belonged to a separate species Ancient Near Easterntexts such as Mursilirsquos Hymn and Prayer to the Sun-goddess o Arinna (CH 376A) establish the fact that Near Eastern peoples believed thatgods of the same species paid homage to higher deities in a way compa-rable to the biblical view

You O Sun-goddess of Arinna are honored goddess Your

name is honored among names and your divinity is honoredamong gods Furthermore among the gods you are the mosthonored and the greatest Tere is no other god more honoredor greater than you You are the lord of just judgment Youcontrol the kingship of heaven and earth1048624

Holding the position ldquomost honoredrdquo among the gods did not estab-lish Arinna as species-unique Arinna was simply the god before

whom from the authorrsquos perspective the other gods would regularly49 Richard J Clifford ldquoPhoenician Religionrdquo Bulletin o the American Schools o

Oriental Research 279 (1990) 57 50 As cited in Itamar Singer Hittite Prayers (Atlanta Society of Biblical Literature2002) 51

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2349

288 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquofall downrdquo1048580 For the ancients the Near Eastern view of the divine

court clearly reflected or were expressed in terms of earthly realityTerefore just as the high king before whom other humans paid hom-age was still a human being so the god to whom other deities paidhomage was still a god matching in species For biblical authors Yah-weh stood at the head of the hierarchy in Israelite thought Yahwehwas unique as the God of gods but he was not unique in his divinityFrom a biblical perspective Yahweh even shared this divinity withhumanity

Humans as Teomorphic Beings

In his discussion concerning the biblical view regarding theomor-phic humans Peterson draws attention to Paulrsquos New estament ser-mon presented in Acts 1728ndash29

For in him we live and move and have our being as

certain also of your own poets have said For we are also hisoffspring

Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God we oughtnot to think that the Godhead is like unto gold or silver orstone graven by art and manrsquos device

Peterson in part argues for a biblical connection between God andhumanity based on the fact that ldquothe word rendered lsquooffspringrsquo by the

King James translators is the Greek genos which is cognate with theLatin genus and means lsquofamilyrsquo or lsquoracersquo or lsquokindrsquo or even and mostespecially interesting lsquodescendants of a common ancestorrsquo rdquo983044 ForLatter-day Saints human beings are literally the offspring of God andtherefore intrinsically theomorphic Part of the strength of Petersonrsquosessay lies in his recognition that like Latter-day Saints biblical authorsregularly blur the distinction between humanity and divine beings

Not only does Peterson draw attention to the prophetic interactionwith the council as support for his thesis but he also places consider-

51 Singer Hittite Prayers 51 52 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 542ndash43 53 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 289

able emphasis upon the deified dead in the Hebrew Bible and the early

Christian teaching regarding deification Heiser notwithstandingPetersonrsquos evidence rejects the idea that a genus equation of God and

humankind appears in the Bible

For his criticisms of Petersonrsquos views Heiser places considerable

weight on the notion that ldquothe concept of the image of God does not

advance the idea that there is a genus equation of God and human-

kind or that God was once a manrdquo (p 224) On some levels Heiserrsquos

point concerning the word tzelem or ldquoimagerdquo in Genesis 126ndash27is correct Concerning this controversial term Marc Z Brettler has

recently explained

Te word tzelem (ldquoimagerdquo) elsewhere always refers to a

physical representation For example the Book of Ezekiel

uses tzelem when it refers to ldquomen sculptured upon the walls

figures of Chaldeans drawn in vermilionrdquo (2314) or when it

accuses Israel of fornicating with ldquophallic imagesrdquo (1617) Teword oen refers to idols (eg Num 3352 Ezek 720 Amos

526 2 Chron 2317) It always signifies a concrete entity

rather than an abstract one Tis is not surprising since the

Bible (in contrast to most medieval philosophical traditions

both Jewish and Christian) oen depicts God in corporeal

terms

Genesis 126ndash27 suggests that Godrsquos physical likeness is similar to

humanityrsquos but Heiser is correct that the statement does not indicate

that biblical authors viewed humans as gods or that God himself was

once a human However many other texts from the Bible do present a

theomorphic view of humanity Peterson therefore is precisely correct

in stating that ldquothe Latter-day Saint understanding that humans are of

the same genus or species as God is thus clearly biblicalrdquo54 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509ndash28

55 Marc Z Brettler How to Read the Bible (Philadelphia Jewish Publication Society2005) 43ndash44 Hebrew word deleted 56 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 547

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2549

290 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Adam as a Divine Council Member

In addition to associating humanity with the tzelem of God theBible describes the first man as a deified member of the divine council

In the Eden story the Lord took advantage of the wet claylike soil and

ldquoformed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils

the breath of life and man became a living soulrdquo (Genesis 27) In an

important study concerning this imagery Walter Brueggemann has

shown that a biblical connection exists between being raised from the

dust and enthronement ldquoo be taken lsquofrom the dustrsquo means to be

elevated from obscurity to royal office and to return to dust means to

be deprived of that office and returned to obscurityrdquo Imagery such

as that witnessed in 1 Kings 162 supports Brueggemannrsquos interpreta-

tion ldquoForasmuch as I [God] exalted thee [Jehu] out of the dust and

made thee prince over my people Israel rdquo (1 Kings 162) Hence the

notion of the God raising man ldquofrom the dust of the earthrdquo in Genesis

27 in part suggests that Yahweh begins his creative activity by form-

ing a divine king According to Genesis 215 this divine king through

a type of imitatio dei would continue to perform the work of Yahweh

who ldquoplantedrdquo the garden ldquoAnd the Lord God took the man and put

him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep itrdquo In a simi-

lar fashion Mesopotamian kings such as Hammurapi glorified their

efforts through the use of creation and agricultural imageryI encircled [the wall] with a swamp I dug the Euphrates

as far as Sippar (and) made it reach a prosperous quay

I Hammu-rāpi who builds up the land caused Sippar

and Babylon to dwell in peaceful abodes forever What

from [primordial days] no one among the kings had done I

did in a grand fashion for the god Šamaš my lord

57 Walter Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestament-liche Wissenschaf 841 (1972) 1ndash18 58 Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo 2 59 Douglas Frayne Old Babylonian Period (2003ndash1595 BC) (oronto University oforonto Press 1990) 348ndash49

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 291

Te view presented in the Babylonian inscription on the wall

of Sippar reflects the common Near Eastern assumption featured inGenesis 2 of a God king participating in the act of creation from ldquopri-

mordial daysrdquo through structure1048624 As a king Hammurapi assumed

the same role filled by deities who created the universe by giving order

to preexistent chaos In its depiction of Adam as the primordial gar-

dener the Bible relies upon similar imagery

Manrsquos status as the archetypal gardener king in Genesis 2ndash3 con-

tains important parallels with Mesopotamian kingship theory1048580 Sev-eral examples of Mesopotamian iconography feature a depiction of the

tree (or plant) of life over which the king and priests appear pouring

libations In assessing the connection between Mesopotamian kings

and gardeners Geo Widengren cites these statements from the am-

muz text R IV 27 No I

A tamarisk which in the garden has no water to drink

Whose foliage on the plant sends forth no twig

A plant which they water no more in its pot

Whose roots are torn away

A herb which is in the garden has no water to drink

Among the flowers of the garden he sleeps

Among the flowers of the garden he is thrown

According to Widengren ldquothe ree of Life is watered by the kingwho pours out over it the Water of Life which he has in his possession

Te ree of Life constantly needs the Water of Life near which it is

growing in the garden of paradiserdquo983044 Te connection between king

and gardener was widely attested throughout ancient Mesopotamia

60 In his translation Frayne renders the Akkadian word szligi-a-tim as ldquothe pastrdquo Teinscription however clearly relies on creation imagery and I have therefore interpreted

szligiatim as ldquoprimordial daysrdquo in accordance with the information provided in Jeremy BlackAndrew George and Nicholas Postgate A Concise Dictionary o Akkadian (WiesbadenHarrassowitz 2000) 337 61 See Geo Widengren Te King and the ree o Lie in Ancient Near Eastern Reli- gion (Uppsala Uppsala Universitets Aringrsskri 1951) 62 Widengren King and the ree o Lie 15

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2749

292 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Tis portrayal of kingship appears in the birth legend of Sargon

wherein the monarch declaresAkki the waterscooper placed me as his gardenerWhen I was a gardener Ishtar was in love with meTe kingship I exercised during x + 5 years

Tese lines from the tale of Sargon the gardener whom the goddess Ishtarloved seem to provide an especially significant parallel with the biblical view presented in the story of Eden In the words of Nicholas Wyatt ldquotheman in his garden is a symbolic allusion to the king in his sanctuaryrdquo

One of the important connections between humanityrsquos enthrone-ment in the garden and later biblical traditions includes the anointingof an Israelite king in 1 Kings 128ndash40 at the Gihon Spring a rivernamed Gihon was one of the four rivers that flowed out of Eden andround the land of Cush (Genesis 213) Significantly the only otherexplicit reference to the Garden of Eden in the Hebrew Bible appears

in a context that addresses the link between kingship and divinity (seeEzekiel 282ndash13)

Concerning the attestation of biblical rituals that may preserveactual religious rites wherein Israelite kings assumed divinity Wyattargues that

the rituals which transform the status of the earthly kingremoving him from ldquomerely humanrdquo status to that of a sacralfigure to be couched in the form of a narrative about a godcarries with it the hint that the king himself is to be seen astransformed into a god Te enthronement of the king isthus his apotheosis

63 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoInterpreting the Creation and Fall Story in Genesis 2ndash3rdquo Zeit-schrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 931 (1981) 15 64 John van Seters has argued according to the Documentary Hypothesis that the

story of divine kingship in J derives from Babylonian influences and is therefore latepostexilic If P is in part a reaction to the J account then it is difficult to accept vanSetersrsquos dating see John van Seters ldquoTe Creation of Man and the Creation of the KingrdquoZeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 1013 (1989) 333ndash41 65 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinity Some Mythical and Ritual Aspects of WestSemitic Kingshiprdquo Ugarit-Forschungen 31 (1999) 857

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 293

In his exploration of biblical deification Wyatt refers to Psalm 198ndash10

as a possible ritual text transforming the king into a divine beingTe teaching of Yahweh is perfectrestoring the breastTe testimony of Yahweh is certainmaking wise the headTe precepts of Yahweh are uprightrejoicing the heart

Te commandment of Yahweh is puremaking bright the eyesTe speech of Yahweh is ritually purestanding for everTe judgments of Yahweh are truthTey are righteous all togethermore desirable than goldthan much pure goldmore sweet than honeyor the refined combYour servant is indeed illumined by themand in their observance is there great gain

Concerning this possible reference to ritual anointing Wyatt argues

It is true that there is no narrative statement about unc-

tion here oil is not even mentioned But only thus can thesuccessive blessings on various parts of the kingrsquos body beexplained For comparison we should consider the unction ofpriests in Exod 294ndash9 19ndash21 4012ndash5 and Lev 810ndash2 22ndash4where various parts of the priestrsquos body are anointed with oiland blood undoubtedly with some liturgical commentary onthe action such is now narrated in these passages providing

a suitable performative utteranceIf correct Wyattrsquos assessment of Israelite deification proves importantfor an analysis of Adam as divine king in the book of Genesis

66 Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinityrdquo 874ndash75

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2949

294 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

In Genesis chapter 2 Godrsquos initial creative act must be the creation

of man for as a divine king raised ldquofrom the dustrdquo man was specifi-cally formed to assist deity in the creation process God appears as agardener who causes to grow ldquoevery tree that is pleasant to the sightand good for foodrdquo (Genesis 29) Te account declares that the Lordplaced the man in the garden to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo his newly createdoasis (Genesis 215) As a gardener the Lord plants Eden as a gardenerthe Lord mixes the soil to form both man and beast As a gardener the

Lord creates man in his image to perform the work of a God Follow-ing his creation man assumes the role of divine gardenerFrom an ancient Near Eastern perspective the view of Adam as

divine gardener suggests that biblical authors viewed humanity asan earthly extension of the divine council According to the Edenaccount man was immortal (Genesis 217) man had received fromdeity the sacred ldquobreath of liferdquo (Genesis 27) man had been com-missioned to perform the work of a godmdashthat is to till and tend the

divine garden Terefore as an immortal gardener man was alreadyldquolike the godsrdquo prior to partaking of the forbidden fruit

In Mesopotamian myths for example the work of gardening wasassigned to lesser members of the divine council Hence the story ofAtrahasis opens with the following portrayal

When gods were man

Tey did forced labor they bore drudgeryGreat indeed was the drudgery of the godsTe forced labor was heavy the misery too muchTe seven() great Anunna-gods were burdeningTe Igigi-gods with forced labor

Like the account in Genesis the lesser gods of the divine council inAtrahasis were gardeners who did the laborious task of caring for the

canals trees and waterways that sustained the higher gods of the67 For additional examples of Yahweh portrayed in the role of gardener see Num-

bers 246 Psalm 10416 Isaiah 4414 68 Altrahasis II39 1ndash6 translation in Benjamin R Foster Beore the Muses An Anthol-ogy o Akkadian Literature (Bethesda MD CDL 1993) 1159

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 295

assembly Hence Adam as an immortal being clearly reflects the

position of the Igigi in Mesopotamian thought Te questions pre-sented to Job by Eliphaz regarding the primal human seem to share

this notion

Are you the firstborn of the human race

Were you brought forth before the hills

Have you listened in the council of God (Job 157ndash8 NRSV)

As Dexter Callender has observed concerning these questionsldquoTe allusion to the primal human in Job does not give us explicit

details concerning his incorporation into the sacred world It is clear

however that the idea is present in the reference that the primal human

lsquolistenedrsquo in the council of Godrdquo As a member of Godrsquos council man

held a stewardship to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo the deityrsquos garden (Genesis

215) According to the Genesis account when the man and woman

eat from the tree of knowledge God expels the humans from Edenand assigns the cherubim other traditional members of the divine

council to ldquokeeprdquo the garden (Genesis 324) Tis move may suggest

that in biblical thought ldquokeepingrdquo the garden is a task reserved for

members of the divine host As an immortal subordinate assigned an

important council task man however eventually appears in the Gen-

esis account as a being very much like the council deities mentioned

in Psalm 82 who receive the decree of death

I have said Ye are gods and all of you are children of the

most High

But ye shall die like men and fall like one of the princes

(Psalm 826ndash7)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou

shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thoushalt surely die (Genesis 217)

69 Dexter E Callender Jr Adam in Myth and History Ancient Israelite Perspectiveson the Primal Human (Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 2000) 212 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 549

270 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

testimony that ldquoall blessings that were ordained for man by the coun-

cil of heaven were on conditions of obedience to the law thereofrdquoTe Book of Abraham refers to ldquothe intelligences that were organizedbeore the world wasrdquo (Abraham 322) In this council setting Godldquostood among those that were spirits and he saw that they were goodrdquo(Abraham 323) According to the Prophet ldquoevery man who has a call-ing to minister to the inhabitants of the world was ordained to that very purpose in the grand council of heavenrdquo Tough the conceptmay seem odd to some Christians these teachings are not completelyabsent in the Bible

Te notion of God assigning members of his council to assumeimportant positions of administrative responsibility appears in its ear-liest form in Deuteronomy 328 ldquoWhen the Most High apportionedthe nations when he divided humankind he fixed the boundaries ofthe peoples according to the number of the godsrdquo (Deuteronomy 328NRSV) For Latter-day Saints who at least in part associate the coun-

cil with humanity a seemingly parallel notion appears in the councilstory featured in the Book of Abraham

And God saw these souls that they were good and he stoodin the midst of them and he said Tese I will make my rulersfor he stood among those that were spirits and he saw that theywere good and he said unto me Abraham thou art one of themthou wast chosen before thou wast born (Abraham 323)

Peterson argues that in Abraham 322ndash23 ldquowe have God standing inthe midst of premortal spirits who are appointed to be rulers in a scenethat is really a textbook instance of the motif of the divine assemblyTese are premortal human beings Can they truly be called lsquogodsrsquo inany sense Yes they canrdquo For Peterson many of the gods describedin biblical council texts are in fact human beings

Petersonrsquos position is grounded in LDS theology Following thecouncil scene described in Abraham 3 the Book of Abraham contin-

7 Words o Joseph Smith 232 8 Words o Joseph Smith 367 9 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 541ndash42

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 271

ues with a description of the Godsrsquo involvement in creation ldquoAnd then

the Lord said Let us go down And they went down at the beginningand they that is the Gods organized and formed the heavens and theearthrdquo (Abraham 41) In his teachings Joseph Smith appears to pro- vide an interpretive key concerning the identity of these deities

[An] everlasting covenant was made between three per-sonages before the organization of this earth and relates totheir dispensation of things to men on the earth these per-

sonages according to Abrahamrsquos record are called God thefirst the Creator God the second the Redeemer and God thethird the witness or estator10485801048624

Other LDS commentators have suggested additional possibilitiesJoseph Fielding Smith taught that

it is true that Adam helped to form this earth He laboredwith our Savior Jesus Christ I have a strong view or convic-tion that there were others also who assisted them PerhapsNoah and Enoch and why not Joseph Smith and those whowere appointed to be rulers before the earth was formed Weknow that Jesus our Savior was a Spirit when this great workwas done He did all of these mighty works before he taber-nacled in the flesh10485801048580

Bruce R McConkie expressed a similar view ldquoChrist and MaryAdam and Eve Abraham and Sarah and a host of mighty men andequally glorious women comprised that group of lsquothe noble and greatonesrsquo to whom the Lord Jesus said lsquoWe will go down for there is spacethere and we will take of these materials and we will make an earthwhereon these may dwellrsquo (Abraham 322ndash24)rdquo1048580983044 Since the expressionwe will go down is followed in the Book of Abraham with the statementldquothey that is the Gods organized and formed the heavens and the

10 eachings o the Prophet Joseph Smith 190 11 Joseph Fielding Smith Doctrines o Salvation (Salt Lake City Bookcra 1999)174ndash75 12 Bruce R McConkie ldquoEve and the Fallrdquo in Woman (Salt Lake City Deseret Book1979) 59 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 749

272 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

earthrdquo (Abraham 41) it appears that Elder McConkie believed that

these Gods from the heavenly council included premortal humanso some extent therefore the title god is appropriately applied to the

premortal sons and daughters of Heavenly Father

Joseph Smithrsquos view of the divine council suggests that this assem-

bly of deities served a vital administrative role in Godrsquos plan of happi-

ness A journal entry recorded by William Clayton in 1845 provides

evidence for the Prophetrsquos teachings regarding this doctrine

It has been a doctrine taught by this church that we were inthe Grand Council amongst the Gods when the organization

of this world was contemplated and that the laws of govern-

ment were all made and sanctioned by all present and all the

ordinances and ceremonies decreed upon1048580

Significantly the Book of Abraham specifically notes that God ldquostood in

the midst ofrdquo these souls (Abraham 323) Tis reference to God stand-ing amongst divine beings in a heavenly council setting finds important

parallels with biblical tradition including Psalm 821 which refers to

God standing in the council and passing judgment

From an analysis of the legal material in the Hebrew Bible it

appears that in a traditional judicial setting judges sat while plain-

tiffs stood 1048580 Tis important distinction provides a significant clue for

interpreting Moses as judge in Exodus 1813ndash14And it came to pass on the morrow that Moses sat to judge

the people and the people stood by Moses from the morning

unto the evening And when Mosesrsquo father in law saw all that

he did to the people he said What is this thing thou doest to

the people why sittest thou thyself alone and all the people

stand by thee from morning unto even1048580

13 Words o Joseph Smith 84 n 10 14 Hans J Boecker Redeormen des Rechtslebens im Alten estament (NeukirchenNeukirchener Verlag 1964) 85ndash86 15 For additional examples of the practice of sitting for judgment see Judges 45Joel 312 Psalm 1225 Proverbs 208 Daniel 79ndash10

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 273

Biblical scholar Simon Parker has shown that the distinction

between sitting and standing in judicial settings also operates in the bib-lical view of the divine council1048580 Tese nuances were not unique to theWest Semitic world In Mesopotamia ldquoanybody who happened alongand had a mind to could lsquostandrsquomdashthat is participatemdashin the pu∆rum

[ie assembly]rdquo1048580 As Assyriologist Torkild Jacobsen explained theAkkadian words ldquouzuzzu lsquoto standrsquo and yašābu lsquoto sitrsquo are technicalterms for participating in the pu∆rumrdquo1048580 From a Near Eastern perspec-

tive these observations shed considerable light on passages such as Isa-iah 313 where Jehovah ldquostands up to plead a cause He rises to championpeoplesrdquo (Jewish Study Bible JSB)

Petersonrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 suggests that the text reflects thecouncil story depicted in the Book of Abraham Te fact that Psalm821 specifically states that ldquoGod stands in the divine councilrdquo sustainsPetersonrsquos thesis Peterson writes

We need not take Psalm 82rsquos portrayal of judgment andcondemnation within the divine council as literally accurate asrepresenting an actual historical event (although obviously itmight) any more than we are obliged to take as literally true thedepiction of Satan in Job 1ndash2 freely coming and going withinthe heavenly court and even placing wagers with God1048580

With its traditional council imagery Psalm 82 has intrigued biblical

scholars such as Parker who argued that the text originally describedYahwehrsquos rise to supremacy in the assembly9830441048624 Parker in part based hisassessment on the fact that Psalm 82 appears as a section of the Elohis-tic collection wherein the editor(s) reveal a strong propensity towardreplacing divine names such as Yahweh with Elohim

16 See for example 1 Kings 2219 21 Job 16 21 Daniel 79ndash10 see also Simon BParker ldquoTe Beginning of the Reign of GodmdashPsalm 82 as Myth and Liturgyrdquo Revue

Biblique 1024 (1995) 537 17 Torkild Jacobsen ldquoPrimitive Democracy in Ancient Mesopotamiardquo Journal oNear Eastern Studies 23 (1943) 164 18 See Jacobsen ldquoPrimitive Democracyrdquo 164 n 24 19 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 536 20 Parker ldquoBeginning of the Reign of Godrdquo 537

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 949

274 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Parker argued that verses one and five in Psalm 82 served as nar-

rative introductions to Yahwehrsquos council address delivered before hisfather Elyon the head of the council In his analysis Parker convinc-ingly illustrates that Yahweh would have originally appeared in Psalm82 as merely one of the assembled participants of deities ldquoHavingthought that the members of the council were all gods (and therefore justmdashand immortal) Yahweh now recognizes that being incorrigi-bly unjust they will perish like mortals fall like some human poten-taterdquo9830441048580 Parkerrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 works well with Petersonrsquos claimthat the text reflects the story of the grand council from the Books ofAbraham and Moses

In an important part of his critique concerning these issuesHeiser argues against the theory endorsed by biblical scholars such asParker and Mark S Smith that in its earliest stages Israelite religionoriginally perceived Yahweh as a son of El ldquoIn terms of an evaluationof the separateness of El and Yahwehrdquo writes Heiser ldquoLatter-day Saint

scholars have too blithely accepted the positions of Smith Parker andBarker All is not nearly as tidy as they proposerdquo (p 234) Heiser forexample maintains that rather than a separate divine father the Elyonor ldquoGod Most Highrdquo presented in Deuteronomy 328ndash9 is none otherthan Yahweh himself In this proposal Heiserrsquos view stands in directcontrast to Mark Smith who argues that ldquoearly on Yahweh is under-stood as Israelrsquos god in distinction to El Deuteronomy 328ndash9 casts

Yahweh in the role of one of the sons of El here called gtelyocircn Tispassage presents an order in which each deity received its own nationIsrael was the nation that Yahweh receivedrdquo983044983044

Te present form of Deuteronomy seems to support Heiserrsquos argu-ment Rather than a separate deity Elyon and Yahweh might appearas a single reference to the head God of the council In addition to thedivine allotment depicted in Deuteronomy 328 the idea of a series of

minor deities that Yahweh had assigned to govern the various nationsappears in Deuteronomy 419ndash20 Tese verses which discuss the

21 Parker ldquoBeginning of the Reign of Godrdquo 539ndash40 22 Mark S Smith Te Early History o God Yahweh and the Other Deities in AncientIsrael (Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2002) 32

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 275

allotment of the host of heaven to the nations of the world parallel

both the vocabulary and the ideology witnessed in 328ndash9 In Deuter-onomy 329 the author uses the same root hlk featured in 420mdashalbeitas a noun Deuteronomy 419ndash20 specifically identifies Yahweh as thedeity who gave each council deity his allotment

And when you look up to the sky and behold the sun and themoon and the stars the whole heavenly host you must not belured into bowing down to them or serving them Tese the

Lord your God allotted to other peoples everywhere underheaven but you the Lord took and brought out of Egypt thatiron blast furnace to be His very own people as is now thecase (Deuteronomy 419ndash20 Jewish Publication Society JPS)983044

Based upon this evidence Heiserrsquos assessment of the view fea-tured in the current form of Deuteronomy may be correct howeverHeiser ultimately fails to address important evidence recognized by

many contemporary biblical scholars that suggests that Israelite the-ology did in fact evolve in a manner consistent with the basic claimsof Parker and Smith983044 For example David Noel Freedman maintainsthat the combination ldquoYahweh Elohimrdquo or ldquoLord Godrdquo found in theearly chapters of Genesis probably derives from an earlier sentencename given the God of Israel namely ldquoYahweh Elrdquo or ldquoGod createsrdquo983044In a related assessment Mark Smith has argued

Te original god of Israel was El Tis reconstruction maybe inferred from two pieces of information First the name

23 Te Jewish Publication Society edition appears in Adele Berlin and Marc Z Brettlereds Te Jewish Study Bible anakh ranslation (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 24 Of course the fact that Deuteronomy 4 simply reflects the language of Deuter-onomy 32 does not automatically mean that both texts derive from the same author Teauthor of Deuteronomy 4 may have simply created his passages concerning Yahweh tointentionally reflect the language and ideology in Deuteronomy 32 in order to present

Yahweh as the chief council deity Tis very real possibility should be considered byHeiser in further research for an introduction to theological changes reflected through-out the book of Deuteronomy see especially Bernard M Levinson Deuteronomy and theHermeneutics o Legal Innovation (New York Oxford University Press 1997) 25 David Noel Freedman ldquoTe Name of the God of Mosesrdquo Journal o Biblical Lit-erature 793 (1960) 156

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1149

276 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of Israel is not a Yahwistic name with the divine element of

Yahweh but an El name with the element lt ēl Tis fact wouldsuggest that El was the original chief god of the group namedIsrael Second Genesis 4924ndash25 presents a series of El epi-thets separate from the mention of Yahweh in verse 18983044

A detailed response to all the evidence amassed by scholars who view a theological evolution in the Hebrew Bible was beyond thescope of Heiserrsquos essay However notwithstanding the probability that

Heiser is correct in linking Elyon with Yahweh in Deuteronomy thisclaim does not negate the likelihood that in ancient Israel Yahwehwas originally a son of Elyon

In the present form of the biblical text the term [gtElyocircn]is understood to be an epithet for Yahweh the God of IsraelIt is possible however as some have argued that the epithetmay conceal a reference to a separate deity possibly an oldergod with whom Yahweh came to be identified983044

LDS scholars have good reason to accept the historical views of schol-ars such as Parker and Smith

Psalm 82 as the Grand Council

Tough helpful to his analysis ultimately Petersonrsquos claims are

not dependent upon the legitimacy of a Parker Smith historical inter-pretation Petersonrsquos argument for interpreting Psalm 82 as a reflec-tion of the grand council story featured in modern revelation findssupport in Near Eastern tradition In the ancient Near East stories ofthe divine council typically begin with a crisis in which the head Godcalls together the gods of the council to resolve the dilemma Duringthe council a series of proposals are offered Finally a ldquosaviorrdquo steps

forward offering his services to the council Tis savior then receives26 Smith Early History o God 32

27 Eric E Elnes and Patrick D Miller ldquoElyonrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demonsin the Bible ed Karel van der oorn Bob Becking and Pieter W van der Horst (LeidenBrill 1995) 560

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 277

a commission to perform his redemptive role983044 Tis common Near

Eastern pattern is seen for example in the Mesopotamian story ofdivine kingship known as Enuma Elish983044 In this Babylonian myththe head god of the pantheon calls together the gods in a council toresolve a dilemma created by the goddess iamat Following a seriesof proposals Marduk the chief god of Babylon receives a commissionas savior Marduk agrees to perform the role of savior on the condi-tion that his father Ea the head god of the council grant Marduk allpower and glory Te same pattern appears in the Assyrian myth ofAnzu However in this version the god Ninurta agrees to serve ascouncil savior while allowing his father to retain his position withinthe council

Like Enuma Elish and Psalm 82 many of the council stories fromthe ancient Near East portray stories of cosmic revolt in which judg-ment is rendered against divine beings Tis pattern is familiar toLatter-day Saints through the council story provided in the Books of

Moses and Abraham (Moses 41ndash4 and Abraham 322ndash28) Althoughsometimes obscured the same pattern is reflected in council tradi-tions featured in the Hebrew Bible Te story of council crisis forexample appears in the Isaiah Apocalypse

On that day [Yahweh] will punishthe host of heaven in heavenand on earth the kings of the earth (Isaiah 2421 NRSV)

Similar language emerges in Isaiah 271

On that day [Yahweh]with his cruel and great and strong swordwill punish Leviathan the fleeing serpent (NRSV)

28 Tis summary is based upon the pattern identified by Simon B Parker ldquoCoun-cilrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 391ndash98 for a consideration of the divine coun-

cil stories within the Bible as ldquotype scenesrdquo see David M Fleming ldquoTe Divine Councilas ype Scene in the Hebrew Biblerdquo (PhD diss Te Southern Baptist Teological Semi-nary 1989) 29 For an English translation of Enuma Elish see Stephanie Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia Creation the Flood Gilgamesh and Others (New York Oxford UniversityPress 1989) 228ndash77

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1349

278 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

For Latter-day Saints these traditions preserved in texts such as Enuma

Elish the book of Isaiah and Psalm 82 provide a type of retellingmdashalbeit sometimes hiddenmdashof the primordial events concerning thegrand council described in modern revelation

In the ancient Near East members of the divine council oenappear to receive a type of reprimand suggestive of the punishmentgiven Lucifer in LDS scripture

Because that Satan rebelled against me and sought to destroy

the agency of man which I the Lord God had given himand also that I should give unto him mine own power by thepower of mine Only Begotten I caused that he should be castdown And he became Satan yea even the devil the father ofall lies to deceive and to blind men and to lead them captiveat his will even as many as would not hearken unto my voice(Moses 43ndash4)

With the words ldquoHere am I send merdquo Latter-day Saints believeJesus Christ stepped forward in the council crisis and volunteered tosave humanity from the challenges associated with mortal probation(Abraham 327) According to the council story depicted in the Bookof Abraham Lucifer ldquowas angry and kept not his first estate and atthat day many followed aer himrdquo (Abraham 328) In his analysisPeterson does well to draw attention to the fact that Isaiahrsquos refer-

ence to ldquoLucifer son of the morningrdquo in Isaiah 1412 ldquodraws us againinto the astronomical imagery oen connected with the divine assem-blyrdquo1048624 In his own studies Heiser has convincingly argued for a similarposition

Ugaritic regularly refers to heavenly beings as p∆r kkbm (the ldquocongregation of the starsrdquo) language corresponding with כוכ י קר (ldquomorning starsrdquo in parallelism with the ldquosons of

Godrdquo in Job 387) and (the ldquostars of Godrdquo Isa 1413)כוכ י לAside from the context of these references each of whichclearly points to personal beings not astronomical phenom-

30 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 533

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 279

ena it is significant that in the entire ancient near eastern lit-

erary record El is never identified with a heavenly body Tusldquothe stars of Elrdquo points to created beings with divine status1048580

For Latter-day Saints recent archaeological and textual discoverieslike those referred to by Heiser are especially intriguing However asPeterson argues in the quotation provided above (p 273) Latter-daySaints do not need the Bible to express a precise parallel with modernrevelation in order to find support for LDS theology

Te fact that texts such as Psalm 82 somewhat parallel Latter-daySaint teachings is sufficient to argue that a more exact version of thegrand council story such as is witnessed in modern revelation mayhave existed in antiquity However notwithstanding his basic agree-ment with Peterson concerning the fundamental role assumed by thecouncil of deities in the Hebrew Bible Heiser ultimately departs fromPetersonrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 suggesting that the biblical view of

the council contains eight fundamental points that conflict with LDStheology

Heiserrsquos Sixteen Points

Heiser provides a list of sixteen arguments outlining his positionregarding Psalm 82 and the divine council He divides these into eightpoints ldquowith which many evangelicals would probably disagree and

with which many Latter-day Saints would likely agreerdquo followed byeight points ldquowith which many Latter-day Saints would probably dis-agree and with which many evangelicals would likely agreerdquo (pp 222ndash24) Heiserrsquos perspectives regarding Psalm 82 are clearly sound Teyinclude such issues as the inadequacy of the term monotheism as areference to Israelite theology and the biblical use of the word elohim as a literal reference to gods rather than human judges While Heiseris certainly correct in suggesting that his first eight views would proveproblematic for many evangelicals but not for most Mormons Heiserrsquoslist of eight statements on Psalm 82 that he assumes many Latter-day

31 Michael S Heiser ldquoDeuteronomy 328 and the Sons of Godrdquo 15 for an electronic version see thedivinecouncilcomD32BibSacpdf (accessed 8 February 2007)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1549

280 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Saints would disagree with indicates a basic lack of exposure to Latter-

day Saint thoughtHeiser is well versed in biblical studies His work has contrib-uted important insights toward a scholarly view of the essential roleassumed by the divine council in Old estament theology but he isnot a Latter-day Saint However Heiser does not consider in his cri-tique the possibility that most Latter-day Saints including Petersondo not believe that the biblical view of the council mirrors preciselywhat Latter-day Saints accept through modern revelation JosephSmithrsquos revelations proclaim our day as the dispensation of the ful-ness of times ldquoaccording to that which was ordained in the midst ofthe Council of the Eternal God of all other gods before this world wasrdquo(DampC 12132) For Latter-day Saints this final dispensation representsthe time decreed by God and his council in which ldquothose things whichnever have been revealed from the foundation of the world but havebeen kept hid from the wise and prudent shall be revealed unto babes

and sucklings in this the dispensation of the fulness of timesrdquo (DampC12818) Terefore Latter-day Saint scholars acknowledge that an LDSunderstanding of the council does not precisely mirror the perspec-tives manifested in the Bible Tat having been said most Latter-daySaints certainly accept the view advocated by Peterson that the bib-lical perspective of the heavenly council of deities is in greater har-mony with LDS belief than with any other contemporary Christian

tradition A recognition that the Bible though not flawless is inspiredof God allows Latter-day Saints to comfortably engage the views putforth by biblical scholars such as Heiser even when those observa-tions prove threatening to our evangelical counterparts

If certain biblical authors for example did in fact believe asHeiser seems to correctly suggest that Yahweh was ldquonot lsquobirthedrsquointo existence by the lsquoolden godsrsquo described in Ugaritic textsrdquo (p 223)Latter-day Saints would have no problem simply accepting the obser- vation as a biblical view Similarly even though Heiser assumes thatmany Mormons would disagree with his opinion that the Bible pre-sents Yahweh the God of Israel as ldquoontologically uniquerdquo (p 223) inreality many Latter-day Saints recognize that this is precisely the case

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 281

Even within LDS theology God the Father stands out as ontologically

unique inasmuch as he created the spirits of all humanity Modernrevelation describes God with the words ldquofrom eternity to eternity Heis the same and His years never failrdquo (DampC 764)

Yahwehrsquos Ontological Uniqueness

In addition to the evidence Heiser presents for what he calls Yah-wehrsquos ontological uniqueness the name Yahweh itself appears vocal-

ized in the Hebrew Bible as a finite Hiphil verb form Te vocalizationof YHWH as ldquoYahwehrdquo carries a specific nuance since ldquoHebrew gram-mars traditionally represent the Hiphil stem as the causative of the Qal

stemrdquo983044 Frank Moore Cross explains that ldquothe accumulated evidence strongly supports the view that the name Yahweh is a causativeimperfect of the Canaanite-Proto-Hebrew verb hwy lsquoto bersquo rdquo Tere-fore the divine name Yahweh according to this view literally means

ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procreatesrdquo One of the inter-esting points to consider concerning the biblical title Yahweh Sabaoth or ldquoLord of Hostsrdquo is that typically in Hebrew proper names do notappear bound to a genitive nounmdashthat is ldquoJohn of Hostsrdquo or ldquoMary ofEarthrdquo etc Since a proper name cannot traditionally function as abound form in a construct chain Cross interprets the King James titleldquoLord of Hostsrdquo as ldquo lsquohe creates the (divine) hostsrsquo rdquo If correct this

view would lend support to Heiserrsquos argument that ldquoYahweh is said32 Bruce K Waltke and M OrsquoConnor An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax

(Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 1990) 433 33 Frank Moore Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge Harvard Uni- versity Press 1973) 65 34 ldquoA proper noun cannot as a rule be followed by a genitiverdquo Paul Jouumlon A Gram-mar o Biblical Hebrew trans and rev Muraoka (Rome Editrice Pontificio IstitutoBiblico 2000) 2481 Admittedly however textual evidence shows that the rule need notapply to divine names see J A Emerton ldquoNew Light on Israelite Religion Te Implica-

tions of the Inscriptions from Kunti llet lsquoAjrudrdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wis-senschaf 94 (1982) 12ndash13 and especially John H Choi ldquoResheph and YHWH IacuteĔBĀlt Ocirc rdquoVetus estamentum 54 (2004) 17ndash28 I offer this assessment of the title Yahweh Sabaothwhich reflects the views of scholars such as David Noel Freedman and Frank MooreCross as merely an intriguing possibility 35 Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic 65 emphasis added

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1749

282 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo (p 250)

Heiser incorrectly assumes that this apparent biblical teaching con-cerning Yahwehrsquos uniqueness among the gods is not inconsistent withLDS theology

Tough Latter-day Saints view God the Father and Jesus Christas two separate divine beings for the Saints the biblical titles associ-ated with these deities are clearly interchangeable Latter-day Saintshave no problem therefore in associating God the Father with thetitle Yahwehmdashthat is ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procre-atesrdquo Te 1916 official declaration presented by the First Presidency ofthe church states ldquoGod the Eternal Father whom we designate by theexalted name-title Elohim is the literal Parent of our Lord and SaviorJesus Christ and of the spirits of the human racerdquo Clearly howeverthe First Presidencyrsquos move toward designating God the Father as Elo-him and Jesus the Son as Jehovah was primarily a move by churchleaders to create uniformity in Latter-day Saint expression In a recent

Ensign article Keith Meservy observed that ldquoin at least three Old es-tament passages it appears that L983151983154983140 [ie Jehovah] applies to Heav-enly Father not Jesus Christ Ps 1101 Ps 27 Isa 5310rdquo No doubtfor many Latter-day Saints this estimate offered by Meservy couldbe greatly augmented LDS teachings therefore do not preclude theontological uniqueness of God the Father that Heiser witnesses in theHebrew Bible

Yahweh as a Being ldquoSpecies-Uniquerdquo

Certainly Heiser is justified in suggesting that the gods of thedivine council appear inferior to Israelrsquos deity He uses this correctobservation however to build an argument that Israelrsquos God wastherefore somehow ldquospecies-uniquerdquo (p 250) In his discussion con-cerning the biblical evidence for Yahweh being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo

Heiser bases his interpretation on five points of evidence (1) ldquoYahweh36 ldquoTe Father and the Son A Doctrinal Exposition by the First Presidency and the

welverdquo as cited in Messages o the First Presidency o the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints ed James R Clark (Salt Lake City Bookcra 1971) 526 emphasis added 37 Keith H Meservy ldquoLORD = Jehovahrdquo Ensign June 2002 29 n 3

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 283

is said to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo

(2) ldquoYahweh was considered pre-existent to all godsrdquo (3) Yahweh hasthe power to strip the other elohim of their immortality (4) Yahwehalone is referred to in the Bible as ha-elohim and (5) ldquothe other godsare commanded to worship Yahwehrdquo (see pp 250ndash57) Tough eachof Heiserrsquos five points of evidence do in fact appear in the Bible con-trary to Heiserrsquos suggestion none of these observations establishesYahweh as being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo In the Bible Yahweh is the God ofgods but the biblical gods were still biblical gods As Paul Sanders hasexplained according to the Deuteronomic vision ldquothe [Sons of Goddescribed in Deuteronomy 328] are relatively independent they havetheir own dominions like YHWHrdquo

Notwithstanding his acceptance of the importance of the divinecouncil of deities in biblical theology Heiserrsquos critique suffers in partthrough his effort to define Israelrsquos deity as a being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo(p 250) He is correct in drawing attention to the fact that biblical

authors viewed their deity as exceptionally powerful in the councilldquoFor the Lord your God is God of godsrdquo proclaims Deuteronomy 1017ldquoand Lord of lordsrdquo Unfortunately however in identifying Yahweh asa being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo Heiser forces the biblical view of deities intoan image somewhat consistent with radical monotheism Contraryto Heiserrsquos suggestion the creative act in and of itself does not set thecreator apart as an exclusive species Te same point also applies tothe issue Heiser raises concerning primogeniture In other words aman for instance may exist before both his children and his siblingsand though preeminence may render the person ldquouniquerdquo on somelevels prior existence would not in this or in any other case rendera being as ldquospecies-uniquerdquo rue the Bible speaks of gods separatefrom Israelrsquos primary deity as elohim a˙erimmdashthat is ldquoother godsrdquo(see Exodus 203 2313 Deuteronomy 57 614 etc) However as YairHoffman has observed ldquoA survey of the use of a˙erim [ldquootherrdquo] shows

38 Paul Sanders Te Provenance o Deuteronomy 32 (Leiden Brill 1996) 37039 Te term radical monotheism refers to the theological position that only one

divine being exists in the universe Te expression was popularized by ikva Frymer-Kensky In the Wake o the Goddesses Women Culture and the Biblical ransormationo Pagan Myth (New York Free Press 1992) 154

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1949

284 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

that when used attributively with regard to garments days messen-

gers and objects it clearly has a relative meaning something differ-ent yet o the same kind rdquo1048624 Terefore ldquothere is no reason to assumethat in the phrase elohim a˙erim the attribute has a more distinctivemeaningrdquo1048580 When all is said and done the biblical deities like Yah-weh himself were still gods

In addition contrary to Heiserrsquos assertion the simple fact that Elo-him possesses the power to strip the other deities of their immortalityin Psalm 82 does not indicate that these gods are of a different spe-cies than Elohim According to the Psalmistrsquos view Elohim is simplymore powerful than the other gods Analogies from the ancient NearEast illustrate the problematic nature of Heiserrsquos claim In the Babylo-nian story Enuma Elish for instance the primordial mother goddessiamat created the god Qingu as chief deity over iamatrsquos militaryforces As a result of his actions taken against the divine council thedeities of the assembly ldquobound [Qingu] and held him in front of Ea

[and they] imposed the penalty on him and cut off his bloodrdquo983044 Tefact that in Enuma Elish the council could strip Qingu of his immor-tality did not mean that the god Qingu was somehow of a different orlesser divine species In the Sumerian myth of Enlil and Ninlil Enlil(one of the ldquogreat godsrdquo of Mesopotamia) is brought to trial for havingraped the goddess Ninlil As Enlil returned to the city of Nippur hewas arrested by the assembly while walking through the temple court

Te trial commenced immediately In the myth the council pre-sented the verdict that ldquothe sex offender Enlil will leave the townrdquoAccordingly the myth reports that Enlil le Nippur headed towardthe netherworld In his assessment of the story Jacobsen points out

40 Yair Hoffman ldquoTe Conception of lsquoOther Godsrsquo in Deuteronomistic Literaturerdquoin Concepts o the Other in Near Eastern Religions ed Ilai Alon Ithamar Gruenwald andItamar Singer (Leiden Brill 1994) 107 emphasis added 41 Hoffman ldquoConception of Other Godsrdquo 107

42 As cited in Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia 261 43 For a summary of the myth see Gwendolyn Leick A Dictionary o Ancient NearEastern Mythology (London Routledge 1998) 47ndash48 for a translation see TorkildJacobsen Te Harps Tat Once Sumerian Poetry in ranslation (New Haven YaleUniversity Press 1987) 167ndash80 44 Jacobsen Harps 174

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 285

that Enlilrsquos descent to Hades may indicate that the high god in Meso-

potamian mythology was originally sentenced to death As notedby James Ackerman in his dissertation concerning Psalm 82 thesetypes of judgment scenes in which the council determines that godswill die like mortals carry important implications for interpreting thecultural background for the biblical text Contrary to Heiserrsquos inter-pretation none of these stories indicate that the dying gods were of adifferent species or order than the gods who issued the sentence

Near Eastern traditions oen place considerable emphasis on thedying-god motif In no sense however are these dying godsmdashevenwhen resurrectedmdashsomehow depicted as a lesser species Heiserrsquos con-fusion concerning the implications of a biblical statement that Godissued a judgment of death to the deities of the divine council illus-trates the fundamental need for biblical scholars to pursue Assyriol-ogy in connection with their efforts to interpret the Hebrew Bible

Also contrary to Heiserrsquos suggestion the punishment meted out

to usurpers in Near Eastern council stories never indicates that thecriminals derived from some sort of exceptional species Te storyof Athtar from ancient Canaan for instance presents the traditionof Athtarrsquos descent to the underworld following the deityrsquos ascensionto the throne of Baal Te details involved in Athtarrsquos story containimportant thematic elements depicted in ancient Near Eastern storiesof cosmic revolt Athtar seems to share some semblance with Baalrsquos

mortal enemy Mot or ldquoDeathrdquo into whom Baal himself descendsHence Hugh Page notes that Athtarrsquos ldquodescent to the underworld implies that on some level Athtar has placed himself in proxim-ity to or relationship with the only god that Baal proves incapable

45 Torkild Jacobsen ldquoAn Ancient Mesopotamian rial for Homiciderdquo in owardthe Image o ammuz and Other Essays on Mesopotamian History and Culture ed Wil-liam L Moran (Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1970) 207 first published inStudia Biblica et Orientalia vol 3 of Analecta Biblica et Orientalia XII (Rome Pontificio

Istituto Biblico 1959) 130ndash50 46 See James S Ackerman ldquoAn Exegetical Study of Psalm 82rdquo (PhD diss HarvardUniversity 1966) 186ndash93 47 For a recent survey of the issue which includes a survey of previous assessmentssee ryggve N D Mettinger Te Riddle o Resurrection ldquoDying and Rising Godsrdquo in the Ancient Near East (Stockholm Almqvist amp Wiksell 2001)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2149

286 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of defeatingrdquo Athtarrsquos assumption of the throne of Baal followed

by his descent to the underworld indicates that this portion of theBaal cycle from ancient Canaan fits the general category of the cosmic

revolt genre witnessed in texts such as Abraham 3 and Psalm 82

1 Kindly El the Compassionate answers

2 ldquoOne so small cannot race

3 with Baal cannot handle the lance

4 with Daganrsquos son when they test one anotherrdquo

5 Lady Athirat of the Sea answers 6 ldquoLet us enthrone Athtar the Strong

7 Let Athtar the Strong be kingrdquo

8 Ten Athtar the Strong

9 ascended the summit of Sapan

10 He sat upon the throne of Mightiest Baal

11 His feet would not reach its footstool

12 His head would not reach its top 13 Athtar the Strong answered

14 ldquoI cannot rule on the summit of Sapanrdquo

15 Athtar the Strong descended

16 He descended from the throne of Mightiest Baal

17 And he ruled over the underworld god of all of it

18 drew in barrels

19 drew in jars (KU 1649ndash67 translation)

Te fact that Athtar the Strong experienced a type of ldquodeathrdquo in which

he ldquoruled over the underworldrdquo following his descent from Baalrsquos

throne does not suggest that Athtar was a ldquobeing species-uniquerdquo from

the other deities any more than Inanna or Ishtar the Mesopotamian

goddesses who experienced a type of death in the underworld were of

a different species than the gods Ea Enki Marduk and so forth48 Hugh R Page Jr Te Myth o Cosmic Rebellion A Study o Its Reflexes in Ugaritic

and Biblical Literature (Leiden Brill 1996) 92 Pagersquos views concerning the Athtar mythhave been criticized by Gregorio del Olmo Lete ldquoIn Search of the Canaanite Luciferrdquo Aula Orientalis 19 (2001) 125ndash32

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 287

Still in his efforts to present Yahweh as a being species-unique

Heiser correctly draws attention to the other gods of the council whoare commanded to worship Yahweh In his analysis he focuses uponthe call given to the gods in Psalm 291ndash2 ldquoAscribe to Yahweh O sons ofGod ascribe to Yahweh glory and strength Ascribe to Yahweh the gloryof his name worship Yahweh in the splendor of holinessrdquo (as quotedon p 256) While Heiserrsquos observations certainly illustrate that biblicalauthors viewed their deity as uniquemdashthat is exceptionalmdashthroughout

Near Eastern tradition lesser gods regularly appear in a position inwhich they offer praise service and devotion to the higher gods of thecouncil Richard J Clifford explains that in the Phoenician view of theassembly ldquoas elsewhere in the ancient Near East the assemblies are pic-tured as subordinate to individual gods although the assemblyrsquos con-sent seems necessary for important decisionsrdquo Simply because ancienttextsmdashincluding the Biblemdashdepict the members of the assemblies asldquosubordinate to individual godsrdquo this in no way implies that the higher

deities somehow belonged to a separate species Ancient Near Easterntexts such as Mursilirsquos Hymn and Prayer to the Sun-goddess o Arinna (CH 376A) establish the fact that Near Eastern peoples believed thatgods of the same species paid homage to higher deities in a way compa-rable to the biblical view

You O Sun-goddess of Arinna are honored goddess Your

name is honored among names and your divinity is honoredamong gods Furthermore among the gods you are the mosthonored and the greatest Tere is no other god more honoredor greater than you You are the lord of just judgment Youcontrol the kingship of heaven and earth1048624

Holding the position ldquomost honoredrdquo among the gods did not estab-lish Arinna as species-unique Arinna was simply the god before

whom from the authorrsquos perspective the other gods would regularly49 Richard J Clifford ldquoPhoenician Religionrdquo Bulletin o the American Schools o

Oriental Research 279 (1990) 57 50 As cited in Itamar Singer Hittite Prayers (Atlanta Society of Biblical Literature2002) 51

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2349

288 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquofall downrdquo1048580 For the ancients the Near Eastern view of the divine

court clearly reflected or were expressed in terms of earthly realityTerefore just as the high king before whom other humans paid hom-age was still a human being so the god to whom other deities paidhomage was still a god matching in species For biblical authors Yah-weh stood at the head of the hierarchy in Israelite thought Yahwehwas unique as the God of gods but he was not unique in his divinityFrom a biblical perspective Yahweh even shared this divinity withhumanity

Humans as Teomorphic Beings

In his discussion concerning the biblical view regarding theomor-phic humans Peterson draws attention to Paulrsquos New estament ser-mon presented in Acts 1728ndash29

For in him we live and move and have our being as

certain also of your own poets have said For we are also hisoffspring

Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God we oughtnot to think that the Godhead is like unto gold or silver orstone graven by art and manrsquos device

Peterson in part argues for a biblical connection between God andhumanity based on the fact that ldquothe word rendered lsquooffspringrsquo by the

King James translators is the Greek genos which is cognate with theLatin genus and means lsquofamilyrsquo or lsquoracersquo or lsquokindrsquo or even and mostespecially interesting lsquodescendants of a common ancestorrsquo rdquo983044 ForLatter-day Saints human beings are literally the offspring of God andtherefore intrinsically theomorphic Part of the strength of Petersonrsquosessay lies in his recognition that like Latter-day Saints biblical authorsregularly blur the distinction between humanity and divine beings

Not only does Peterson draw attention to the prophetic interactionwith the council as support for his thesis but he also places consider-

51 Singer Hittite Prayers 51 52 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 542ndash43 53 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 289

able emphasis upon the deified dead in the Hebrew Bible and the early

Christian teaching regarding deification Heiser notwithstandingPetersonrsquos evidence rejects the idea that a genus equation of God and

humankind appears in the Bible

For his criticisms of Petersonrsquos views Heiser places considerable

weight on the notion that ldquothe concept of the image of God does not

advance the idea that there is a genus equation of God and human-

kind or that God was once a manrdquo (p 224) On some levels Heiserrsquos

point concerning the word tzelem or ldquoimagerdquo in Genesis 126ndash27is correct Concerning this controversial term Marc Z Brettler has

recently explained

Te word tzelem (ldquoimagerdquo) elsewhere always refers to a

physical representation For example the Book of Ezekiel

uses tzelem when it refers to ldquomen sculptured upon the walls

figures of Chaldeans drawn in vermilionrdquo (2314) or when it

accuses Israel of fornicating with ldquophallic imagesrdquo (1617) Teword oen refers to idols (eg Num 3352 Ezek 720 Amos

526 2 Chron 2317) It always signifies a concrete entity

rather than an abstract one Tis is not surprising since the

Bible (in contrast to most medieval philosophical traditions

both Jewish and Christian) oen depicts God in corporeal

terms

Genesis 126ndash27 suggests that Godrsquos physical likeness is similar to

humanityrsquos but Heiser is correct that the statement does not indicate

that biblical authors viewed humans as gods or that God himself was

once a human However many other texts from the Bible do present a

theomorphic view of humanity Peterson therefore is precisely correct

in stating that ldquothe Latter-day Saint understanding that humans are of

the same genus or species as God is thus clearly biblicalrdquo54 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509ndash28

55 Marc Z Brettler How to Read the Bible (Philadelphia Jewish Publication Society2005) 43ndash44 Hebrew word deleted 56 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 547

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2549

290 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Adam as a Divine Council Member

In addition to associating humanity with the tzelem of God theBible describes the first man as a deified member of the divine council

In the Eden story the Lord took advantage of the wet claylike soil and

ldquoformed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils

the breath of life and man became a living soulrdquo (Genesis 27) In an

important study concerning this imagery Walter Brueggemann has

shown that a biblical connection exists between being raised from the

dust and enthronement ldquoo be taken lsquofrom the dustrsquo means to be

elevated from obscurity to royal office and to return to dust means to

be deprived of that office and returned to obscurityrdquo Imagery such

as that witnessed in 1 Kings 162 supports Brueggemannrsquos interpreta-

tion ldquoForasmuch as I [God] exalted thee [Jehu] out of the dust and

made thee prince over my people Israel rdquo (1 Kings 162) Hence the

notion of the God raising man ldquofrom the dust of the earthrdquo in Genesis

27 in part suggests that Yahweh begins his creative activity by form-

ing a divine king According to Genesis 215 this divine king through

a type of imitatio dei would continue to perform the work of Yahweh

who ldquoplantedrdquo the garden ldquoAnd the Lord God took the man and put

him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep itrdquo In a simi-

lar fashion Mesopotamian kings such as Hammurapi glorified their

efforts through the use of creation and agricultural imageryI encircled [the wall] with a swamp I dug the Euphrates

as far as Sippar (and) made it reach a prosperous quay

I Hammu-rāpi who builds up the land caused Sippar

and Babylon to dwell in peaceful abodes forever What

from [primordial days] no one among the kings had done I

did in a grand fashion for the god Šamaš my lord

57 Walter Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestament-liche Wissenschaf 841 (1972) 1ndash18 58 Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo 2 59 Douglas Frayne Old Babylonian Period (2003ndash1595 BC) (oronto University oforonto Press 1990) 348ndash49

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 291

Te view presented in the Babylonian inscription on the wall

of Sippar reflects the common Near Eastern assumption featured inGenesis 2 of a God king participating in the act of creation from ldquopri-

mordial daysrdquo through structure1048624 As a king Hammurapi assumed

the same role filled by deities who created the universe by giving order

to preexistent chaos In its depiction of Adam as the primordial gar-

dener the Bible relies upon similar imagery

Manrsquos status as the archetypal gardener king in Genesis 2ndash3 con-

tains important parallels with Mesopotamian kingship theory1048580 Sev-eral examples of Mesopotamian iconography feature a depiction of the

tree (or plant) of life over which the king and priests appear pouring

libations In assessing the connection between Mesopotamian kings

and gardeners Geo Widengren cites these statements from the am-

muz text R IV 27 No I

A tamarisk which in the garden has no water to drink

Whose foliage on the plant sends forth no twig

A plant which they water no more in its pot

Whose roots are torn away

A herb which is in the garden has no water to drink

Among the flowers of the garden he sleeps

Among the flowers of the garden he is thrown

According to Widengren ldquothe ree of Life is watered by the kingwho pours out over it the Water of Life which he has in his possession

Te ree of Life constantly needs the Water of Life near which it is

growing in the garden of paradiserdquo983044 Te connection between king

and gardener was widely attested throughout ancient Mesopotamia

60 In his translation Frayne renders the Akkadian word szligi-a-tim as ldquothe pastrdquo Teinscription however clearly relies on creation imagery and I have therefore interpreted

szligiatim as ldquoprimordial daysrdquo in accordance with the information provided in Jeremy BlackAndrew George and Nicholas Postgate A Concise Dictionary o Akkadian (WiesbadenHarrassowitz 2000) 337 61 See Geo Widengren Te King and the ree o Lie in Ancient Near Eastern Reli- gion (Uppsala Uppsala Universitets Aringrsskri 1951) 62 Widengren King and the ree o Lie 15

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2749

292 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Tis portrayal of kingship appears in the birth legend of Sargon

wherein the monarch declaresAkki the waterscooper placed me as his gardenerWhen I was a gardener Ishtar was in love with meTe kingship I exercised during x + 5 years

Tese lines from the tale of Sargon the gardener whom the goddess Ishtarloved seem to provide an especially significant parallel with the biblical view presented in the story of Eden In the words of Nicholas Wyatt ldquotheman in his garden is a symbolic allusion to the king in his sanctuaryrdquo

One of the important connections between humanityrsquos enthrone-ment in the garden and later biblical traditions includes the anointingof an Israelite king in 1 Kings 128ndash40 at the Gihon Spring a rivernamed Gihon was one of the four rivers that flowed out of Eden andround the land of Cush (Genesis 213) Significantly the only otherexplicit reference to the Garden of Eden in the Hebrew Bible appears

in a context that addresses the link between kingship and divinity (seeEzekiel 282ndash13)

Concerning the attestation of biblical rituals that may preserveactual religious rites wherein Israelite kings assumed divinity Wyattargues that

the rituals which transform the status of the earthly kingremoving him from ldquomerely humanrdquo status to that of a sacralfigure to be couched in the form of a narrative about a godcarries with it the hint that the king himself is to be seen astransformed into a god Te enthronement of the king isthus his apotheosis

63 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoInterpreting the Creation and Fall Story in Genesis 2ndash3rdquo Zeit-schrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 931 (1981) 15 64 John van Seters has argued according to the Documentary Hypothesis that the

story of divine kingship in J derives from Babylonian influences and is therefore latepostexilic If P is in part a reaction to the J account then it is difficult to accept vanSetersrsquos dating see John van Seters ldquoTe Creation of Man and the Creation of the KingrdquoZeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 1013 (1989) 333ndash41 65 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinity Some Mythical and Ritual Aspects of WestSemitic Kingshiprdquo Ugarit-Forschungen 31 (1999) 857

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 293

In his exploration of biblical deification Wyatt refers to Psalm 198ndash10

as a possible ritual text transforming the king into a divine beingTe teaching of Yahweh is perfectrestoring the breastTe testimony of Yahweh is certainmaking wise the headTe precepts of Yahweh are uprightrejoicing the heart

Te commandment of Yahweh is puremaking bright the eyesTe speech of Yahweh is ritually purestanding for everTe judgments of Yahweh are truthTey are righteous all togethermore desirable than goldthan much pure goldmore sweet than honeyor the refined combYour servant is indeed illumined by themand in their observance is there great gain

Concerning this possible reference to ritual anointing Wyatt argues

It is true that there is no narrative statement about unc-

tion here oil is not even mentioned But only thus can thesuccessive blessings on various parts of the kingrsquos body beexplained For comparison we should consider the unction ofpriests in Exod 294ndash9 19ndash21 4012ndash5 and Lev 810ndash2 22ndash4where various parts of the priestrsquos body are anointed with oiland blood undoubtedly with some liturgical commentary onthe action such is now narrated in these passages providing

a suitable performative utteranceIf correct Wyattrsquos assessment of Israelite deification proves importantfor an analysis of Adam as divine king in the book of Genesis

66 Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinityrdquo 874ndash75

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2949

294 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

In Genesis chapter 2 Godrsquos initial creative act must be the creation

of man for as a divine king raised ldquofrom the dustrdquo man was specifi-cally formed to assist deity in the creation process God appears as agardener who causes to grow ldquoevery tree that is pleasant to the sightand good for foodrdquo (Genesis 29) Te account declares that the Lordplaced the man in the garden to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo his newly createdoasis (Genesis 215) As a gardener the Lord plants Eden as a gardenerthe Lord mixes the soil to form both man and beast As a gardener the

Lord creates man in his image to perform the work of a God Follow-ing his creation man assumes the role of divine gardenerFrom an ancient Near Eastern perspective the view of Adam as

divine gardener suggests that biblical authors viewed humanity asan earthly extension of the divine council According to the Edenaccount man was immortal (Genesis 217) man had received fromdeity the sacred ldquobreath of liferdquo (Genesis 27) man had been com-missioned to perform the work of a godmdashthat is to till and tend the

divine garden Terefore as an immortal gardener man was alreadyldquolike the godsrdquo prior to partaking of the forbidden fruit

In Mesopotamian myths for example the work of gardening wasassigned to lesser members of the divine council Hence the story ofAtrahasis opens with the following portrayal

When gods were man

Tey did forced labor they bore drudgeryGreat indeed was the drudgery of the godsTe forced labor was heavy the misery too muchTe seven() great Anunna-gods were burdeningTe Igigi-gods with forced labor

Like the account in Genesis the lesser gods of the divine council inAtrahasis were gardeners who did the laborious task of caring for the

canals trees and waterways that sustained the higher gods of the67 For additional examples of Yahweh portrayed in the role of gardener see Num-

bers 246 Psalm 10416 Isaiah 4414 68 Altrahasis II39 1ndash6 translation in Benjamin R Foster Beore the Muses An Anthol-ogy o Akkadian Literature (Bethesda MD CDL 1993) 1159

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 295

assembly Hence Adam as an immortal being clearly reflects the

position of the Igigi in Mesopotamian thought Te questions pre-sented to Job by Eliphaz regarding the primal human seem to share

this notion

Are you the firstborn of the human race

Were you brought forth before the hills

Have you listened in the council of God (Job 157ndash8 NRSV)

As Dexter Callender has observed concerning these questionsldquoTe allusion to the primal human in Job does not give us explicit

details concerning his incorporation into the sacred world It is clear

however that the idea is present in the reference that the primal human

lsquolistenedrsquo in the council of Godrdquo As a member of Godrsquos council man

held a stewardship to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo the deityrsquos garden (Genesis

215) According to the Genesis account when the man and woman

eat from the tree of knowledge God expels the humans from Edenand assigns the cherubim other traditional members of the divine

council to ldquokeeprdquo the garden (Genesis 324) Tis move may suggest

that in biblical thought ldquokeepingrdquo the garden is a task reserved for

members of the divine host As an immortal subordinate assigned an

important council task man however eventually appears in the Gen-

esis account as a being very much like the council deities mentioned

in Psalm 82 who receive the decree of death

I have said Ye are gods and all of you are children of the

most High

But ye shall die like men and fall like one of the princes

(Psalm 826ndash7)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou

shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thoushalt surely die (Genesis 217)

69 Dexter E Callender Jr Adam in Myth and History Ancient Israelite Perspectiveson the Primal Human (Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 2000) 212 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 271

ues with a description of the Godsrsquo involvement in creation ldquoAnd then

the Lord said Let us go down And they went down at the beginningand they that is the Gods organized and formed the heavens and theearthrdquo (Abraham 41) In his teachings Joseph Smith appears to pro- vide an interpretive key concerning the identity of these deities

[An] everlasting covenant was made between three per-sonages before the organization of this earth and relates totheir dispensation of things to men on the earth these per-

sonages according to Abrahamrsquos record are called God thefirst the Creator God the second the Redeemer and God thethird the witness or estator10485801048624

Other LDS commentators have suggested additional possibilitiesJoseph Fielding Smith taught that

it is true that Adam helped to form this earth He laboredwith our Savior Jesus Christ I have a strong view or convic-tion that there were others also who assisted them PerhapsNoah and Enoch and why not Joseph Smith and those whowere appointed to be rulers before the earth was formed Weknow that Jesus our Savior was a Spirit when this great workwas done He did all of these mighty works before he taber-nacled in the flesh10485801048580

Bruce R McConkie expressed a similar view ldquoChrist and MaryAdam and Eve Abraham and Sarah and a host of mighty men andequally glorious women comprised that group of lsquothe noble and greatonesrsquo to whom the Lord Jesus said lsquoWe will go down for there is spacethere and we will take of these materials and we will make an earthwhereon these may dwellrsquo (Abraham 322ndash24)rdquo1048580983044 Since the expressionwe will go down is followed in the Book of Abraham with the statementldquothey that is the Gods organized and formed the heavens and the

10 eachings o the Prophet Joseph Smith 190 11 Joseph Fielding Smith Doctrines o Salvation (Salt Lake City Bookcra 1999)174ndash75 12 Bruce R McConkie ldquoEve and the Fallrdquo in Woman (Salt Lake City Deseret Book1979) 59 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 749

272 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

earthrdquo (Abraham 41) it appears that Elder McConkie believed that

these Gods from the heavenly council included premortal humanso some extent therefore the title god is appropriately applied to the

premortal sons and daughters of Heavenly Father

Joseph Smithrsquos view of the divine council suggests that this assem-

bly of deities served a vital administrative role in Godrsquos plan of happi-

ness A journal entry recorded by William Clayton in 1845 provides

evidence for the Prophetrsquos teachings regarding this doctrine

It has been a doctrine taught by this church that we were inthe Grand Council amongst the Gods when the organization

of this world was contemplated and that the laws of govern-

ment were all made and sanctioned by all present and all the

ordinances and ceremonies decreed upon1048580

Significantly the Book of Abraham specifically notes that God ldquostood in

the midst ofrdquo these souls (Abraham 323) Tis reference to God stand-ing amongst divine beings in a heavenly council setting finds important

parallels with biblical tradition including Psalm 821 which refers to

God standing in the council and passing judgment

From an analysis of the legal material in the Hebrew Bible it

appears that in a traditional judicial setting judges sat while plain-

tiffs stood 1048580 Tis important distinction provides a significant clue for

interpreting Moses as judge in Exodus 1813ndash14And it came to pass on the morrow that Moses sat to judge

the people and the people stood by Moses from the morning

unto the evening And when Mosesrsquo father in law saw all that

he did to the people he said What is this thing thou doest to

the people why sittest thou thyself alone and all the people

stand by thee from morning unto even1048580

13 Words o Joseph Smith 84 n 10 14 Hans J Boecker Redeormen des Rechtslebens im Alten estament (NeukirchenNeukirchener Verlag 1964) 85ndash86 15 For additional examples of the practice of sitting for judgment see Judges 45Joel 312 Psalm 1225 Proverbs 208 Daniel 79ndash10

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 273

Biblical scholar Simon Parker has shown that the distinction

between sitting and standing in judicial settings also operates in the bib-lical view of the divine council1048580 Tese nuances were not unique to theWest Semitic world In Mesopotamia ldquoanybody who happened alongand had a mind to could lsquostandrsquomdashthat is participatemdashin the pu∆rum

[ie assembly]rdquo1048580 As Assyriologist Torkild Jacobsen explained theAkkadian words ldquouzuzzu lsquoto standrsquo and yašābu lsquoto sitrsquo are technicalterms for participating in the pu∆rumrdquo1048580 From a Near Eastern perspec-

tive these observations shed considerable light on passages such as Isa-iah 313 where Jehovah ldquostands up to plead a cause He rises to championpeoplesrdquo (Jewish Study Bible JSB)

Petersonrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 suggests that the text reflects thecouncil story depicted in the Book of Abraham Te fact that Psalm821 specifically states that ldquoGod stands in the divine councilrdquo sustainsPetersonrsquos thesis Peterson writes

We need not take Psalm 82rsquos portrayal of judgment andcondemnation within the divine council as literally accurate asrepresenting an actual historical event (although obviously itmight) any more than we are obliged to take as literally true thedepiction of Satan in Job 1ndash2 freely coming and going withinthe heavenly court and even placing wagers with God1048580

With its traditional council imagery Psalm 82 has intrigued biblical

scholars such as Parker who argued that the text originally describedYahwehrsquos rise to supremacy in the assembly9830441048624 Parker in part based hisassessment on the fact that Psalm 82 appears as a section of the Elohis-tic collection wherein the editor(s) reveal a strong propensity towardreplacing divine names such as Yahweh with Elohim

16 See for example 1 Kings 2219 21 Job 16 21 Daniel 79ndash10 see also Simon BParker ldquoTe Beginning of the Reign of GodmdashPsalm 82 as Myth and Liturgyrdquo Revue

Biblique 1024 (1995) 537 17 Torkild Jacobsen ldquoPrimitive Democracy in Ancient Mesopotamiardquo Journal oNear Eastern Studies 23 (1943) 164 18 See Jacobsen ldquoPrimitive Democracyrdquo 164 n 24 19 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 536 20 Parker ldquoBeginning of the Reign of Godrdquo 537

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 949

274 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Parker argued that verses one and five in Psalm 82 served as nar-

rative introductions to Yahwehrsquos council address delivered before hisfather Elyon the head of the council In his analysis Parker convinc-ingly illustrates that Yahweh would have originally appeared in Psalm82 as merely one of the assembled participants of deities ldquoHavingthought that the members of the council were all gods (and therefore justmdashand immortal) Yahweh now recognizes that being incorrigi-bly unjust they will perish like mortals fall like some human poten-taterdquo9830441048580 Parkerrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 works well with Petersonrsquos claimthat the text reflects the story of the grand council from the Books ofAbraham and Moses

In an important part of his critique concerning these issuesHeiser argues against the theory endorsed by biblical scholars such asParker and Mark S Smith that in its earliest stages Israelite religionoriginally perceived Yahweh as a son of El ldquoIn terms of an evaluationof the separateness of El and Yahwehrdquo writes Heiser ldquoLatter-day Saint

scholars have too blithely accepted the positions of Smith Parker andBarker All is not nearly as tidy as they proposerdquo (p 234) Heiser forexample maintains that rather than a separate divine father the Elyonor ldquoGod Most Highrdquo presented in Deuteronomy 328ndash9 is none otherthan Yahweh himself In this proposal Heiserrsquos view stands in directcontrast to Mark Smith who argues that ldquoearly on Yahweh is under-stood as Israelrsquos god in distinction to El Deuteronomy 328ndash9 casts

Yahweh in the role of one of the sons of El here called gtelyocircn Tispassage presents an order in which each deity received its own nationIsrael was the nation that Yahweh receivedrdquo983044983044

Te present form of Deuteronomy seems to support Heiserrsquos argu-ment Rather than a separate deity Elyon and Yahweh might appearas a single reference to the head God of the council In addition to thedivine allotment depicted in Deuteronomy 328 the idea of a series of

minor deities that Yahweh had assigned to govern the various nationsappears in Deuteronomy 419ndash20 Tese verses which discuss the

21 Parker ldquoBeginning of the Reign of Godrdquo 539ndash40 22 Mark S Smith Te Early History o God Yahweh and the Other Deities in AncientIsrael (Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2002) 32

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 275

allotment of the host of heaven to the nations of the world parallel

both the vocabulary and the ideology witnessed in 328ndash9 In Deuter-onomy 329 the author uses the same root hlk featured in 420mdashalbeitas a noun Deuteronomy 419ndash20 specifically identifies Yahweh as thedeity who gave each council deity his allotment

And when you look up to the sky and behold the sun and themoon and the stars the whole heavenly host you must not belured into bowing down to them or serving them Tese the

Lord your God allotted to other peoples everywhere underheaven but you the Lord took and brought out of Egypt thatiron blast furnace to be His very own people as is now thecase (Deuteronomy 419ndash20 Jewish Publication Society JPS)983044

Based upon this evidence Heiserrsquos assessment of the view fea-tured in the current form of Deuteronomy may be correct howeverHeiser ultimately fails to address important evidence recognized by

many contemporary biblical scholars that suggests that Israelite the-ology did in fact evolve in a manner consistent with the basic claimsof Parker and Smith983044 For example David Noel Freedman maintainsthat the combination ldquoYahweh Elohimrdquo or ldquoLord Godrdquo found in theearly chapters of Genesis probably derives from an earlier sentencename given the God of Israel namely ldquoYahweh Elrdquo or ldquoGod createsrdquo983044In a related assessment Mark Smith has argued

Te original god of Israel was El Tis reconstruction maybe inferred from two pieces of information First the name

23 Te Jewish Publication Society edition appears in Adele Berlin and Marc Z Brettlereds Te Jewish Study Bible anakh ranslation (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 24 Of course the fact that Deuteronomy 4 simply reflects the language of Deuter-onomy 32 does not automatically mean that both texts derive from the same author Teauthor of Deuteronomy 4 may have simply created his passages concerning Yahweh tointentionally reflect the language and ideology in Deuteronomy 32 in order to present

Yahweh as the chief council deity Tis very real possibility should be considered byHeiser in further research for an introduction to theological changes reflected through-out the book of Deuteronomy see especially Bernard M Levinson Deuteronomy and theHermeneutics o Legal Innovation (New York Oxford University Press 1997) 25 David Noel Freedman ldquoTe Name of the God of Mosesrdquo Journal o Biblical Lit-erature 793 (1960) 156

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1149

276 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of Israel is not a Yahwistic name with the divine element of

Yahweh but an El name with the element lt ēl Tis fact wouldsuggest that El was the original chief god of the group namedIsrael Second Genesis 4924ndash25 presents a series of El epi-thets separate from the mention of Yahweh in verse 18983044

A detailed response to all the evidence amassed by scholars who view a theological evolution in the Hebrew Bible was beyond thescope of Heiserrsquos essay However notwithstanding the probability that

Heiser is correct in linking Elyon with Yahweh in Deuteronomy thisclaim does not negate the likelihood that in ancient Israel Yahwehwas originally a son of Elyon

In the present form of the biblical text the term [gtElyocircn]is understood to be an epithet for Yahweh the God of IsraelIt is possible however as some have argued that the epithetmay conceal a reference to a separate deity possibly an oldergod with whom Yahweh came to be identified983044

LDS scholars have good reason to accept the historical views of schol-ars such as Parker and Smith

Psalm 82 as the Grand Council

Tough helpful to his analysis ultimately Petersonrsquos claims are

not dependent upon the legitimacy of a Parker Smith historical inter-pretation Petersonrsquos argument for interpreting Psalm 82 as a reflec-tion of the grand council story featured in modern revelation findssupport in Near Eastern tradition In the ancient Near East stories ofthe divine council typically begin with a crisis in which the head Godcalls together the gods of the council to resolve the dilemma Duringthe council a series of proposals are offered Finally a ldquosaviorrdquo steps

forward offering his services to the council Tis savior then receives26 Smith Early History o God 32

27 Eric E Elnes and Patrick D Miller ldquoElyonrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demonsin the Bible ed Karel van der oorn Bob Becking and Pieter W van der Horst (LeidenBrill 1995) 560

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 277

a commission to perform his redemptive role983044 Tis common Near

Eastern pattern is seen for example in the Mesopotamian story ofdivine kingship known as Enuma Elish983044 In this Babylonian myththe head god of the pantheon calls together the gods in a council toresolve a dilemma created by the goddess iamat Following a seriesof proposals Marduk the chief god of Babylon receives a commissionas savior Marduk agrees to perform the role of savior on the condi-tion that his father Ea the head god of the council grant Marduk allpower and glory Te same pattern appears in the Assyrian myth ofAnzu However in this version the god Ninurta agrees to serve ascouncil savior while allowing his father to retain his position withinthe council

Like Enuma Elish and Psalm 82 many of the council stories fromthe ancient Near East portray stories of cosmic revolt in which judg-ment is rendered against divine beings Tis pattern is familiar toLatter-day Saints through the council story provided in the Books of

Moses and Abraham (Moses 41ndash4 and Abraham 322ndash28) Althoughsometimes obscured the same pattern is reflected in council tradi-tions featured in the Hebrew Bible Te story of council crisis forexample appears in the Isaiah Apocalypse

On that day [Yahweh] will punishthe host of heaven in heavenand on earth the kings of the earth (Isaiah 2421 NRSV)

Similar language emerges in Isaiah 271

On that day [Yahweh]with his cruel and great and strong swordwill punish Leviathan the fleeing serpent (NRSV)

28 Tis summary is based upon the pattern identified by Simon B Parker ldquoCoun-cilrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 391ndash98 for a consideration of the divine coun-

cil stories within the Bible as ldquotype scenesrdquo see David M Fleming ldquoTe Divine Councilas ype Scene in the Hebrew Biblerdquo (PhD diss Te Southern Baptist Teological Semi-nary 1989) 29 For an English translation of Enuma Elish see Stephanie Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia Creation the Flood Gilgamesh and Others (New York Oxford UniversityPress 1989) 228ndash77

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1349

278 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

For Latter-day Saints these traditions preserved in texts such as Enuma

Elish the book of Isaiah and Psalm 82 provide a type of retellingmdashalbeit sometimes hiddenmdashof the primordial events concerning thegrand council described in modern revelation

In the ancient Near East members of the divine council oenappear to receive a type of reprimand suggestive of the punishmentgiven Lucifer in LDS scripture

Because that Satan rebelled against me and sought to destroy

the agency of man which I the Lord God had given himand also that I should give unto him mine own power by thepower of mine Only Begotten I caused that he should be castdown And he became Satan yea even the devil the father ofall lies to deceive and to blind men and to lead them captiveat his will even as many as would not hearken unto my voice(Moses 43ndash4)

With the words ldquoHere am I send merdquo Latter-day Saints believeJesus Christ stepped forward in the council crisis and volunteered tosave humanity from the challenges associated with mortal probation(Abraham 327) According to the council story depicted in the Bookof Abraham Lucifer ldquowas angry and kept not his first estate and atthat day many followed aer himrdquo (Abraham 328) In his analysisPeterson does well to draw attention to the fact that Isaiahrsquos refer-

ence to ldquoLucifer son of the morningrdquo in Isaiah 1412 ldquodraws us againinto the astronomical imagery oen connected with the divine assem-blyrdquo1048624 In his own studies Heiser has convincingly argued for a similarposition

Ugaritic regularly refers to heavenly beings as p∆r kkbm (the ldquocongregation of the starsrdquo) language corresponding with כוכ י קר (ldquomorning starsrdquo in parallelism with the ldquosons of

Godrdquo in Job 387) and (the ldquostars of Godrdquo Isa 1413)כוכ י לAside from the context of these references each of whichclearly points to personal beings not astronomical phenom-

30 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 533

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 279

ena it is significant that in the entire ancient near eastern lit-

erary record El is never identified with a heavenly body Tusldquothe stars of Elrdquo points to created beings with divine status1048580

For Latter-day Saints recent archaeological and textual discoverieslike those referred to by Heiser are especially intriguing However asPeterson argues in the quotation provided above (p 273) Latter-daySaints do not need the Bible to express a precise parallel with modernrevelation in order to find support for LDS theology

Te fact that texts such as Psalm 82 somewhat parallel Latter-daySaint teachings is sufficient to argue that a more exact version of thegrand council story such as is witnessed in modern revelation mayhave existed in antiquity However notwithstanding his basic agree-ment with Peterson concerning the fundamental role assumed by thecouncil of deities in the Hebrew Bible Heiser ultimately departs fromPetersonrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 suggesting that the biblical view of

the council contains eight fundamental points that conflict with LDStheology

Heiserrsquos Sixteen Points

Heiser provides a list of sixteen arguments outlining his positionregarding Psalm 82 and the divine council He divides these into eightpoints ldquowith which many evangelicals would probably disagree and

with which many Latter-day Saints would likely agreerdquo followed byeight points ldquowith which many Latter-day Saints would probably dis-agree and with which many evangelicals would likely agreerdquo (pp 222ndash24) Heiserrsquos perspectives regarding Psalm 82 are clearly sound Teyinclude such issues as the inadequacy of the term monotheism as areference to Israelite theology and the biblical use of the word elohim as a literal reference to gods rather than human judges While Heiseris certainly correct in suggesting that his first eight views would proveproblematic for many evangelicals but not for most Mormons Heiserrsquoslist of eight statements on Psalm 82 that he assumes many Latter-day

31 Michael S Heiser ldquoDeuteronomy 328 and the Sons of Godrdquo 15 for an electronic version see thedivinecouncilcomD32BibSacpdf (accessed 8 February 2007)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1549

280 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Saints would disagree with indicates a basic lack of exposure to Latter-

day Saint thoughtHeiser is well versed in biblical studies His work has contrib-uted important insights toward a scholarly view of the essential roleassumed by the divine council in Old estament theology but he isnot a Latter-day Saint However Heiser does not consider in his cri-tique the possibility that most Latter-day Saints including Petersondo not believe that the biblical view of the council mirrors preciselywhat Latter-day Saints accept through modern revelation JosephSmithrsquos revelations proclaim our day as the dispensation of the ful-ness of times ldquoaccording to that which was ordained in the midst ofthe Council of the Eternal God of all other gods before this world wasrdquo(DampC 12132) For Latter-day Saints this final dispensation representsthe time decreed by God and his council in which ldquothose things whichnever have been revealed from the foundation of the world but havebeen kept hid from the wise and prudent shall be revealed unto babes

and sucklings in this the dispensation of the fulness of timesrdquo (DampC12818) Terefore Latter-day Saint scholars acknowledge that an LDSunderstanding of the council does not precisely mirror the perspec-tives manifested in the Bible Tat having been said most Latter-daySaints certainly accept the view advocated by Peterson that the bib-lical perspective of the heavenly council of deities is in greater har-mony with LDS belief than with any other contemporary Christian

tradition A recognition that the Bible though not flawless is inspiredof God allows Latter-day Saints to comfortably engage the views putforth by biblical scholars such as Heiser even when those observa-tions prove threatening to our evangelical counterparts

If certain biblical authors for example did in fact believe asHeiser seems to correctly suggest that Yahweh was ldquonot lsquobirthedrsquointo existence by the lsquoolden godsrsquo described in Ugaritic textsrdquo (p 223)Latter-day Saints would have no problem simply accepting the obser- vation as a biblical view Similarly even though Heiser assumes thatmany Mormons would disagree with his opinion that the Bible pre-sents Yahweh the God of Israel as ldquoontologically uniquerdquo (p 223) inreality many Latter-day Saints recognize that this is precisely the case

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 281

Even within LDS theology God the Father stands out as ontologically

unique inasmuch as he created the spirits of all humanity Modernrevelation describes God with the words ldquofrom eternity to eternity Heis the same and His years never failrdquo (DampC 764)

Yahwehrsquos Ontological Uniqueness

In addition to the evidence Heiser presents for what he calls Yah-wehrsquos ontological uniqueness the name Yahweh itself appears vocal-

ized in the Hebrew Bible as a finite Hiphil verb form Te vocalizationof YHWH as ldquoYahwehrdquo carries a specific nuance since ldquoHebrew gram-mars traditionally represent the Hiphil stem as the causative of the Qal

stemrdquo983044 Frank Moore Cross explains that ldquothe accumulated evidence strongly supports the view that the name Yahweh is a causativeimperfect of the Canaanite-Proto-Hebrew verb hwy lsquoto bersquo rdquo Tere-fore the divine name Yahweh according to this view literally means

ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procreatesrdquo One of the inter-esting points to consider concerning the biblical title Yahweh Sabaoth or ldquoLord of Hostsrdquo is that typically in Hebrew proper names do notappear bound to a genitive nounmdashthat is ldquoJohn of Hostsrdquo or ldquoMary ofEarthrdquo etc Since a proper name cannot traditionally function as abound form in a construct chain Cross interprets the King James titleldquoLord of Hostsrdquo as ldquo lsquohe creates the (divine) hostsrsquo rdquo If correct this

view would lend support to Heiserrsquos argument that ldquoYahweh is said32 Bruce K Waltke and M OrsquoConnor An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax

(Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 1990) 433 33 Frank Moore Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge Harvard Uni- versity Press 1973) 65 34 ldquoA proper noun cannot as a rule be followed by a genitiverdquo Paul Jouumlon A Gram-mar o Biblical Hebrew trans and rev Muraoka (Rome Editrice Pontificio IstitutoBiblico 2000) 2481 Admittedly however textual evidence shows that the rule need notapply to divine names see J A Emerton ldquoNew Light on Israelite Religion Te Implica-

tions of the Inscriptions from Kunti llet lsquoAjrudrdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wis-senschaf 94 (1982) 12ndash13 and especially John H Choi ldquoResheph and YHWH IacuteĔBĀlt Ocirc rdquoVetus estamentum 54 (2004) 17ndash28 I offer this assessment of the title Yahweh Sabaothwhich reflects the views of scholars such as David Noel Freedman and Frank MooreCross as merely an intriguing possibility 35 Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic 65 emphasis added

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1749

282 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo (p 250)

Heiser incorrectly assumes that this apparent biblical teaching con-cerning Yahwehrsquos uniqueness among the gods is not inconsistent withLDS theology

Tough Latter-day Saints view God the Father and Jesus Christas two separate divine beings for the Saints the biblical titles associ-ated with these deities are clearly interchangeable Latter-day Saintshave no problem therefore in associating God the Father with thetitle Yahwehmdashthat is ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procre-atesrdquo Te 1916 official declaration presented by the First Presidency ofthe church states ldquoGod the Eternal Father whom we designate by theexalted name-title Elohim is the literal Parent of our Lord and SaviorJesus Christ and of the spirits of the human racerdquo Clearly howeverthe First Presidencyrsquos move toward designating God the Father as Elo-him and Jesus the Son as Jehovah was primarily a move by churchleaders to create uniformity in Latter-day Saint expression In a recent

Ensign article Keith Meservy observed that ldquoin at least three Old es-tament passages it appears that L983151983154983140 [ie Jehovah] applies to Heav-enly Father not Jesus Christ Ps 1101 Ps 27 Isa 5310rdquo No doubtfor many Latter-day Saints this estimate offered by Meservy couldbe greatly augmented LDS teachings therefore do not preclude theontological uniqueness of God the Father that Heiser witnesses in theHebrew Bible

Yahweh as a Being ldquoSpecies-Uniquerdquo

Certainly Heiser is justified in suggesting that the gods of thedivine council appear inferior to Israelrsquos deity He uses this correctobservation however to build an argument that Israelrsquos God wastherefore somehow ldquospecies-uniquerdquo (p 250) In his discussion con-cerning the biblical evidence for Yahweh being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo

Heiser bases his interpretation on five points of evidence (1) ldquoYahweh36 ldquoTe Father and the Son A Doctrinal Exposition by the First Presidency and the

welverdquo as cited in Messages o the First Presidency o the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints ed James R Clark (Salt Lake City Bookcra 1971) 526 emphasis added 37 Keith H Meservy ldquoLORD = Jehovahrdquo Ensign June 2002 29 n 3

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 283

is said to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo

(2) ldquoYahweh was considered pre-existent to all godsrdquo (3) Yahweh hasthe power to strip the other elohim of their immortality (4) Yahwehalone is referred to in the Bible as ha-elohim and (5) ldquothe other godsare commanded to worship Yahwehrdquo (see pp 250ndash57) Tough eachof Heiserrsquos five points of evidence do in fact appear in the Bible con-trary to Heiserrsquos suggestion none of these observations establishesYahweh as being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo In the Bible Yahweh is the God ofgods but the biblical gods were still biblical gods As Paul Sanders hasexplained according to the Deuteronomic vision ldquothe [Sons of Goddescribed in Deuteronomy 328] are relatively independent they havetheir own dominions like YHWHrdquo

Notwithstanding his acceptance of the importance of the divinecouncil of deities in biblical theology Heiserrsquos critique suffers in partthrough his effort to define Israelrsquos deity as a being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo(p 250) He is correct in drawing attention to the fact that biblical

authors viewed their deity as exceptionally powerful in the councilldquoFor the Lord your God is God of godsrdquo proclaims Deuteronomy 1017ldquoand Lord of lordsrdquo Unfortunately however in identifying Yahweh asa being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo Heiser forces the biblical view of deities intoan image somewhat consistent with radical monotheism Contraryto Heiserrsquos suggestion the creative act in and of itself does not set thecreator apart as an exclusive species Te same point also applies tothe issue Heiser raises concerning primogeniture In other words aman for instance may exist before both his children and his siblingsand though preeminence may render the person ldquouniquerdquo on somelevels prior existence would not in this or in any other case rendera being as ldquospecies-uniquerdquo rue the Bible speaks of gods separatefrom Israelrsquos primary deity as elohim a˙erimmdashthat is ldquoother godsrdquo(see Exodus 203 2313 Deuteronomy 57 614 etc) However as YairHoffman has observed ldquoA survey of the use of a˙erim [ldquootherrdquo] shows

38 Paul Sanders Te Provenance o Deuteronomy 32 (Leiden Brill 1996) 37039 Te term radical monotheism refers to the theological position that only one

divine being exists in the universe Te expression was popularized by ikva Frymer-Kensky In the Wake o the Goddesses Women Culture and the Biblical ransormationo Pagan Myth (New York Free Press 1992) 154

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1949

284 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

that when used attributively with regard to garments days messen-

gers and objects it clearly has a relative meaning something differ-ent yet o the same kind rdquo1048624 Terefore ldquothere is no reason to assumethat in the phrase elohim a˙erim the attribute has a more distinctivemeaningrdquo1048580 When all is said and done the biblical deities like Yah-weh himself were still gods

In addition contrary to Heiserrsquos assertion the simple fact that Elo-him possesses the power to strip the other deities of their immortalityin Psalm 82 does not indicate that these gods are of a different spe-cies than Elohim According to the Psalmistrsquos view Elohim is simplymore powerful than the other gods Analogies from the ancient NearEast illustrate the problematic nature of Heiserrsquos claim In the Babylo-nian story Enuma Elish for instance the primordial mother goddessiamat created the god Qingu as chief deity over iamatrsquos militaryforces As a result of his actions taken against the divine council thedeities of the assembly ldquobound [Qingu] and held him in front of Ea

[and they] imposed the penalty on him and cut off his bloodrdquo983044 Tefact that in Enuma Elish the council could strip Qingu of his immor-tality did not mean that the god Qingu was somehow of a different orlesser divine species In the Sumerian myth of Enlil and Ninlil Enlil(one of the ldquogreat godsrdquo of Mesopotamia) is brought to trial for havingraped the goddess Ninlil As Enlil returned to the city of Nippur hewas arrested by the assembly while walking through the temple court

Te trial commenced immediately In the myth the council pre-sented the verdict that ldquothe sex offender Enlil will leave the townrdquoAccordingly the myth reports that Enlil le Nippur headed towardthe netherworld In his assessment of the story Jacobsen points out

40 Yair Hoffman ldquoTe Conception of lsquoOther Godsrsquo in Deuteronomistic Literaturerdquoin Concepts o the Other in Near Eastern Religions ed Ilai Alon Ithamar Gruenwald andItamar Singer (Leiden Brill 1994) 107 emphasis added 41 Hoffman ldquoConception of Other Godsrdquo 107

42 As cited in Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia 261 43 For a summary of the myth see Gwendolyn Leick A Dictionary o Ancient NearEastern Mythology (London Routledge 1998) 47ndash48 for a translation see TorkildJacobsen Te Harps Tat Once Sumerian Poetry in ranslation (New Haven YaleUniversity Press 1987) 167ndash80 44 Jacobsen Harps 174

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 285

that Enlilrsquos descent to Hades may indicate that the high god in Meso-

potamian mythology was originally sentenced to death As notedby James Ackerman in his dissertation concerning Psalm 82 thesetypes of judgment scenes in which the council determines that godswill die like mortals carry important implications for interpreting thecultural background for the biblical text Contrary to Heiserrsquos inter-pretation none of these stories indicate that the dying gods were of adifferent species or order than the gods who issued the sentence

Near Eastern traditions oen place considerable emphasis on thedying-god motif In no sense however are these dying godsmdashevenwhen resurrectedmdashsomehow depicted as a lesser species Heiserrsquos con-fusion concerning the implications of a biblical statement that Godissued a judgment of death to the deities of the divine council illus-trates the fundamental need for biblical scholars to pursue Assyriol-ogy in connection with their efforts to interpret the Hebrew Bible

Also contrary to Heiserrsquos suggestion the punishment meted out

to usurpers in Near Eastern council stories never indicates that thecriminals derived from some sort of exceptional species Te storyof Athtar from ancient Canaan for instance presents the traditionof Athtarrsquos descent to the underworld following the deityrsquos ascensionto the throne of Baal Te details involved in Athtarrsquos story containimportant thematic elements depicted in ancient Near Eastern storiesof cosmic revolt Athtar seems to share some semblance with Baalrsquos

mortal enemy Mot or ldquoDeathrdquo into whom Baal himself descendsHence Hugh Page notes that Athtarrsquos ldquodescent to the underworld implies that on some level Athtar has placed himself in proxim-ity to or relationship with the only god that Baal proves incapable

45 Torkild Jacobsen ldquoAn Ancient Mesopotamian rial for Homiciderdquo in owardthe Image o ammuz and Other Essays on Mesopotamian History and Culture ed Wil-liam L Moran (Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1970) 207 first published inStudia Biblica et Orientalia vol 3 of Analecta Biblica et Orientalia XII (Rome Pontificio

Istituto Biblico 1959) 130ndash50 46 See James S Ackerman ldquoAn Exegetical Study of Psalm 82rdquo (PhD diss HarvardUniversity 1966) 186ndash93 47 For a recent survey of the issue which includes a survey of previous assessmentssee ryggve N D Mettinger Te Riddle o Resurrection ldquoDying and Rising Godsrdquo in the Ancient Near East (Stockholm Almqvist amp Wiksell 2001)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2149

286 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of defeatingrdquo Athtarrsquos assumption of the throne of Baal followed

by his descent to the underworld indicates that this portion of theBaal cycle from ancient Canaan fits the general category of the cosmic

revolt genre witnessed in texts such as Abraham 3 and Psalm 82

1 Kindly El the Compassionate answers

2 ldquoOne so small cannot race

3 with Baal cannot handle the lance

4 with Daganrsquos son when they test one anotherrdquo

5 Lady Athirat of the Sea answers 6 ldquoLet us enthrone Athtar the Strong

7 Let Athtar the Strong be kingrdquo

8 Ten Athtar the Strong

9 ascended the summit of Sapan

10 He sat upon the throne of Mightiest Baal

11 His feet would not reach its footstool

12 His head would not reach its top 13 Athtar the Strong answered

14 ldquoI cannot rule on the summit of Sapanrdquo

15 Athtar the Strong descended

16 He descended from the throne of Mightiest Baal

17 And he ruled over the underworld god of all of it

18 drew in barrels

19 drew in jars (KU 1649ndash67 translation)

Te fact that Athtar the Strong experienced a type of ldquodeathrdquo in which

he ldquoruled over the underworldrdquo following his descent from Baalrsquos

throne does not suggest that Athtar was a ldquobeing species-uniquerdquo from

the other deities any more than Inanna or Ishtar the Mesopotamian

goddesses who experienced a type of death in the underworld were of

a different species than the gods Ea Enki Marduk and so forth48 Hugh R Page Jr Te Myth o Cosmic Rebellion A Study o Its Reflexes in Ugaritic

and Biblical Literature (Leiden Brill 1996) 92 Pagersquos views concerning the Athtar mythhave been criticized by Gregorio del Olmo Lete ldquoIn Search of the Canaanite Luciferrdquo Aula Orientalis 19 (2001) 125ndash32

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 287

Still in his efforts to present Yahweh as a being species-unique

Heiser correctly draws attention to the other gods of the council whoare commanded to worship Yahweh In his analysis he focuses uponthe call given to the gods in Psalm 291ndash2 ldquoAscribe to Yahweh O sons ofGod ascribe to Yahweh glory and strength Ascribe to Yahweh the gloryof his name worship Yahweh in the splendor of holinessrdquo (as quotedon p 256) While Heiserrsquos observations certainly illustrate that biblicalauthors viewed their deity as uniquemdashthat is exceptionalmdashthroughout

Near Eastern tradition lesser gods regularly appear in a position inwhich they offer praise service and devotion to the higher gods of thecouncil Richard J Clifford explains that in the Phoenician view of theassembly ldquoas elsewhere in the ancient Near East the assemblies are pic-tured as subordinate to individual gods although the assemblyrsquos con-sent seems necessary for important decisionsrdquo Simply because ancienttextsmdashincluding the Biblemdashdepict the members of the assemblies asldquosubordinate to individual godsrdquo this in no way implies that the higher

deities somehow belonged to a separate species Ancient Near Easterntexts such as Mursilirsquos Hymn and Prayer to the Sun-goddess o Arinna (CH 376A) establish the fact that Near Eastern peoples believed thatgods of the same species paid homage to higher deities in a way compa-rable to the biblical view

You O Sun-goddess of Arinna are honored goddess Your

name is honored among names and your divinity is honoredamong gods Furthermore among the gods you are the mosthonored and the greatest Tere is no other god more honoredor greater than you You are the lord of just judgment Youcontrol the kingship of heaven and earth1048624

Holding the position ldquomost honoredrdquo among the gods did not estab-lish Arinna as species-unique Arinna was simply the god before

whom from the authorrsquos perspective the other gods would regularly49 Richard J Clifford ldquoPhoenician Religionrdquo Bulletin o the American Schools o

Oriental Research 279 (1990) 57 50 As cited in Itamar Singer Hittite Prayers (Atlanta Society of Biblical Literature2002) 51

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2349

288 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquofall downrdquo1048580 For the ancients the Near Eastern view of the divine

court clearly reflected or were expressed in terms of earthly realityTerefore just as the high king before whom other humans paid hom-age was still a human being so the god to whom other deities paidhomage was still a god matching in species For biblical authors Yah-weh stood at the head of the hierarchy in Israelite thought Yahwehwas unique as the God of gods but he was not unique in his divinityFrom a biblical perspective Yahweh even shared this divinity withhumanity

Humans as Teomorphic Beings

In his discussion concerning the biblical view regarding theomor-phic humans Peterson draws attention to Paulrsquos New estament ser-mon presented in Acts 1728ndash29

For in him we live and move and have our being as

certain also of your own poets have said For we are also hisoffspring

Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God we oughtnot to think that the Godhead is like unto gold or silver orstone graven by art and manrsquos device

Peterson in part argues for a biblical connection between God andhumanity based on the fact that ldquothe word rendered lsquooffspringrsquo by the

King James translators is the Greek genos which is cognate with theLatin genus and means lsquofamilyrsquo or lsquoracersquo or lsquokindrsquo or even and mostespecially interesting lsquodescendants of a common ancestorrsquo rdquo983044 ForLatter-day Saints human beings are literally the offspring of God andtherefore intrinsically theomorphic Part of the strength of Petersonrsquosessay lies in his recognition that like Latter-day Saints biblical authorsregularly blur the distinction between humanity and divine beings

Not only does Peterson draw attention to the prophetic interactionwith the council as support for his thesis but he also places consider-

51 Singer Hittite Prayers 51 52 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 542ndash43 53 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 289

able emphasis upon the deified dead in the Hebrew Bible and the early

Christian teaching regarding deification Heiser notwithstandingPetersonrsquos evidence rejects the idea that a genus equation of God and

humankind appears in the Bible

For his criticisms of Petersonrsquos views Heiser places considerable

weight on the notion that ldquothe concept of the image of God does not

advance the idea that there is a genus equation of God and human-

kind or that God was once a manrdquo (p 224) On some levels Heiserrsquos

point concerning the word tzelem or ldquoimagerdquo in Genesis 126ndash27is correct Concerning this controversial term Marc Z Brettler has

recently explained

Te word tzelem (ldquoimagerdquo) elsewhere always refers to a

physical representation For example the Book of Ezekiel

uses tzelem when it refers to ldquomen sculptured upon the walls

figures of Chaldeans drawn in vermilionrdquo (2314) or when it

accuses Israel of fornicating with ldquophallic imagesrdquo (1617) Teword oen refers to idols (eg Num 3352 Ezek 720 Amos

526 2 Chron 2317) It always signifies a concrete entity

rather than an abstract one Tis is not surprising since the

Bible (in contrast to most medieval philosophical traditions

both Jewish and Christian) oen depicts God in corporeal

terms

Genesis 126ndash27 suggests that Godrsquos physical likeness is similar to

humanityrsquos but Heiser is correct that the statement does not indicate

that biblical authors viewed humans as gods or that God himself was

once a human However many other texts from the Bible do present a

theomorphic view of humanity Peterson therefore is precisely correct

in stating that ldquothe Latter-day Saint understanding that humans are of

the same genus or species as God is thus clearly biblicalrdquo54 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509ndash28

55 Marc Z Brettler How to Read the Bible (Philadelphia Jewish Publication Society2005) 43ndash44 Hebrew word deleted 56 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 547

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2549

290 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Adam as a Divine Council Member

In addition to associating humanity with the tzelem of God theBible describes the first man as a deified member of the divine council

In the Eden story the Lord took advantage of the wet claylike soil and

ldquoformed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils

the breath of life and man became a living soulrdquo (Genesis 27) In an

important study concerning this imagery Walter Brueggemann has

shown that a biblical connection exists between being raised from the

dust and enthronement ldquoo be taken lsquofrom the dustrsquo means to be

elevated from obscurity to royal office and to return to dust means to

be deprived of that office and returned to obscurityrdquo Imagery such

as that witnessed in 1 Kings 162 supports Brueggemannrsquos interpreta-

tion ldquoForasmuch as I [God] exalted thee [Jehu] out of the dust and

made thee prince over my people Israel rdquo (1 Kings 162) Hence the

notion of the God raising man ldquofrom the dust of the earthrdquo in Genesis

27 in part suggests that Yahweh begins his creative activity by form-

ing a divine king According to Genesis 215 this divine king through

a type of imitatio dei would continue to perform the work of Yahweh

who ldquoplantedrdquo the garden ldquoAnd the Lord God took the man and put

him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep itrdquo In a simi-

lar fashion Mesopotamian kings such as Hammurapi glorified their

efforts through the use of creation and agricultural imageryI encircled [the wall] with a swamp I dug the Euphrates

as far as Sippar (and) made it reach a prosperous quay

I Hammu-rāpi who builds up the land caused Sippar

and Babylon to dwell in peaceful abodes forever What

from [primordial days] no one among the kings had done I

did in a grand fashion for the god Šamaš my lord

57 Walter Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestament-liche Wissenschaf 841 (1972) 1ndash18 58 Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo 2 59 Douglas Frayne Old Babylonian Period (2003ndash1595 BC) (oronto University oforonto Press 1990) 348ndash49

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 291

Te view presented in the Babylonian inscription on the wall

of Sippar reflects the common Near Eastern assumption featured inGenesis 2 of a God king participating in the act of creation from ldquopri-

mordial daysrdquo through structure1048624 As a king Hammurapi assumed

the same role filled by deities who created the universe by giving order

to preexistent chaos In its depiction of Adam as the primordial gar-

dener the Bible relies upon similar imagery

Manrsquos status as the archetypal gardener king in Genesis 2ndash3 con-

tains important parallels with Mesopotamian kingship theory1048580 Sev-eral examples of Mesopotamian iconography feature a depiction of the

tree (or plant) of life over which the king and priests appear pouring

libations In assessing the connection between Mesopotamian kings

and gardeners Geo Widengren cites these statements from the am-

muz text R IV 27 No I

A tamarisk which in the garden has no water to drink

Whose foliage on the plant sends forth no twig

A plant which they water no more in its pot

Whose roots are torn away

A herb which is in the garden has no water to drink

Among the flowers of the garden he sleeps

Among the flowers of the garden he is thrown

According to Widengren ldquothe ree of Life is watered by the kingwho pours out over it the Water of Life which he has in his possession

Te ree of Life constantly needs the Water of Life near which it is

growing in the garden of paradiserdquo983044 Te connection between king

and gardener was widely attested throughout ancient Mesopotamia

60 In his translation Frayne renders the Akkadian word szligi-a-tim as ldquothe pastrdquo Teinscription however clearly relies on creation imagery and I have therefore interpreted

szligiatim as ldquoprimordial daysrdquo in accordance with the information provided in Jeremy BlackAndrew George and Nicholas Postgate A Concise Dictionary o Akkadian (WiesbadenHarrassowitz 2000) 337 61 See Geo Widengren Te King and the ree o Lie in Ancient Near Eastern Reli- gion (Uppsala Uppsala Universitets Aringrsskri 1951) 62 Widengren King and the ree o Lie 15

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2749

292 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Tis portrayal of kingship appears in the birth legend of Sargon

wherein the monarch declaresAkki the waterscooper placed me as his gardenerWhen I was a gardener Ishtar was in love with meTe kingship I exercised during x + 5 years

Tese lines from the tale of Sargon the gardener whom the goddess Ishtarloved seem to provide an especially significant parallel with the biblical view presented in the story of Eden In the words of Nicholas Wyatt ldquotheman in his garden is a symbolic allusion to the king in his sanctuaryrdquo

One of the important connections between humanityrsquos enthrone-ment in the garden and later biblical traditions includes the anointingof an Israelite king in 1 Kings 128ndash40 at the Gihon Spring a rivernamed Gihon was one of the four rivers that flowed out of Eden andround the land of Cush (Genesis 213) Significantly the only otherexplicit reference to the Garden of Eden in the Hebrew Bible appears

in a context that addresses the link between kingship and divinity (seeEzekiel 282ndash13)

Concerning the attestation of biblical rituals that may preserveactual religious rites wherein Israelite kings assumed divinity Wyattargues that

the rituals which transform the status of the earthly kingremoving him from ldquomerely humanrdquo status to that of a sacralfigure to be couched in the form of a narrative about a godcarries with it the hint that the king himself is to be seen astransformed into a god Te enthronement of the king isthus his apotheosis

63 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoInterpreting the Creation and Fall Story in Genesis 2ndash3rdquo Zeit-schrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 931 (1981) 15 64 John van Seters has argued according to the Documentary Hypothesis that the

story of divine kingship in J derives from Babylonian influences and is therefore latepostexilic If P is in part a reaction to the J account then it is difficult to accept vanSetersrsquos dating see John van Seters ldquoTe Creation of Man and the Creation of the KingrdquoZeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 1013 (1989) 333ndash41 65 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinity Some Mythical and Ritual Aspects of WestSemitic Kingshiprdquo Ugarit-Forschungen 31 (1999) 857

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 293

In his exploration of biblical deification Wyatt refers to Psalm 198ndash10

as a possible ritual text transforming the king into a divine beingTe teaching of Yahweh is perfectrestoring the breastTe testimony of Yahweh is certainmaking wise the headTe precepts of Yahweh are uprightrejoicing the heart

Te commandment of Yahweh is puremaking bright the eyesTe speech of Yahweh is ritually purestanding for everTe judgments of Yahweh are truthTey are righteous all togethermore desirable than goldthan much pure goldmore sweet than honeyor the refined combYour servant is indeed illumined by themand in their observance is there great gain

Concerning this possible reference to ritual anointing Wyatt argues

It is true that there is no narrative statement about unc-

tion here oil is not even mentioned But only thus can thesuccessive blessings on various parts of the kingrsquos body beexplained For comparison we should consider the unction ofpriests in Exod 294ndash9 19ndash21 4012ndash5 and Lev 810ndash2 22ndash4where various parts of the priestrsquos body are anointed with oiland blood undoubtedly with some liturgical commentary onthe action such is now narrated in these passages providing

a suitable performative utteranceIf correct Wyattrsquos assessment of Israelite deification proves importantfor an analysis of Adam as divine king in the book of Genesis

66 Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinityrdquo 874ndash75

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2949

294 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

In Genesis chapter 2 Godrsquos initial creative act must be the creation

of man for as a divine king raised ldquofrom the dustrdquo man was specifi-cally formed to assist deity in the creation process God appears as agardener who causes to grow ldquoevery tree that is pleasant to the sightand good for foodrdquo (Genesis 29) Te account declares that the Lordplaced the man in the garden to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo his newly createdoasis (Genesis 215) As a gardener the Lord plants Eden as a gardenerthe Lord mixes the soil to form both man and beast As a gardener the

Lord creates man in his image to perform the work of a God Follow-ing his creation man assumes the role of divine gardenerFrom an ancient Near Eastern perspective the view of Adam as

divine gardener suggests that biblical authors viewed humanity asan earthly extension of the divine council According to the Edenaccount man was immortal (Genesis 217) man had received fromdeity the sacred ldquobreath of liferdquo (Genesis 27) man had been com-missioned to perform the work of a godmdashthat is to till and tend the

divine garden Terefore as an immortal gardener man was alreadyldquolike the godsrdquo prior to partaking of the forbidden fruit

In Mesopotamian myths for example the work of gardening wasassigned to lesser members of the divine council Hence the story ofAtrahasis opens with the following portrayal

When gods were man

Tey did forced labor they bore drudgeryGreat indeed was the drudgery of the godsTe forced labor was heavy the misery too muchTe seven() great Anunna-gods were burdeningTe Igigi-gods with forced labor

Like the account in Genesis the lesser gods of the divine council inAtrahasis were gardeners who did the laborious task of caring for the

canals trees and waterways that sustained the higher gods of the67 For additional examples of Yahweh portrayed in the role of gardener see Num-

bers 246 Psalm 10416 Isaiah 4414 68 Altrahasis II39 1ndash6 translation in Benjamin R Foster Beore the Muses An Anthol-ogy o Akkadian Literature (Bethesda MD CDL 1993) 1159

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 295

assembly Hence Adam as an immortal being clearly reflects the

position of the Igigi in Mesopotamian thought Te questions pre-sented to Job by Eliphaz regarding the primal human seem to share

this notion

Are you the firstborn of the human race

Were you brought forth before the hills

Have you listened in the council of God (Job 157ndash8 NRSV)

As Dexter Callender has observed concerning these questionsldquoTe allusion to the primal human in Job does not give us explicit

details concerning his incorporation into the sacred world It is clear

however that the idea is present in the reference that the primal human

lsquolistenedrsquo in the council of Godrdquo As a member of Godrsquos council man

held a stewardship to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo the deityrsquos garden (Genesis

215) According to the Genesis account when the man and woman

eat from the tree of knowledge God expels the humans from Edenand assigns the cherubim other traditional members of the divine

council to ldquokeeprdquo the garden (Genesis 324) Tis move may suggest

that in biblical thought ldquokeepingrdquo the garden is a task reserved for

members of the divine host As an immortal subordinate assigned an

important council task man however eventually appears in the Gen-

esis account as a being very much like the council deities mentioned

in Psalm 82 who receive the decree of death

I have said Ye are gods and all of you are children of the

most High

But ye shall die like men and fall like one of the princes

(Psalm 826ndash7)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou

shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thoushalt surely die (Genesis 217)

69 Dexter E Callender Jr Adam in Myth and History Ancient Israelite Perspectiveson the Primal Human (Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 2000) 212 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 749

272 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

earthrdquo (Abraham 41) it appears that Elder McConkie believed that

these Gods from the heavenly council included premortal humanso some extent therefore the title god is appropriately applied to the

premortal sons and daughters of Heavenly Father

Joseph Smithrsquos view of the divine council suggests that this assem-

bly of deities served a vital administrative role in Godrsquos plan of happi-

ness A journal entry recorded by William Clayton in 1845 provides

evidence for the Prophetrsquos teachings regarding this doctrine

It has been a doctrine taught by this church that we were inthe Grand Council amongst the Gods when the organization

of this world was contemplated and that the laws of govern-

ment were all made and sanctioned by all present and all the

ordinances and ceremonies decreed upon1048580

Significantly the Book of Abraham specifically notes that God ldquostood in

the midst ofrdquo these souls (Abraham 323) Tis reference to God stand-ing amongst divine beings in a heavenly council setting finds important

parallels with biblical tradition including Psalm 821 which refers to

God standing in the council and passing judgment

From an analysis of the legal material in the Hebrew Bible it

appears that in a traditional judicial setting judges sat while plain-

tiffs stood 1048580 Tis important distinction provides a significant clue for

interpreting Moses as judge in Exodus 1813ndash14And it came to pass on the morrow that Moses sat to judge

the people and the people stood by Moses from the morning

unto the evening And when Mosesrsquo father in law saw all that

he did to the people he said What is this thing thou doest to

the people why sittest thou thyself alone and all the people

stand by thee from morning unto even1048580

13 Words o Joseph Smith 84 n 10 14 Hans J Boecker Redeormen des Rechtslebens im Alten estament (NeukirchenNeukirchener Verlag 1964) 85ndash86 15 For additional examples of the practice of sitting for judgment see Judges 45Joel 312 Psalm 1225 Proverbs 208 Daniel 79ndash10

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 273

Biblical scholar Simon Parker has shown that the distinction

between sitting and standing in judicial settings also operates in the bib-lical view of the divine council1048580 Tese nuances were not unique to theWest Semitic world In Mesopotamia ldquoanybody who happened alongand had a mind to could lsquostandrsquomdashthat is participatemdashin the pu∆rum

[ie assembly]rdquo1048580 As Assyriologist Torkild Jacobsen explained theAkkadian words ldquouzuzzu lsquoto standrsquo and yašābu lsquoto sitrsquo are technicalterms for participating in the pu∆rumrdquo1048580 From a Near Eastern perspec-

tive these observations shed considerable light on passages such as Isa-iah 313 where Jehovah ldquostands up to plead a cause He rises to championpeoplesrdquo (Jewish Study Bible JSB)

Petersonrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 suggests that the text reflects thecouncil story depicted in the Book of Abraham Te fact that Psalm821 specifically states that ldquoGod stands in the divine councilrdquo sustainsPetersonrsquos thesis Peterson writes

We need not take Psalm 82rsquos portrayal of judgment andcondemnation within the divine council as literally accurate asrepresenting an actual historical event (although obviously itmight) any more than we are obliged to take as literally true thedepiction of Satan in Job 1ndash2 freely coming and going withinthe heavenly court and even placing wagers with God1048580

With its traditional council imagery Psalm 82 has intrigued biblical

scholars such as Parker who argued that the text originally describedYahwehrsquos rise to supremacy in the assembly9830441048624 Parker in part based hisassessment on the fact that Psalm 82 appears as a section of the Elohis-tic collection wherein the editor(s) reveal a strong propensity towardreplacing divine names such as Yahweh with Elohim

16 See for example 1 Kings 2219 21 Job 16 21 Daniel 79ndash10 see also Simon BParker ldquoTe Beginning of the Reign of GodmdashPsalm 82 as Myth and Liturgyrdquo Revue

Biblique 1024 (1995) 537 17 Torkild Jacobsen ldquoPrimitive Democracy in Ancient Mesopotamiardquo Journal oNear Eastern Studies 23 (1943) 164 18 See Jacobsen ldquoPrimitive Democracyrdquo 164 n 24 19 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 536 20 Parker ldquoBeginning of the Reign of Godrdquo 537

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 949

274 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Parker argued that verses one and five in Psalm 82 served as nar-

rative introductions to Yahwehrsquos council address delivered before hisfather Elyon the head of the council In his analysis Parker convinc-ingly illustrates that Yahweh would have originally appeared in Psalm82 as merely one of the assembled participants of deities ldquoHavingthought that the members of the council were all gods (and therefore justmdashand immortal) Yahweh now recognizes that being incorrigi-bly unjust they will perish like mortals fall like some human poten-taterdquo9830441048580 Parkerrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 works well with Petersonrsquos claimthat the text reflects the story of the grand council from the Books ofAbraham and Moses

In an important part of his critique concerning these issuesHeiser argues against the theory endorsed by biblical scholars such asParker and Mark S Smith that in its earliest stages Israelite religionoriginally perceived Yahweh as a son of El ldquoIn terms of an evaluationof the separateness of El and Yahwehrdquo writes Heiser ldquoLatter-day Saint

scholars have too blithely accepted the positions of Smith Parker andBarker All is not nearly as tidy as they proposerdquo (p 234) Heiser forexample maintains that rather than a separate divine father the Elyonor ldquoGod Most Highrdquo presented in Deuteronomy 328ndash9 is none otherthan Yahweh himself In this proposal Heiserrsquos view stands in directcontrast to Mark Smith who argues that ldquoearly on Yahweh is under-stood as Israelrsquos god in distinction to El Deuteronomy 328ndash9 casts

Yahweh in the role of one of the sons of El here called gtelyocircn Tispassage presents an order in which each deity received its own nationIsrael was the nation that Yahweh receivedrdquo983044983044

Te present form of Deuteronomy seems to support Heiserrsquos argu-ment Rather than a separate deity Elyon and Yahweh might appearas a single reference to the head God of the council In addition to thedivine allotment depicted in Deuteronomy 328 the idea of a series of

minor deities that Yahweh had assigned to govern the various nationsappears in Deuteronomy 419ndash20 Tese verses which discuss the

21 Parker ldquoBeginning of the Reign of Godrdquo 539ndash40 22 Mark S Smith Te Early History o God Yahweh and the Other Deities in AncientIsrael (Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2002) 32

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 275

allotment of the host of heaven to the nations of the world parallel

both the vocabulary and the ideology witnessed in 328ndash9 In Deuter-onomy 329 the author uses the same root hlk featured in 420mdashalbeitas a noun Deuteronomy 419ndash20 specifically identifies Yahweh as thedeity who gave each council deity his allotment

And when you look up to the sky and behold the sun and themoon and the stars the whole heavenly host you must not belured into bowing down to them or serving them Tese the

Lord your God allotted to other peoples everywhere underheaven but you the Lord took and brought out of Egypt thatiron blast furnace to be His very own people as is now thecase (Deuteronomy 419ndash20 Jewish Publication Society JPS)983044

Based upon this evidence Heiserrsquos assessment of the view fea-tured in the current form of Deuteronomy may be correct howeverHeiser ultimately fails to address important evidence recognized by

many contemporary biblical scholars that suggests that Israelite the-ology did in fact evolve in a manner consistent with the basic claimsof Parker and Smith983044 For example David Noel Freedman maintainsthat the combination ldquoYahweh Elohimrdquo or ldquoLord Godrdquo found in theearly chapters of Genesis probably derives from an earlier sentencename given the God of Israel namely ldquoYahweh Elrdquo or ldquoGod createsrdquo983044In a related assessment Mark Smith has argued

Te original god of Israel was El Tis reconstruction maybe inferred from two pieces of information First the name

23 Te Jewish Publication Society edition appears in Adele Berlin and Marc Z Brettlereds Te Jewish Study Bible anakh ranslation (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 24 Of course the fact that Deuteronomy 4 simply reflects the language of Deuter-onomy 32 does not automatically mean that both texts derive from the same author Teauthor of Deuteronomy 4 may have simply created his passages concerning Yahweh tointentionally reflect the language and ideology in Deuteronomy 32 in order to present

Yahweh as the chief council deity Tis very real possibility should be considered byHeiser in further research for an introduction to theological changes reflected through-out the book of Deuteronomy see especially Bernard M Levinson Deuteronomy and theHermeneutics o Legal Innovation (New York Oxford University Press 1997) 25 David Noel Freedman ldquoTe Name of the God of Mosesrdquo Journal o Biblical Lit-erature 793 (1960) 156

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1149

276 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of Israel is not a Yahwistic name with the divine element of

Yahweh but an El name with the element lt ēl Tis fact wouldsuggest that El was the original chief god of the group namedIsrael Second Genesis 4924ndash25 presents a series of El epi-thets separate from the mention of Yahweh in verse 18983044

A detailed response to all the evidence amassed by scholars who view a theological evolution in the Hebrew Bible was beyond thescope of Heiserrsquos essay However notwithstanding the probability that

Heiser is correct in linking Elyon with Yahweh in Deuteronomy thisclaim does not negate the likelihood that in ancient Israel Yahwehwas originally a son of Elyon

In the present form of the biblical text the term [gtElyocircn]is understood to be an epithet for Yahweh the God of IsraelIt is possible however as some have argued that the epithetmay conceal a reference to a separate deity possibly an oldergod with whom Yahweh came to be identified983044

LDS scholars have good reason to accept the historical views of schol-ars such as Parker and Smith

Psalm 82 as the Grand Council

Tough helpful to his analysis ultimately Petersonrsquos claims are

not dependent upon the legitimacy of a Parker Smith historical inter-pretation Petersonrsquos argument for interpreting Psalm 82 as a reflec-tion of the grand council story featured in modern revelation findssupport in Near Eastern tradition In the ancient Near East stories ofthe divine council typically begin with a crisis in which the head Godcalls together the gods of the council to resolve the dilemma Duringthe council a series of proposals are offered Finally a ldquosaviorrdquo steps

forward offering his services to the council Tis savior then receives26 Smith Early History o God 32

27 Eric E Elnes and Patrick D Miller ldquoElyonrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demonsin the Bible ed Karel van der oorn Bob Becking and Pieter W van der Horst (LeidenBrill 1995) 560

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 277

a commission to perform his redemptive role983044 Tis common Near

Eastern pattern is seen for example in the Mesopotamian story ofdivine kingship known as Enuma Elish983044 In this Babylonian myththe head god of the pantheon calls together the gods in a council toresolve a dilemma created by the goddess iamat Following a seriesof proposals Marduk the chief god of Babylon receives a commissionas savior Marduk agrees to perform the role of savior on the condi-tion that his father Ea the head god of the council grant Marduk allpower and glory Te same pattern appears in the Assyrian myth ofAnzu However in this version the god Ninurta agrees to serve ascouncil savior while allowing his father to retain his position withinthe council

Like Enuma Elish and Psalm 82 many of the council stories fromthe ancient Near East portray stories of cosmic revolt in which judg-ment is rendered against divine beings Tis pattern is familiar toLatter-day Saints through the council story provided in the Books of

Moses and Abraham (Moses 41ndash4 and Abraham 322ndash28) Althoughsometimes obscured the same pattern is reflected in council tradi-tions featured in the Hebrew Bible Te story of council crisis forexample appears in the Isaiah Apocalypse

On that day [Yahweh] will punishthe host of heaven in heavenand on earth the kings of the earth (Isaiah 2421 NRSV)

Similar language emerges in Isaiah 271

On that day [Yahweh]with his cruel and great and strong swordwill punish Leviathan the fleeing serpent (NRSV)

28 Tis summary is based upon the pattern identified by Simon B Parker ldquoCoun-cilrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 391ndash98 for a consideration of the divine coun-

cil stories within the Bible as ldquotype scenesrdquo see David M Fleming ldquoTe Divine Councilas ype Scene in the Hebrew Biblerdquo (PhD diss Te Southern Baptist Teological Semi-nary 1989) 29 For an English translation of Enuma Elish see Stephanie Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia Creation the Flood Gilgamesh and Others (New York Oxford UniversityPress 1989) 228ndash77

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1349

278 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

For Latter-day Saints these traditions preserved in texts such as Enuma

Elish the book of Isaiah and Psalm 82 provide a type of retellingmdashalbeit sometimes hiddenmdashof the primordial events concerning thegrand council described in modern revelation

In the ancient Near East members of the divine council oenappear to receive a type of reprimand suggestive of the punishmentgiven Lucifer in LDS scripture

Because that Satan rebelled against me and sought to destroy

the agency of man which I the Lord God had given himand also that I should give unto him mine own power by thepower of mine Only Begotten I caused that he should be castdown And he became Satan yea even the devil the father ofall lies to deceive and to blind men and to lead them captiveat his will even as many as would not hearken unto my voice(Moses 43ndash4)

With the words ldquoHere am I send merdquo Latter-day Saints believeJesus Christ stepped forward in the council crisis and volunteered tosave humanity from the challenges associated with mortal probation(Abraham 327) According to the council story depicted in the Bookof Abraham Lucifer ldquowas angry and kept not his first estate and atthat day many followed aer himrdquo (Abraham 328) In his analysisPeterson does well to draw attention to the fact that Isaiahrsquos refer-

ence to ldquoLucifer son of the morningrdquo in Isaiah 1412 ldquodraws us againinto the astronomical imagery oen connected with the divine assem-blyrdquo1048624 In his own studies Heiser has convincingly argued for a similarposition

Ugaritic regularly refers to heavenly beings as p∆r kkbm (the ldquocongregation of the starsrdquo) language corresponding with כוכ י קר (ldquomorning starsrdquo in parallelism with the ldquosons of

Godrdquo in Job 387) and (the ldquostars of Godrdquo Isa 1413)כוכ י לAside from the context of these references each of whichclearly points to personal beings not astronomical phenom-

30 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 533

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 279

ena it is significant that in the entire ancient near eastern lit-

erary record El is never identified with a heavenly body Tusldquothe stars of Elrdquo points to created beings with divine status1048580

For Latter-day Saints recent archaeological and textual discoverieslike those referred to by Heiser are especially intriguing However asPeterson argues in the quotation provided above (p 273) Latter-daySaints do not need the Bible to express a precise parallel with modernrevelation in order to find support for LDS theology

Te fact that texts such as Psalm 82 somewhat parallel Latter-daySaint teachings is sufficient to argue that a more exact version of thegrand council story such as is witnessed in modern revelation mayhave existed in antiquity However notwithstanding his basic agree-ment with Peterson concerning the fundamental role assumed by thecouncil of deities in the Hebrew Bible Heiser ultimately departs fromPetersonrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 suggesting that the biblical view of

the council contains eight fundamental points that conflict with LDStheology

Heiserrsquos Sixteen Points

Heiser provides a list of sixteen arguments outlining his positionregarding Psalm 82 and the divine council He divides these into eightpoints ldquowith which many evangelicals would probably disagree and

with which many Latter-day Saints would likely agreerdquo followed byeight points ldquowith which many Latter-day Saints would probably dis-agree and with which many evangelicals would likely agreerdquo (pp 222ndash24) Heiserrsquos perspectives regarding Psalm 82 are clearly sound Teyinclude such issues as the inadequacy of the term monotheism as areference to Israelite theology and the biblical use of the word elohim as a literal reference to gods rather than human judges While Heiseris certainly correct in suggesting that his first eight views would proveproblematic for many evangelicals but not for most Mormons Heiserrsquoslist of eight statements on Psalm 82 that he assumes many Latter-day

31 Michael S Heiser ldquoDeuteronomy 328 and the Sons of Godrdquo 15 for an electronic version see thedivinecouncilcomD32BibSacpdf (accessed 8 February 2007)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1549

280 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Saints would disagree with indicates a basic lack of exposure to Latter-

day Saint thoughtHeiser is well versed in biblical studies His work has contrib-uted important insights toward a scholarly view of the essential roleassumed by the divine council in Old estament theology but he isnot a Latter-day Saint However Heiser does not consider in his cri-tique the possibility that most Latter-day Saints including Petersondo not believe that the biblical view of the council mirrors preciselywhat Latter-day Saints accept through modern revelation JosephSmithrsquos revelations proclaim our day as the dispensation of the ful-ness of times ldquoaccording to that which was ordained in the midst ofthe Council of the Eternal God of all other gods before this world wasrdquo(DampC 12132) For Latter-day Saints this final dispensation representsthe time decreed by God and his council in which ldquothose things whichnever have been revealed from the foundation of the world but havebeen kept hid from the wise and prudent shall be revealed unto babes

and sucklings in this the dispensation of the fulness of timesrdquo (DampC12818) Terefore Latter-day Saint scholars acknowledge that an LDSunderstanding of the council does not precisely mirror the perspec-tives manifested in the Bible Tat having been said most Latter-daySaints certainly accept the view advocated by Peterson that the bib-lical perspective of the heavenly council of deities is in greater har-mony with LDS belief than with any other contemporary Christian

tradition A recognition that the Bible though not flawless is inspiredof God allows Latter-day Saints to comfortably engage the views putforth by biblical scholars such as Heiser even when those observa-tions prove threatening to our evangelical counterparts

If certain biblical authors for example did in fact believe asHeiser seems to correctly suggest that Yahweh was ldquonot lsquobirthedrsquointo existence by the lsquoolden godsrsquo described in Ugaritic textsrdquo (p 223)Latter-day Saints would have no problem simply accepting the obser- vation as a biblical view Similarly even though Heiser assumes thatmany Mormons would disagree with his opinion that the Bible pre-sents Yahweh the God of Israel as ldquoontologically uniquerdquo (p 223) inreality many Latter-day Saints recognize that this is precisely the case

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 281

Even within LDS theology God the Father stands out as ontologically

unique inasmuch as he created the spirits of all humanity Modernrevelation describes God with the words ldquofrom eternity to eternity Heis the same and His years never failrdquo (DampC 764)

Yahwehrsquos Ontological Uniqueness

In addition to the evidence Heiser presents for what he calls Yah-wehrsquos ontological uniqueness the name Yahweh itself appears vocal-

ized in the Hebrew Bible as a finite Hiphil verb form Te vocalizationof YHWH as ldquoYahwehrdquo carries a specific nuance since ldquoHebrew gram-mars traditionally represent the Hiphil stem as the causative of the Qal

stemrdquo983044 Frank Moore Cross explains that ldquothe accumulated evidence strongly supports the view that the name Yahweh is a causativeimperfect of the Canaanite-Proto-Hebrew verb hwy lsquoto bersquo rdquo Tere-fore the divine name Yahweh according to this view literally means

ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procreatesrdquo One of the inter-esting points to consider concerning the biblical title Yahweh Sabaoth or ldquoLord of Hostsrdquo is that typically in Hebrew proper names do notappear bound to a genitive nounmdashthat is ldquoJohn of Hostsrdquo or ldquoMary ofEarthrdquo etc Since a proper name cannot traditionally function as abound form in a construct chain Cross interprets the King James titleldquoLord of Hostsrdquo as ldquo lsquohe creates the (divine) hostsrsquo rdquo If correct this

view would lend support to Heiserrsquos argument that ldquoYahweh is said32 Bruce K Waltke and M OrsquoConnor An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax

(Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 1990) 433 33 Frank Moore Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge Harvard Uni- versity Press 1973) 65 34 ldquoA proper noun cannot as a rule be followed by a genitiverdquo Paul Jouumlon A Gram-mar o Biblical Hebrew trans and rev Muraoka (Rome Editrice Pontificio IstitutoBiblico 2000) 2481 Admittedly however textual evidence shows that the rule need notapply to divine names see J A Emerton ldquoNew Light on Israelite Religion Te Implica-

tions of the Inscriptions from Kunti llet lsquoAjrudrdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wis-senschaf 94 (1982) 12ndash13 and especially John H Choi ldquoResheph and YHWH IacuteĔBĀlt Ocirc rdquoVetus estamentum 54 (2004) 17ndash28 I offer this assessment of the title Yahweh Sabaothwhich reflects the views of scholars such as David Noel Freedman and Frank MooreCross as merely an intriguing possibility 35 Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic 65 emphasis added

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1749

282 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo (p 250)

Heiser incorrectly assumes that this apparent biblical teaching con-cerning Yahwehrsquos uniqueness among the gods is not inconsistent withLDS theology

Tough Latter-day Saints view God the Father and Jesus Christas two separate divine beings for the Saints the biblical titles associ-ated with these deities are clearly interchangeable Latter-day Saintshave no problem therefore in associating God the Father with thetitle Yahwehmdashthat is ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procre-atesrdquo Te 1916 official declaration presented by the First Presidency ofthe church states ldquoGod the Eternal Father whom we designate by theexalted name-title Elohim is the literal Parent of our Lord and SaviorJesus Christ and of the spirits of the human racerdquo Clearly howeverthe First Presidencyrsquos move toward designating God the Father as Elo-him and Jesus the Son as Jehovah was primarily a move by churchleaders to create uniformity in Latter-day Saint expression In a recent

Ensign article Keith Meservy observed that ldquoin at least three Old es-tament passages it appears that L983151983154983140 [ie Jehovah] applies to Heav-enly Father not Jesus Christ Ps 1101 Ps 27 Isa 5310rdquo No doubtfor many Latter-day Saints this estimate offered by Meservy couldbe greatly augmented LDS teachings therefore do not preclude theontological uniqueness of God the Father that Heiser witnesses in theHebrew Bible

Yahweh as a Being ldquoSpecies-Uniquerdquo

Certainly Heiser is justified in suggesting that the gods of thedivine council appear inferior to Israelrsquos deity He uses this correctobservation however to build an argument that Israelrsquos God wastherefore somehow ldquospecies-uniquerdquo (p 250) In his discussion con-cerning the biblical evidence for Yahweh being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo

Heiser bases his interpretation on five points of evidence (1) ldquoYahweh36 ldquoTe Father and the Son A Doctrinal Exposition by the First Presidency and the

welverdquo as cited in Messages o the First Presidency o the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints ed James R Clark (Salt Lake City Bookcra 1971) 526 emphasis added 37 Keith H Meservy ldquoLORD = Jehovahrdquo Ensign June 2002 29 n 3

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 283

is said to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo

(2) ldquoYahweh was considered pre-existent to all godsrdquo (3) Yahweh hasthe power to strip the other elohim of their immortality (4) Yahwehalone is referred to in the Bible as ha-elohim and (5) ldquothe other godsare commanded to worship Yahwehrdquo (see pp 250ndash57) Tough eachof Heiserrsquos five points of evidence do in fact appear in the Bible con-trary to Heiserrsquos suggestion none of these observations establishesYahweh as being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo In the Bible Yahweh is the God ofgods but the biblical gods were still biblical gods As Paul Sanders hasexplained according to the Deuteronomic vision ldquothe [Sons of Goddescribed in Deuteronomy 328] are relatively independent they havetheir own dominions like YHWHrdquo

Notwithstanding his acceptance of the importance of the divinecouncil of deities in biblical theology Heiserrsquos critique suffers in partthrough his effort to define Israelrsquos deity as a being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo(p 250) He is correct in drawing attention to the fact that biblical

authors viewed their deity as exceptionally powerful in the councilldquoFor the Lord your God is God of godsrdquo proclaims Deuteronomy 1017ldquoand Lord of lordsrdquo Unfortunately however in identifying Yahweh asa being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo Heiser forces the biblical view of deities intoan image somewhat consistent with radical monotheism Contraryto Heiserrsquos suggestion the creative act in and of itself does not set thecreator apart as an exclusive species Te same point also applies tothe issue Heiser raises concerning primogeniture In other words aman for instance may exist before both his children and his siblingsand though preeminence may render the person ldquouniquerdquo on somelevels prior existence would not in this or in any other case rendera being as ldquospecies-uniquerdquo rue the Bible speaks of gods separatefrom Israelrsquos primary deity as elohim a˙erimmdashthat is ldquoother godsrdquo(see Exodus 203 2313 Deuteronomy 57 614 etc) However as YairHoffman has observed ldquoA survey of the use of a˙erim [ldquootherrdquo] shows

38 Paul Sanders Te Provenance o Deuteronomy 32 (Leiden Brill 1996) 37039 Te term radical monotheism refers to the theological position that only one

divine being exists in the universe Te expression was popularized by ikva Frymer-Kensky In the Wake o the Goddesses Women Culture and the Biblical ransormationo Pagan Myth (New York Free Press 1992) 154

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1949

284 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

that when used attributively with regard to garments days messen-

gers and objects it clearly has a relative meaning something differ-ent yet o the same kind rdquo1048624 Terefore ldquothere is no reason to assumethat in the phrase elohim a˙erim the attribute has a more distinctivemeaningrdquo1048580 When all is said and done the biblical deities like Yah-weh himself were still gods

In addition contrary to Heiserrsquos assertion the simple fact that Elo-him possesses the power to strip the other deities of their immortalityin Psalm 82 does not indicate that these gods are of a different spe-cies than Elohim According to the Psalmistrsquos view Elohim is simplymore powerful than the other gods Analogies from the ancient NearEast illustrate the problematic nature of Heiserrsquos claim In the Babylo-nian story Enuma Elish for instance the primordial mother goddessiamat created the god Qingu as chief deity over iamatrsquos militaryforces As a result of his actions taken against the divine council thedeities of the assembly ldquobound [Qingu] and held him in front of Ea

[and they] imposed the penalty on him and cut off his bloodrdquo983044 Tefact that in Enuma Elish the council could strip Qingu of his immor-tality did not mean that the god Qingu was somehow of a different orlesser divine species In the Sumerian myth of Enlil and Ninlil Enlil(one of the ldquogreat godsrdquo of Mesopotamia) is brought to trial for havingraped the goddess Ninlil As Enlil returned to the city of Nippur hewas arrested by the assembly while walking through the temple court

Te trial commenced immediately In the myth the council pre-sented the verdict that ldquothe sex offender Enlil will leave the townrdquoAccordingly the myth reports that Enlil le Nippur headed towardthe netherworld In his assessment of the story Jacobsen points out

40 Yair Hoffman ldquoTe Conception of lsquoOther Godsrsquo in Deuteronomistic Literaturerdquoin Concepts o the Other in Near Eastern Religions ed Ilai Alon Ithamar Gruenwald andItamar Singer (Leiden Brill 1994) 107 emphasis added 41 Hoffman ldquoConception of Other Godsrdquo 107

42 As cited in Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia 261 43 For a summary of the myth see Gwendolyn Leick A Dictionary o Ancient NearEastern Mythology (London Routledge 1998) 47ndash48 for a translation see TorkildJacobsen Te Harps Tat Once Sumerian Poetry in ranslation (New Haven YaleUniversity Press 1987) 167ndash80 44 Jacobsen Harps 174

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 285

that Enlilrsquos descent to Hades may indicate that the high god in Meso-

potamian mythology was originally sentenced to death As notedby James Ackerman in his dissertation concerning Psalm 82 thesetypes of judgment scenes in which the council determines that godswill die like mortals carry important implications for interpreting thecultural background for the biblical text Contrary to Heiserrsquos inter-pretation none of these stories indicate that the dying gods were of adifferent species or order than the gods who issued the sentence

Near Eastern traditions oen place considerable emphasis on thedying-god motif In no sense however are these dying godsmdashevenwhen resurrectedmdashsomehow depicted as a lesser species Heiserrsquos con-fusion concerning the implications of a biblical statement that Godissued a judgment of death to the deities of the divine council illus-trates the fundamental need for biblical scholars to pursue Assyriol-ogy in connection with their efforts to interpret the Hebrew Bible

Also contrary to Heiserrsquos suggestion the punishment meted out

to usurpers in Near Eastern council stories never indicates that thecriminals derived from some sort of exceptional species Te storyof Athtar from ancient Canaan for instance presents the traditionof Athtarrsquos descent to the underworld following the deityrsquos ascensionto the throne of Baal Te details involved in Athtarrsquos story containimportant thematic elements depicted in ancient Near Eastern storiesof cosmic revolt Athtar seems to share some semblance with Baalrsquos

mortal enemy Mot or ldquoDeathrdquo into whom Baal himself descendsHence Hugh Page notes that Athtarrsquos ldquodescent to the underworld implies that on some level Athtar has placed himself in proxim-ity to or relationship with the only god that Baal proves incapable

45 Torkild Jacobsen ldquoAn Ancient Mesopotamian rial for Homiciderdquo in owardthe Image o ammuz and Other Essays on Mesopotamian History and Culture ed Wil-liam L Moran (Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1970) 207 first published inStudia Biblica et Orientalia vol 3 of Analecta Biblica et Orientalia XII (Rome Pontificio

Istituto Biblico 1959) 130ndash50 46 See James S Ackerman ldquoAn Exegetical Study of Psalm 82rdquo (PhD diss HarvardUniversity 1966) 186ndash93 47 For a recent survey of the issue which includes a survey of previous assessmentssee ryggve N D Mettinger Te Riddle o Resurrection ldquoDying and Rising Godsrdquo in the Ancient Near East (Stockholm Almqvist amp Wiksell 2001)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2149

286 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of defeatingrdquo Athtarrsquos assumption of the throne of Baal followed

by his descent to the underworld indicates that this portion of theBaal cycle from ancient Canaan fits the general category of the cosmic

revolt genre witnessed in texts such as Abraham 3 and Psalm 82

1 Kindly El the Compassionate answers

2 ldquoOne so small cannot race

3 with Baal cannot handle the lance

4 with Daganrsquos son when they test one anotherrdquo

5 Lady Athirat of the Sea answers 6 ldquoLet us enthrone Athtar the Strong

7 Let Athtar the Strong be kingrdquo

8 Ten Athtar the Strong

9 ascended the summit of Sapan

10 He sat upon the throne of Mightiest Baal

11 His feet would not reach its footstool

12 His head would not reach its top 13 Athtar the Strong answered

14 ldquoI cannot rule on the summit of Sapanrdquo

15 Athtar the Strong descended

16 He descended from the throne of Mightiest Baal

17 And he ruled over the underworld god of all of it

18 drew in barrels

19 drew in jars (KU 1649ndash67 translation)

Te fact that Athtar the Strong experienced a type of ldquodeathrdquo in which

he ldquoruled over the underworldrdquo following his descent from Baalrsquos

throne does not suggest that Athtar was a ldquobeing species-uniquerdquo from

the other deities any more than Inanna or Ishtar the Mesopotamian

goddesses who experienced a type of death in the underworld were of

a different species than the gods Ea Enki Marduk and so forth48 Hugh R Page Jr Te Myth o Cosmic Rebellion A Study o Its Reflexes in Ugaritic

and Biblical Literature (Leiden Brill 1996) 92 Pagersquos views concerning the Athtar mythhave been criticized by Gregorio del Olmo Lete ldquoIn Search of the Canaanite Luciferrdquo Aula Orientalis 19 (2001) 125ndash32

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 287

Still in his efforts to present Yahweh as a being species-unique

Heiser correctly draws attention to the other gods of the council whoare commanded to worship Yahweh In his analysis he focuses uponthe call given to the gods in Psalm 291ndash2 ldquoAscribe to Yahweh O sons ofGod ascribe to Yahweh glory and strength Ascribe to Yahweh the gloryof his name worship Yahweh in the splendor of holinessrdquo (as quotedon p 256) While Heiserrsquos observations certainly illustrate that biblicalauthors viewed their deity as uniquemdashthat is exceptionalmdashthroughout

Near Eastern tradition lesser gods regularly appear in a position inwhich they offer praise service and devotion to the higher gods of thecouncil Richard J Clifford explains that in the Phoenician view of theassembly ldquoas elsewhere in the ancient Near East the assemblies are pic-tured as subordinate to individual gods although the assemblyrsquos con-sent seems necessary for important decisionsrdquo Simply because ancienttextsmdashincluding the Biblemdashdepict the members of the assemblies asldquosubordinate to individual godsrdquo this in no way implies that the higher

deities somehow belonged to a separate species Ancient Near Easterntexts such as Mursilirsquos Hymn and Prayer to the Sun-goddess o Arinna (CH 376A) establish the fact that Near Eastern peoples believed thatgods of the same species paid homage to higher deities in a way compa-rable to the biblical view

You O Sun-goddess of Arinna are honored goddess Your

name is honored among names and your divinity is honoredamong gods Furthermore among the gods you are the mosthonored and the greatest Tere is no other god more honoredor greater than you You are the lord of just judgment Youcontrol the kingship of heaven and earth1048624

Holding the position ldquomost honoredrdquo among the gods did not estab-lish Arinna as species-unique Arinna was simply the god before

whom from the authorrsquos perspective the other gods would regularly49 Richard J Clifford ldquoPhoenician Religionrdquo Bulletin o the American Schools o

Oriental Research 279 (1990) 57 50 As cited in Itamar Singer Hittite Prayers (Atlanta Society of Biblical Literature2002) 51

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2349

288 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquofall downrdquo1048580 For the ancients the Near Eastern view of the divine

court clearly reflected or were expressed in terms of earthly realityTerefore just as the high king before whom other humans paid hom-age was still a human being so the god to whom other deities paidhomage was still a god matching in species For biblical authors Yah-weh stood at the head of the hierarchy in Israelite thought Yahwehwas unique as the God of gods but he was not unique in his divinityFrom a biblical perspective Yahweh even shared this divinity withhumanity

Humans as Teomorphic Beings

In his discussion concerning the biblical view regarding theomor-phic humans Peterson draws attention to Paulrsquos New estament ser-mon presented in Acts 1728ndash29

For in him we live and move and have our being as

certain also of your own poets have said For we are also hisoffspring

Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God we oughtnot to think that the Godhead is like unto gold or silver orstone graven by art and manrsquos device

Peterson in part argues for a biblical connection between God andhumanity based on the fact that ldquothe word rendered lsquooffspringrsquo by the

King James translators is the Greek genos which is cognate with theLatin genus and means lsquofamilyrsquo or lsquoracersquo or lsquokindrsquo or even and mostespecially interesting lsquodescendants of a common ancestorrsquo rdquo983044 ForLatter-day Saints human beings are literally the offspring of God andtherefore intrinsically theomorphic Part of the strength of Petersonrsquosessay lies in his recognition that like Latter-day Saints biblical authorsregularly blur the distinction between humanity and divine beings

Not only does Peterson draw attention to the prophetic interactionwith the council as support for his thesis but he also places consider-

51 Singer Hittite Prayers 51 52 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 542ndash43 53 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 289

able emphasis upon the deified dead in the Hebrew Bible and the early

Christian teaching regarding deification Heiser notwithstandingPetersonrsquos evidence rejects the idea that a genus equation of God and

humankind appears in the Bible

For his criticisms of Petersonrsquos views Heiser places considerable

weight on the notion that ldquothe concept of the image of God does not

advance the idea that there is a genus equation of God and human-

kind or that God was once a manrdquo (p 224) On some levels Heiserrsquos

point concerning the word tzelem or ldquoimagerdquo in Genesis 126ndash27is correct Concerning this controversial term Marc Z Brettler has

recently explained

Te word tzelem (ldquoimagerdquo) elsewhere always refers to a

physical representation For example the Book of Ezekiel

uses tzelem when it refers to ldquomen sculptured upon the walls

figures of Chaldeans drawn in vermilionrdquo (2314) or when it

accuses Israel of fornicating with ldquophallic imagesrdquo (1617) Teword oen refers to idols (eg Num 3352 Ezek 720 Amos

526 2 Chron 2317) It always signifies a concrete entity

rather than an abstract one Tis is not surprising since the

Bible (in contrast to most medieval philosophical traditions

both Jewish and Christian) oen depicts God in corporeal

terms

Genesis 126ndash27 suggests that Godrsquos physical likeness is similar to

humanityrsquos but Heiser is correct that the statement does not indicate

that biblical authors viewed humans as gods or that God himself was

once a human However many other texts from the Bible do present a

theomorphic view of humanity Peterson therefore is precisely correct

in stating that ldquothe Latter-day Saint understanding that humans are of

the same genus or species as God is thus clearly biblicalrdquo54 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509ndash28

55 Marc Z Brettler How to Read the Bible (Philadelphia Jewish Publication Society2005) 43ndash44 Hebrew word deleted 56 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 547

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2549

290 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Adam as a Divine Council Member

In addition to associating humanity with the tzelem of God theBible describes the first man as a deified member of the divine council

In the Eden story the Lord took advantage of the wet claylike soil and

ldquoformed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils

the breath of life and man became a living soulrdquo (Genesis 27) In an

important study concerning this imagery Walter Brueggemann has

shown that a biblical connection exists between being raised from the

dust and enthronement ldquoo be taken lsquofrom the dustrsquo means to be

elevated from obscurity to royal office and to return to dust means to

be deprived of that office and returned to obscurityrdquo Imagery such

as that witnessed in 1 Kings 162 supports Brueggemannrsquos interpreta-

tion ldquoForasmuch as I [God] exalted thee [Jehu] out of the dust and

made thee prince over my people Israel rdquo (1 Kings 162) Hence the

notion of the God raising man ldquofrom the dust of the earthrdquo in Genesis

27 in part suggests that Yahweh begins his creative activity by form-

ing a divine king According to Genesis 215 this divine king through

a type of imitatio dei would continue to perform the work of Yahweh

who ldquoplantedrdquo the garden ldquoAnd the Lord God took the man and put

him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep itrdquo In a simi-

lar fashion Mesopotamian kings such as Hammurapi glorified their

efforts through the use of creation and agricultural imageryI encircled [the wall] with a swamp I dug the Euphrates

as far as Sippar (and) made it reach a prosperous quay

I Hammu-rāpi who builds up the land caused Sippar

and Babylon to dwell in peaceful abodes forever What

from [primordial days] no one among the kings had done I

did in a grand fashion for the god Šamaš my lord

57 Walter Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestament-liche Wissenschaf 841 (1972) 1ndash18 58 Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo 2 59 Douglas Frayne Old Babylonian Period (2003ndash1595 BC) (oronto University oforonto Press 1990) 348ndash49

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 291

Te view presented in the Babylonian inscription on the wall

of Sippar reflects the common Near Eastern assumption featured inGenesis 2 of a God king participating in the act of creation from ldquopri-

mordial daysrdquo through structure1048624 As a king Hammurapi assumed

the same role filled by deities who created the universe by giving order

to preexistent chaos In its depiction of Adam as the primordial gar-

dener the Bible relies upon similar imagery

Manrsquos status as the archetypal gardener king in Genesis 2ndash3 con-

tains important parallels with Mesopotamian kingship theory1048580 Sev-eral examples of Mesopotamian iconography feature a depiction of the

tree (or plant) of life over which the king and priests appear pouring

libations In assessing the connection between Mesopotamian kings

and gardeners Geo Widengren cites these statements from the am-

muz text R IV 27 No I

A tamarisk which in the garden has no water to drink

Whose foliage on the plant sends forth no twig

A plant which they water no more in its pot

Whose roots are torn away

A herb which is in the garden has no water to drink

Among the flowers of the garden he sleeps

Among the flowers of the garden he is thrown

According to Widengren ldquothe ree of Life is watered by the kingwho pours out over it the Water of Life which he has in his possession

Te ree of Life constantly needs the Water of Life near which it is

growing in the garden of paradiserdquo983044 Te connection between king

and gardener was widely attested throughout ancient Mesopotamia

60 In his translation Frayne renders the Akkadian word szligi-a-tim as ldquothe pastrdquo Teinscription however clearly relies on creation imagery and I have therefore interpreted

szligiatim as ldquoprimordial daysrdquo in accordance with the information provided in Jeremy BlackAndrew George and Nicholas Postgate A Concise Dictionary o Akkadian (WiesbadenHarrassowitz 2000) 337 61 See Geo Widengren Te King and the ree o Lie in Ancient Near Eastern Reli- gion (Uppsala Uppsala Universitets Aringrsskri 1951) 62 Widengren King and the ree o Lie 15

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2749

292 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Tis portrayal of kingship appears in the birth legend of Sargon

wherein the monarch declaresAkki the waterscooper placed me as his gardenerWhen I was a gardener Ishtar was in love with meTe kingship I exercised during x + 5 years

Tese lines from the tale of Sargon the gardener whom the goddess Ishtarloved seem to provide an especially significant parallel with the biblical view presented in the story of Eden In the words of Nicholas Wyatt ldquotheman in his garden is a symbolic allusion to the king in his sanctuaryrdquo

One of the important connections between humanityrsquos enthrone-ment in the garden and later biblical traditions includes the anointingof an Israelite king in 1 Kings 128ndash40 at the Gihon Spring a rivernamed Gihon was one of the four rivers that flowed out of Eden andround the land of Cush (Genesis 213) Significantly the only otherexplicit reference to the Garden of Eden in the Hebrew Bible appears

in a context that addresses the link between kingship and divinity (seeEzekiel 282ndash13)

Concerning the attestation of biblical rituals that may preserveactual religious rites wherein Israelite kings assumed divinity Wyattargues that

the rituals which transform the status of the earthly kingremoving him from ldquomerely humanrdquo status to that of a sacralfigure to be couched in the form of a narrative about a godcarries with it the hint that the king himself is to be seen astransformed into a god Te enthronement of the king isthus his apotheosis

63 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoInterpreting the Creation and Fall Story in Genesis 2ndash3rdquo Zeit-schrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 931 (1981) 15 64 John van Seters has argued according to the Documentary Hypothesis that the

story of divine kingship in J derives from Babylonian influences and is therefore latepostexilic If P is in part a reaction to the J account then it is difficult to accept vanSetersrsquos dating see John van Seters ldquoTe Creation of Man and the Creation of the KingrdquoZeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 1013 (1989) 333ndash41 65 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinity Some Mythical and Ritual Aspects of WestSemitic Kingshiprdquo Ugarit-Forschungen 31 (1999) 857

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 293

In his exploration of biblical deification Wyatt refers to Psalm 198ndash10

as a possible ritual text transforming the king into a divine beingTe teaching of Yahweh is perfectrestoring the breastTe testimony of Yahweh is certainmaking wise the headTe precepts of Yahweh are uprightrejoicing the heart

Te commandment of Yahweh is puremaking bright the eyesTe speech of Yahweh is ritually purestanding for everTe judgments of Yahweh are truthTey are righteous all togethermore desirable than goldthan much pure goldmore sweet than honeyor the refined combYour servant is indeed illumined by themand in their observance is there great gain

Concerning this possible reference to ritual anointing Wyatt argues

It is true that there is no narrative statement about unc-

tion here oil is not even mentioned But only thus can thesuccessive blessings on various parts of the kingrsquos body beexplained For comparison we should consider the unction ofpriests in Exod 294ndash9 19ndash21 4012ndash5 and Lev 810ndash2 22ndash4where various parts of the priestrsquos body are anointed with oiland blood undoubtedly with some liturgical commentary onthe action such is now narrated in these passages providing

a suitable performative utteranceIf correct Wyattrsquos assessment of Israelite deification proves importantfor an analysis of Adam as divine king in the book of Genesis

66 Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinityrdquo 874ndash75

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2949

294 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

In Genesis chapter 2 Godrsquos initial creative act must be the creation

of man for as a divine king raised ldquofrom the dustrdquo man was specifi-cally formed to assist deity in the creation process God appears as agardener who causes to grow ldquoevery tree that is pleasant to the sightand good for foodrdquo (Genesis 29) Te account declares that the Lordplaced the man in the garden to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo his newly createdoasis (Genesis 215) As a gardener the Lord plants Eden as a gardenerthe Lord mixes the soil to form both man and beast As a gardener the

Lord creates man in his image to perform the work of a God Follow-ing his creation man assumes the role of divine gardenerFrom an ancient Near Eastern perspective the view of Adam as

divine gardener suggests that biblical authors viewed humanity asan earthly extension of the divine council According to the Edenaccount man was immortal (Genesis 217) man had received fromdeity the sacred ldquobreath of liferdquo (Genesis 27) man had been com-missioned to perform the work of a godmdashthat is to till and tend the

divine garden Terefore as an immortal gardener man was alreadyldquolike the godsrdquo prior to partaking of the forbidden fruit

In Mesopotamian myths for example the work of gardening wasassigned to lesser members of the divine council Hence the story ofAtrahasis opens with the following portrayal

When gods were man

Tey did forced labor they bore drudgeryGreat indeed was the drudgery of the godsTe forced labor was heavy the misery too muchTe seven() great Anunna-gods were burdeningTe Igigi-gods with forced labor

Like the account in Genesis the lesser gods of the divine council inAtrahasis were gardeners who did the laborious task of caring for the

canals trees and waterways that sustained the higher gods of the67 For additional examples of Yahweh portrayed in the role of gardener see Num-

bers 246 Psalm 10416 Isaiah 4414 68 Altrahasis II39 1ndash6 translation in Benjamin R Foster Beore the Muses An Anthol-ogy o Akkadian Literature (Bethesda MD CDL 1993) 1159

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 295

assembly Hence Adam as an immortal being clearly reflects the

position of the Igigi in Mesopotamian thought Te questions pre-sented to Job by Eliphaz regarding the primal human seem to share

this notion

Are you the firstborn of the human race

Were you brought forth before the hills

Have you listened in the council of God (Job 157ndash8 NRSV)

As Dexter Callender has observed concerning these questionsldquoTe allusion to the primal human in Job does not give us explicit

details concerning his incorporation into the sacred world It is clear

however that the idea is present in the reference that the primal human

lsquolistenedrsquo in the council of Godrdquo As a member of Godrsquos council man

held a stewardship to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo the deityrsquos garden (Genesis

215) According to the Genesis account when the man and woman

eat from the tree of knowledge God expels the humans from Edenand assigns the cherubim other traditional members of the divine

council to ldquokeeprdquo the garden (Genesis 324) Tis move may suggest

that in biblical thought ldquokeepingrdquo the garden is a task reserved for

members of the divine host As an immortal subordinate assigned an

important council task man however eventually appears in the Gen-

esis account as a being very much like the council deities mentioned

in Psalm 82 who receive the decree of death

I have said Ye are gods and all of you are children of the

most High

But ye shall die like men and fall like one of the princes

(Psalm 826ndash7)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou

shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thoushalt surely die (Genesis 217)

69 Dexter E Callender Jr Adam in Myth and History Ancient Israelite Perspectiveson the Primal Human (Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 2000) 212 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 273

Biblical scholar Simon Parker has shown that the distinction

between sitting and standing in judicial settings also operates in the bib-lical view of the divine council1048580 Tese nuances were not unique to theWest Semitic world In Mesopotamia ldquoanybody who happened alongand had a mind to could lsquostandrsquomdashthat is participatemdashin the pu∆rum

[ie assembly]rdquo1048580 As Assyriologist Torkild Jacobsen explained theAkkadian words ldquouzuzzu lsquoto standrsquo and yašābu lsquoto sitrsquo are technicalterms for participating in the pu∆rumrdquo1048580 From a Near Eastern perspec-

tive these observations shed considerable light on passages such as Isa-iah 313 where Jehovah ldquostands up to plead a cause He rises to championpeoplesrdquo (Jewish Study Bible JSB)

Petersonrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 suggests that the text reflects thecouncil story depicted in the Book of Abraham Te fact that Psalm821 specifically states that ldquoGod stands in the divine councilrdquo sustainsPetersonrsquos thesis Peterson writes

We need not take Psalm 82rsquos portrayal of judgment andcondemnation within the divine council as literally accurate asrepresenting an actual historical event (although obviously itmight) any more than we are obliged to take as literally true thedepiction of Satan in Job 1ndash2 freely coming and going withinthe heavenly court and even placing wagers with God1048580

With its traditional council imagery Psalm 82 has intrigued biblical

scholars such as Parker who argued that the text originally describedYahwehrsquos rise to supremacy in the assembly9830441048624 Parker in part based hisassessment on the fact that Psalm 82 appears as a section of the Elohis-tic collection wherein the editor(s) reveal a strong propensity towardreplacing divine names such as Yahweh with Elohim

16 See for example 1 Kings 2219 21 Job 16 21 Daniel 79ndash10 see also Simon BParker ldquoTe Beginning of the Reign of GodmdashPsalm 82 as Myth and Liturgyrdquo Revue

Biblique 1024 (1995) 537 17 Torkild Jacobsen ldquoPrimitive Democracy in Ancient Mesopotamiardquo Journal oNear Eastern Studies 23 (1943) 164 18 See Jacobsen ldquoPrimitive Democracyrdquo 164 n 24 19 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 536 20 Parker ldquoBeginning of the Reign of Godrdquo 537

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 949

274 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Parker argued that verses one and five in Psalm 82 served as nar-

rative introductions to Yahwehrsquos council address delivered before hisfather Elyon the head of the council In his analysis Parker convinc-ingly illustrates that Yahweh would have originally appeared in Psalm82 as merely one of the assembled participants of deities ldquoHavingthought that the members of the council were all gods (and therefore justmdashand immortal) Yahweh now recognizes that being incorrigi-bly unjust they will perish like mortals fall like some human poten-taterdquo9830441048580 Parkerrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 works well with Petersonrsquos claimthat the text reflects the story of the grand council from the Books ofAbraham and Moses

In an important part of his critique concerning these issuesHeiser argues against the theory endorsed by biblical scholars such asParker and Mark S Smith that in its earliest stages Israelite religionoriginally perceived Yahweh as a son of El ldquoIn terms of an evaluationof the separateness of El and Yahwehrdquo writes Heiser ldquoLatter-day Saint

scholars have too blithely accepted the positions of Smith Parker andBarker All is not nearly as tidy as they proposerdquo (p 234) Heiser forexample maintains that rather than a separate divine father the Elyonor ldquoGod Most Highrdquo presented in Deuteronomy 328ndash9 is none otherthan Yahweh himself In this proposal Heiserrsquos view stands in directcontrast to Mark Smith who argues that ldquoearly on Yahweh is under-stood as Israelrsquos god in distinction to El Deuteronomy 328ndash9 casts

Yahweh in the role of one of the sons of El here called gtelyocircn Tispassage presents an order in which each deity received its own nationIsrael was the nation that Yahweh receivedrdquo983044983044

Te present form of Deuteronomy seems to support Heiserrsquos argu-ment Rather than a separate deity Elyon and Yahweh might appearas a single reference to the head God of the council In addition to thedivine allotment depicted in Deuteronomy 328 the idea of a series of

minor deities that Yahweh had assigned to govern the various nationsappears in Deuteronomy 419ndash20 Tese verses which discuss the

21 Parker ldquoBeginning of the Reign of Godrdquo 539ndash40 22 Mark S Smith Te Early History o God Yahweh and the Other Deities in AncientIsrael (Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2002) 32

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 275

allotment of the host of heaven to the nations of the world parallel

both the vocabulary and the ideology witnessed in 328ndash9 In Deuter-onomy 329 the author uses the same root hlk featured in 420mdashalbeitas a noun Deuteronomy 419ndash20 specifically identifies Yahweh as thedeity who gave each council deity his allotment

And when you look up to the sky and behold the sun and themoon and the stars the whole heavenly host you must not belured into bowing down to them or serving them Tese the

Lord your God allotted to other peoples everywhere underheaven but you the Lord took and brought out of Egypt thatiron blast furnace to be His very own people as is now thecase (Deuteronomy 419ndash20 Jewish Publication Society JPS)983044

Based upon this evidence Heiserrsquos assessment of the view fea-tured in the current form of Deuteronomy may be correct howeverHeiser ultimately fails to address important evidence recognized by

many contemporary biblical scholars that suggests that Israelite the-ology did in fact evolve in a manner consistent with the basic claimsof Parker and Smith983044 For example David Noel Freedman maintainsthat the combination ldquoYahweh Elohimrdquo or ldquoLord Godrdquo found in theearly chapters of Genesis probably derives from an earlier sentencename given the God of Israel namely ldquoYahweh Elrdquo or ldquoGod createsrdquo983044In a related assessment Mark Smith has argued

Te original god of Israel was El Tis reconstruction maybe inferred from two pieces of information First the name

23 Te Jewish Publication Society edition appears in Adele Berlin and Marc Z Brettlereds Te Jewish Study Bible anakh ranslation (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 24 Of course the fact that Deuteronomy 4 simply reflects the language of Deuter-onomy 32 does not automatically mean that both texts derive from the same author Teauthor of Deuteronomy 4 may have simply created his passages concerning Yahweh tointentionally reflect the language and ideology in Deuteronomy 32 in order to present

Yahweh as the chief council deity Tis very real possibility should be considered byHeiser in further research for an introduction to theological changes reflected through-out the book of Deuteronomy see especially Bernard M Levinson Deuteronomy and theHermeneutics o Legal Innovation (New York Oxford University Press 1997) 25 David Noel Freedman ldquoTe Name of the God of Mosesrdquo Journal o Biblical Lit-erature 793 (1960) 156

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1149

276 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of Israel is not a Yahwistic name with the divine element of

Yahweh but an El name with the element lt ēl Tis fact wouldsuggest that El was the original chief god of the group namedIsrael Second Genesis 4924ndash25 presents a series of El epi-thets separate from the mention of Yahweh in verse 18983044

A detailed response to all the evidence amassed by scholars who view a theological evolution in the Hebrew Bible was beyond thescope of Heiserrsquos essay However notwithstanding the probability that

Heiser is correct in linking Elyon with Yahweh in Deuteronomy thisclaim does not negate the likelihood that in ancient Israel Yahwehwas originally a son of Elyon

In the present form of the biblical text the term [gtElyocircn]is understood to be an epithet for Yahweh the God of IsraelIt is possible however as some have argued that the epithetmay conceal a reference to a separate deity possibly an oldergod with whom Yahweh came to be identified983044

LDS scholars have good reason to accept the historical views of schol-ars such as Parker and Smith

Psalm 82 as the Grand Council

Tough helpful to his analysis ultimately Petersonrsquos claims are

not dependent upon the legitimacy of a Parker Smith historical inter-pretation Petersonrsquos argument for interpreting Psalm 82 as a reflec-tion of the grand council story featured in modern revelation findssupport in Near Eastern tradition In the ancient Near East stories ofthe divine council typically begin with a crisis in which the head Godcalls together the gods of the council to resolve the dilemma Duringthe council a series of proposals are offered Finally a ldquosaviorrdquo steps

forward offering his services to the council Tis savior then receives26 Smith Early History o God 32

27 Eric E Elnes and Patrick D Miller ldquoElyonrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demonsin the Bible ed Karel van der oorn Bob Becking and Pieter W van der Horst (LeidenBrill 1995) 560

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 277

a commission to perform his redemptive role983044 Tis common Near

Eastern pattern is seen for example in the Mesopotamian story ofdivine kingship known as Enuma Elish983044 In this Babylonian myththe head god of the pantheon calls together the gods in a council toresolve a dilemma created by the goddess iamat Following a seriesof proposals Marduk the chief god of Babylon receives a commissionas savior Marduk agrees to perform the role of savior on the condi-tion that his father Ea the head god of the council grant Marduk allpower and glory Te same pattern appears in the Assyrian myth ofAnzu However in this version the god Ninurta agrees to serve ascouncil savior while allowing his father to retain his position withinthe council

Like Enuma Elish and Psalm 82 many of the council stories fromthe ancient Near East portray stories of cosmic revolt in which judg-ment is rendered against divine beings Tis pattern is familiar toLatter-day Saints through the council story provided in the Books of

Moses and Abraham (Moses 41ndash4 and Abraham 322ndash28) Althoughsometimes obscured the same pattern is reflected in council tradi-tions featured in the Hebrew Bible Te story of council crisis forexample appears in the Isaiah Apocalypse

On that day [Yahweh] will punishthe host of heaven in heavenand on earth the kings of the earth (Isaiah 2421 NRSV)

Similar language emerges in Isaiah 271

On that day [Yahweh]with his cruel and great and strong swordwill punish Leviathan the fleeing serpent (NRSV)

28 Tis summary is based upon the pattern identified by Simon B Parker ldquoCoun-cilrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 391ndash98 for a consideration of the divine coun-

cil stories within the Bible as ldquotype scenesrdquo see David M Fleming ldquoTe Divine Councilas ype Scene in the Hebrew Biblerdquo (PhD diss Te Southern Baptist Teological Semi-nary 1989) 29 For an English translation of Enuma Elish see Stephanie Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia Creation the Flood Gilgamesh and Others (New York Oxford UniversityPress 1989) 228ndash77

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1349

278 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

For Latter-day Saints these traditions preserved in texts such as Enuma

Elish the book of Isaiah and Psalm 82 provide a type of retellingmdashalbeit sometimes hiddenmdashof the primordial events concerning thegrand council described in modern revelation

In the ancient Near East members of the divine council oenappear to receive a type of reprimand suggestive of the punishmentgiven Lucifer in LDS scripture

Because that Satan rebelled against me and sought to destroy

the agency of man which I the Lord God had given himand also that I should give unto him mine own power by thepower of mine Only Begotten I caused that he should be castdown And he became Satan yea even the devil the father ofall lies to deceive and to blind men and to lead them captiveat his will even as many as would not hearken unto my voice(Moses 43ndash4)

With the words ldquoHere am I send merdquo Latter-day Saints believeJesus Christ stepped forward in the council crisis and volunteered tosave humanity from the challenges associated with mortal probation(Abraham 327) According to the council story depicted in the Bookof Abraham Lucifer ldquowas angry and kept not his first estate and atthat day many followed aer himrdquo (Abraham 328) In his analysisPeterson does well to draw attention to the fact that Isaiahrsquos refer-

ence to ldquoLucifer son of the morningrdquo in Isaiah 1412 ldquodraws us againinto the astronomical imagery oen connected with the divine assem-blyrdquo1048624 In his own studies Heiser has convincingly argued for a similarposition

Ugaritic regularly refers to heavenly beings as p∆r kkbm (the ldquocongregation of the starsrdquo) language corresponding with כוכ י קר (ldquomorning starsrdquo in parallelism with the ldquosons of

Godrdquo in Job 387) and (the ldquostars of Godrdquo Isa 1413)כוכ י לAside from the context of these references each of whichclearly points to personal beings not astronomical phenom-

30 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 533

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 279

ena it is significant that in the entire ancient near eastern lit-

erary record El is never identified with a heavenly body Tusldquothe stars of Elrdquo points to created beings with divine status1048580

For Latter-day Saints recent archaeological and textual discoverieslike those referred to by Heiser are especially intriguing However asPeterson argues in the quotation provided above (p 273) Latter-daySaints do not need the Bible to express a precise parallel with modernrevelation in order to find support for LDS theology

Te fact that texts such as Psalm 82 somewhat parallel Latter-daySaint teachings is sufficient to argue that a more exact version of thegrand council story such as is witnessed in modern revelation mayhave existed in antiquity However notwithstanding his basic agree-ment with Peterson concerning the fundamental role assumed by thecouncil of deities in the Hebrew Bible Heiser ultimately departs fromPetersonrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 suggesting that the biblical view of

the council contains eight fundamental points that conflict with LDStheology

Heiserrsquos Sixteen Points

Heiser provides a list of sixteen arguments outlining his positionregarding Psalm 82 and the divine council He divides these into eightpoints ldquowith which many evangelicals would probably disagree and

with which many Latter-day Saints would likely agreerdquo followed byeight points ldquowith which many Latter-day Saints would probably dis-agree and with which many evangelicals would likely agreerdquo (pp 222ndash24) Heiserrsquos perspectives regarding Psalm 82 are clearly sound Teyinclude such issues as the inadequacy of the term monotheism as areference to Israelite theology and the biblical use of the word elohim as a literal reference to gods rather than human judges While Heiseris certainly correct in suggesting that his first eight views would proveproblematic for many evangelicals but not for most Mormons Heiserrsquoslist of eight statements on Psalm 82 that he assumes many Latter-day

31 Michael S Heiser ldquoDeuteronomy 328 and the Sons of Godrdquo 15 for an electronic version see thedivinecouncilcomD32BibSacpdf (accessed 8 February 2007)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1549

280 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Saints would disagree with indicates a basic lack of exposure to Latter-

day Saint thoughtHeiser is well versed in biblical studies His work has contrib-uted important insights toward a scholarly view of the essential roleassumed by the divine council in Old estament theology but he isnot a Latter-day Saint However Heiser does not consider in his cri-tique the possibility that most Latter-day Saints including Petersondo not believe that the biblical view of the council mirrors preciselywhat Latter-day Saints accept through modern revelation JosephSmithrsquos revelations proclaim our day as the dispensation of the ful-ness of times ldquoaccording to that which was ordained in the midst ofthe Council of the Eternal God of all other gods before this world wasrdquo(DampC 12132) For Latter-day Saints this final dispensation representsthe time decreed by God and his council in which ldquothose things whichnever have been revealed from the foundation of the world but havebeen kept hid from the wise and prudent shall be revealed unto babes

and sucklings in this the dispensation of the fulness of timesrdquo (DampC12818) Terefore Latter-day Saint scholars acknowledge that an LDSunderstanding of the council does not precisely mirror the perspec-tives manifested in the Bible Tat having been said most Latter-daySaints certainly accept the view advocated by Peterson that the bib-lical perspective of the heavenly council of deities is in greater har-mony with LDS belief than with any other contemporary Christian

tradition A recognition that the Bible though not flawless is inspiredof God allows Latter-day Saints to comfortably engage the views putforth by biblical scholars such as Heiser even when those observa-tions prove threatening to our evangelical counterparts

If certain biblical authors for example did in fact believe asHeiser seems to correctly suggest that Yahweh was ldquonot lsquobirthedrsquointo existence by the lsquoolden godsrsquo described in Ugaritic textsrdquo (p 223)Latter-day Saints would have no problem simply accepting the obser- vation as a biblical view Similarly even though Heiser assumes thatmany Mormons would disagree with his opinion that the Bible pre-sents Yahweh the God of Israel as ldquoontologically uniquerdquo (p 223) inreality many Latter-day Saints recognize that this is precisely the case

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 281

Even within LDS theology God the Father stands out as ontologically

unique inasmuch as he created the spirits of all humanity Modernrevelation describes God with the words ldquofrom eternity to eternity Heis the same and His years never failrdquo (DampC 764)

Yahwehrsquos Ontological Uniqueness

In addition to the evidence Heiser presents for what he calls Yah-wehrsquos ontological uniqueness the name Yahweh itself appears vocal-

ized in the Hebrew Bible as a finite Hiphil verb form Te vocalizationof YHWH as ldquoYahwehrdquo carries a specific nuance since ldquoHebrew gram-mars traditionally represent the Hiphil stem as the causative of the Qal

stemrdquo983044 Frank Moore Cross explains that ldquothe accumulated evidence strongly supports the view that the name Yahweh is a causativeimperfect of the Canaanite-Proto-Hebrew verb hwy lsquoto bersquo rdquo Tere-fore the divine name Yahweh according to this view literally means

ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procreatesrdquo One of the inter-esting points to consider concerning the biblical title Yahweh Sabaoth or ldquoLord of Hostsrdquo is that typically in Hebrew proper names do notappear bound to a genitive nounmdashthat is ldquoJohn of Hostsrdquo or ldquoMary ofEarthrdquo etc Since a proper name cannot traditionally function as abound form in a construct chain Cross interprets the King James titleldquoLord of Hostsrdquo as ldquo lsquohe creates the (divine) hostsrsquo rdquo If correct this

view would lend support to Heiserrsquos argument that ldquoYahweh is said32 Bruce K Waltke and M OrsquoConnor An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax

(Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 1990) 433 33 Frank Moore Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge Harvard Uni- versity Press 1973) 65 34 ldquoA proper noun cannot as a rule be followed by a genitiverdquo Paul Jouumlon A Gram-mar o Biblical Hebrew trans and rev Muraoka (Rome Editrice Pontificio IstitutoBiblico 2000) 2481 Admittedly however textual evidence shows that the rule need notapply to divine names see J A Emerton ldquoNew Light on Israelite Religion Te Implica-

tions of the Inscriptions from Kunti llet lsquoAjrudrdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wis-senschaf 94 (1982) 12ndash13 and especially John H Choi ldquoResheph and YHWH IacuteĔBĀlt Ocirc rdquoVetus estamentum 54 (2004) 17ndash28 I offer this assessment of the title Yahweh Sabaothwhich reflects the views of scholars such as David Noel Freedman and Frank MooreCross as merely an intriguing possibility 35 Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic 65 emphasis added

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1749

282 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo (p 250)

Heiser incorrectly assumes that this apparent biblical teaching con-cerning Yahwehrsquos uniqueness among the gods is not inconsistent withLDS theology

Tough Latter-day Saints view God the Father and Jesus Christas two separate divine beings for the Saints the biblical titles associ-ated with these deities are clearly interchangeable Latter-day Saintshave no problem therefore in associating God the Father with thetitle Yahwehmdashthat is ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procre-atesrdquo Te 1916 official declaration presented by the First Presidency ofthe church states ldquoGod the Eternal Father whom we designate by theexalted name-title Elohim is the literal Parent of our Lord and SaviorJesus Christ and of the spirits of the human racerdquo Clearly howeverthe First Presidencyrsquos move toward designating God the Father as Elo-him and Jesus the Son as Jehovah was primarily a move by churchleaders to create uniformity in Latter-day Saint expression In a recent

Ensign article Keith Meservy observed that ldquoin at least three Old es-tament passages it appears that L983151983154983140 [ie Jehovah] applies to Heav-enly Father not Jesus Christ Ps 1101 Ps 27 Isa 5310rdquo No doubtfor many Latter-day Saints this estimate offered by Meservy couldbe greatly augmented LDS teachings therefore do not preclude theontological uniqueness of God the Father that Heiser witnesses in theHebrew Bible

Yahweh as a Being ldquoSpecies-Uniquerdquo

Certainly Heiser is justified in suggesting that the gods of thedivine council appear inferior to Israelrsquos deity He uses this correctobservation however to build an argument that Israelrsquos God wastherefore somehow ldquospecies-uniquerdquo (p 250) In his discussion con-cerning the biblical evidence for Yahweh being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo

Heiser bases his interpretation on five points of evidence (1) ldquoYahweh36 ldquoTe Father and the Son A Doctrinal Exposition by the First Presidency and the

welverdquo as cited in Messages o the First Presidency o the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints ed James R Clark (Salt Lake City Bookcra 1971) 526 emphasis added 37 Keith H Meservy ldquoLORD = Jehovahrdquo Ensign June 2002 29 n 3

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 283

is said to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo

(2) ldquoYahweh was considered pre-existent to all godsrdquo (3) Yahweh hasthe power to strip the other elohim of their immortality (4) Yahwehalone is referred to in the Bible as ha-elohim and (5) ldquothe other godsare commanded to worship Yahwehrdquo (see pp 250ndash57) Tough eachof Heiserrsquos five points of evidence do in fact appear in the Bible con-trary to Heiserrsquos suggestion none of these observations establishesYahweh as being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo In the Bible Yahweh is the God ofgods but the biblical gods were still biblical gods As Paul Sanders hasexplained according to the Deuteronomic vision ldquothe [Sons of Goddescribed in Deuteronomy 328] are relatively independent they havetheir own dominions like YHWHrdquo

Notwithstanding his acceptance of the importance of the divinecouncil of deities in biblical theology Heiserrsquos critique suffers in partthrough his effort to define Israelrsquos deity as a being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo(p 250) He is correct in drawing attention to the fact that biblical

authors viewed their deity as exceptionally powerful in the councilldquoFor the Lord your God is God of godsrdquo proclaims Deuteronomy 1017ldquoand Lord of lordsrdquo Unfortunately however in identifying Yahweh asa being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo Heiser forces the biblical view of deities intoan image somewhat consistent with radical monotheism Contraryto Heiserrsquos suggestion the creative act in and of itself does not set thecreator apart as an exclusive species Te same point also applies tothe issue Heiser raises concerning primogeniture In other words aman for instance may exist before both his children and his siblingsand though preeminence may render the person ldquouniquerdquo on somelevels prior existence would not in this or in any other case rendera being as ldquospecies-uniquerdquo rue the Bible speaks of gods separatefrom Israelrsquos primary deity as elohim a˙erimmdashthat is ldquoother godsrdquo(see Exodus 203 2313 Deuteronomy 57 614 etc) However as YairHoffman has observed ldquoA survey of the use of a˙erim [ldquootherrdquo] shows

38 Paul Sanders Te Provenance o Deuteronomy 32 (Leiden Brill 1996) 37039 Te term radical monotheism refers to the theological position that only one

divine being exists in the universe Te expression was popularized by ikva Frymer-Kensky In the Wake o the Goddesses Women Culture and the Biblical ransormationo Pagan Myth (New York Free Press 1992) 154

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1949

284 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

that when used attributively with regard to garments days messen-

gers and objects it clearly has a relative meaning something differ-ent yet o the same kind rdquo1048624 Terefore ldquothere is no reason to assumethat in the phrase elohim a˙erim the attribute has a more distinctivemeaningrdquo1048580 When all is said and done the biblical deities like Yah-weh himself were still gods

In addition contrary to Heiserrsquos assertion the simple fact that Elo-him possesses the power to strip the other deities of their immortalityin Psalm 82 does not indicate that these gods are of a different spe-cies than Elohim According to the Psalmistrsquos view Elohim is simplymore powerful than the other gods Analogies from the ancient NearEast illustrate the problematic nature of Heiserrsquos claim In the Babylo-nian story Enuma Elish for instance the primordial mother goddessiamat created the god Qingu as chief deity over iamatrsquos militaryforces As a result of his actions taken against the divine council thedeities of the assembly ldquobound [Qingu] and held him in front of Ea

[and they] imposed the penalty on him and cut off his bloodrdquo983044 Tefact that in Enuma Elish the council could strip Qingu of his immor-tality did not mean that the god Qingu was somehow of a different orlesser divine species In the Sumerian myth of Enlil and Ninlil Enlil(one of the ldquogreat godsrdquo of Mesopotamia) is brought to trial for havingraped the goddess Ninlil As Enlil returned to the city of Nippur hewas arrested by the assembly while walking through the temple court

Te trial commenced immediately In the myth the council pre-sented the verdict that ldquothe sex offender Enlil will leave the townrdquoAccordingly the myth reports that Enlil le Nippur headed towardthe netherworld In his assessment of the story Jacobsen points out

40 Yair Hoffman ldquoTe Conception of lsquoOther Godsrsquo in Deuteronomistic Literaturerdquoin Concepts o the Other in Near Eastern Religions ed Ilai Alon Ithamar Gruenwald andItamar Singer (Leiden Brill 1994) 107 emphasis added 41 Hoffman ldquoConception of Other Godsrdquo 107

42 As cited in Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia 261 43 For a summary of the myth see Gwendolyn Leick A Dictionary o Ancient NearEastern Mythology (London Routledge 1998) 47ndash48 for a translation see TorkildJacobsen Te Harps Tat Once Sumerian Poetry in ranslation (New Haven YaleUniversity Press 1987) 167ndash80 44 Jacobsen Harps 174

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 285

that Enlilrsquos descent to Hades may indicate that the high god in Meso-

potamian mythology was originally sentenced to death As notedby James Ackerman in his dissertation concerning Psalm 82 thesetypes of judgment scenes in which the council determines that godswill die like mortals carry important implications for interpreting thecultural background for the biblical text Contrary to Heiserrsquos inter-pretation none of these stories indicate that the dying gods were of adifferent species or order than the gods who issued the sentence

Near Eastern traditions oen place considerable emphasis on thedying-god motif In no sense however are these dying godsmdashevenwhen resurrectedmdashsomehow depicted as a lesser species Heiserrsquos con-fusion concerning the implications of a biblical statement that Godissued a judgment of death to the deities of the divine council illus-trates the fundamental need for biblical scholars to pursue Assyriol-ogy in connection with their efforts to interpret the Hebrew Bible

Also contrary to Heiserrsquos suggestion the punishment meted out

to usurpers in Near Eastern council stories never indicates that thecriminals derived from some sort of exceptional species Te storyof Athtar from ancient Canaan for instance presents the traditionof Athtarrsquos descent to the underworld following the deityrsquos ascensionto the throne of Baal Te details involved in Athtarrsquos story containimportant thematic elements depicted in ancient Near Eastern storiesof cosmic revolt Athtar seems to share some semblance with Baalrsquos

mortal enemy Mot or ldquoDeathrdquo into whom Baal himself descendsHence Hugh Page notes that Athtarrsquos ldquodescent to the underworld implies that on some level Athtar has placed himself in proxim-ity to or relationship with the only god that Baal proves incapable

45 Torkild Jacobsen ldquoAn Ancient Mesopotamian rial for Homiciderdquo in owardthe Image o ammuz and Other Essays on Mesopotamian History and Culture ed Wil-liam L Moran (Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1970) 207 first published inStudia Biblica et Orientalia vol 3 of Analecta Biblica et Orientalia XII (Rome Pontificio

Istituto Biblico 1959) 130ndash50 46 See James S Ackerman ldquoAn Exegetical Study of Psalm 82rdquo (PhD diss HarvardUniversity 1966) 186ndash93 47 For a recent survey of the issue which includes a survey of previous assessmentssee ryggve N D Mettinger Te Riddle o Resurrection ldquoDying and Rising Godsrdquo in the Ancient Near East (Stockholm Almqvist amp Wiksell 2001)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2149

286 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of defeatingrdquo Athtarrsquos assumption of the throne of Baal followed

by his descent to the underworld indicates that this portion of theBaal cycle from ancient Canaan fits the general category of the cosmic

revolt genre witnessed in texts such as Abraham 3 and Psalm 82

1 Kindly El the Compassionate answers

2 ldquoOne so small cannot race

3 with Baal cannot handle the lance

4 with Daganrsquos son when they test one anotherrdquo

5 Lady Athirat of the Sea answers 6 ldquoLet us enthrone Athtar the Strong

7 Let Athtar the Strong be kingrdquo

8 Ten Athtar the Strong

9 ascended the summit of Sapan

10 He sat upon the throne of Mightiest Baal

11 His feet would not reach its footstool

12 His head would not reach its top 13 Athtar the Strong answered

14 ldquoI cannot rule on the summit of Sapanrdquo

15 Athtar the Strong descended

16 He descended from the throne of Mightiest Baal

17 And he ruled over the underworld god of all of it

18 drew in barrels

19 drew in jars (KU 1649ndash67 translation)

Te fact that Athtar the Strong experienced a type of ldquodeathrdquo in which

he ldquoruled over the underworldrdquo following his descent from Baalrsquos

throne does not suggest that Athtar was a ldquobeing species-uniquerdquo from

the other deities any more than Inanna or Ishtar the Mesopotamian

goddesses who experienced a type of death in the underworld were of

a different species than the gods Ea Enki Marduk and so forth48 Hugh R Page Jr Te Myth o Cosmic Rebellion A Study o Its Reflexes in Ugaritic

and Biblical Literature (Leiden Brill 1996) 92 Pagersquos views concerning the Athtar mythhave been criticized by Gregorio del Olmo Lete ldquoIn Search of the Canaanite Luciferrdquo Aula Orientalis 19 (2001) 125ndash32

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 287

Still in his efforts to present Yahweh as a being species-unique

Heiser correctly draws attention to the other gods of the council whoare commanded to worship Yahweh In his analysis he focuses uponthe call given to the gods in Psalm 291ndash2 ldquoAscribe to Yahweh O sons ofGod ascribe to Yahweh glory and strength Ascribe to Yahweh the gloryof his name worship Yahweh in the splendor of holinessrdquo (as quotedon p 256) While Heiserrsquos observations certainly illustrate that biblicalauthors viewed their deity as uniquemdashthat is exceptionalmdashthroughout

Near Eastern tradition lesser gods regularly appear in a position inwhich they offer praise service and devotion to the higher gods of thecouncil Richard J Clifford explains that in the Phoenician view of theassembly ldquoas elsewhere in the ancient Near East the assemblies are pic-tured as subordinate to individual gods although the assemblyrsquos con-sent seems necessary for important decisionsrdquo Simply because ancienttextsmdashincluding the Biblemdashdepict the members of the assemblies asldquosubordinate to individual godsrdquo this in no way implies that the higher

deities somehow belonged to a separate species Ancient Near Easterntexts such as Mursilirsquos Hymn and Prayer to the Sun-goddess o Arinna (CH 376A) establish the fact that Near Eastern peoples believed thatgods of the same species paid homage to higher deities in a way compa-rable to the biblical view

You O Sun-goddess of Arinna are honored goddess Your

name is honored among names and your divinity is honoredamong gods Furthermore among the gods you are the mosthonored and the greatest Tere is no other god more honoredor greater than you You are the lord of just judgment Youcontrol the kingship of heaven and earth1048624

Holding the position ldquomost honoredrdquo among the gods did not estab-lish Arinna as species-unique Arinna was simply the god before

whom from the authorrsquos perspective the other gods would regularly49 Richard J Clifford ldquoPhoenician Religionrdquo Bulletin o the American Schools o

Oriental Research 279 (1990) 57 50 As cited in Itamar Singer Hittite Prayers (Atlanta Society of Biblical Literature2002) 51

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2349

288 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquofall downrdquo1048580 For the ancients the Near Eastern view of the divine

court clearly reflected or were expressed in terms of earthly realityTerefore just as the high king before whom other humans paid hom-age was still a human being so the god to whom other deities paidhomage was still a god matching in species For biblical authors Yah-weh stood at the head of the hierarchy in Israelite thought Yahwehwas unique as the God of gods but he was not unique in his divinityFrom a biblical perspective Yahweh even shared this divinity withhumanity

Humans as Teomorphic Beings

In his discussion concerning the biblical view regarding theomor-phic humans Peterson draws attention to Paulrsquos New estament ser-mon presented in Acts 1728ndash29

For in him we live and move and have our being as

certain also of your own poets have said For we are also hisoffspring

Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God we oughtnot to think that the Godhead is like unto gold or silver orstone graven by art and manrsquos device

Peterson in part argues for a biblical connection between God andhumanity based on the fact that ldquothe word rendered lsquooffspringrsquo by the

King James translators is the Greek genos which is cognate with theLatin genus and means lsquofamilyrsquo or lsquoracersquo or lsquokindrsquo or even and mostespecially interesting lsquodescendants of a common ancestorrsquo rdquo983044 ForLatter-day Saints human beings are literally the offspring of God andtherefore intrinsically theomorphic Part of the strength of Petersonrsquosessay lies in his recognition that like Latter-day Saints biblical authorsregularly blur the distinction between humanity and divine beings

Not only does Peterson draw attention to the prophetic interactionwith the council as support for his thesis but he also places consider-

51 Singer Hittite Prayers 51 52 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 542ndash43 53 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 289

able emphasis upon the deified dead in the Hebrew Bible and the early

Christian teaching regarding deification Heiser notwithstandingPetersonrsquos evidence rejects the idea that a genus equation of God and

humankind appears in the Bible

For his criticisms of Petersonrsquos views Heiser places considerable

weight on the notion that ldquothe concept of the image of God does not

advance the idea that there is a genus equation of God and human-

kind or that God was once a manrdquo (p 224) On some levels Heiserrsquos

point concerning the word tzelem or ldquoimagerdquo in Genesis 126ndash27is correct Concerning this controversial term Marc Z Brettler has

recently explained

Te word tzelem (ldquoimagerdquo) elsewhere always refers to a

physical representation For example the Book of Ezekiel

uses tzelem when it refers to ldquomen sculptured upon the walls

figures of Chaldeans drawn in vermilionrdquo (2314) or when it

accuses Israel of fornicating with ldquophallic imagesrdquo (1617) Teword oen refers to idols (eg Num 3352 Ezek 720 Amos

526 2 Chron 2317) It always signifies a concrete entity

rather than an abstract one Tis is not surprising since the

Bible (in contrast to most medieval philosophical traditions

both Jewish and Christian) oen depicts God in corporeal

terms

Genesis 126ndash27 suggests that Godrsquos physical likeness is similar to

humanityrsquos but Heiser is correct that the statement does not indicate

that biblical authors viewed humans as gods or that God himself was

once a human However many other texts from the Bible do present a

theomorphic view of humanity Peterson therefore is precisely correct

in stating that ldquothe Latter-day Saint understanding that humans are of

the same genus or species as God is thus clearly biblicalrdquo54 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509ndash28

55 Marc Z Brettler How to Read the Bible (Philadelphia Jewish Publication Society2005) 43ndash44 Hebrew word deleted 56 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 547

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2549

290 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Adam as a Divine Council Member

In addition to associating humanity with the tzelem of God theBible describes the first man as a deified member of the divine council

In the Eden story the Lord took advantage of the wet claylike soil and

ldquoformed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils

the breath of life and man became a living soulrdquo (Genesis 27) In an

important study concerning this imagery Walter Brueggemann has

shown that a biblical connection exists between being raised from the

dust and enthronement ldquoo be taken lsquofrom the dustrsquo means to be

elevated from obscurity to royal office and to return to dust means to

be deprived of that office and returned to obscurityrdquo Imagery such

as that witnessed in 1 Kings 162 supports Brueggemannrsquos interpreta-

tion ldquoForasmuch as I [God] exalted thee [Jehu] out of the dust and

made thee prince over my people Israel rdquo (1 Kings 162) Hence the

notion of the God raising man ldquofrom the dust of the earthrdquo in Genesis

27 in part suggests that Yahweh begins his creative activity by form-

ing a divine king According to Genesis 215 this divine king through

a type of imitatio dei would continue to perform the work of Yahweh

who ldquoplantedrdquo the garden ldquoAnd the Lord God took the man and put

him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep itrdquo In a simi-

lar fashion Mesopotamian kings such as Hammurapi glorified their

efforts through the use of creation and agricultural imageryI encircled [the wall] with a swamp I dug the Euphrates

as far as Sippar (and) made it reach a prosperous quay

I Hammu-rāpi who builds up the land caused Sippar

and Babylon to dwell in peaceful abodes forever What

from [primordial days] no one among the kings had done I

did in a grand fashion for the god Šamaš my lord

57 Walter Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestament-liche Wissenschaf 841 (1972) 1ndash18 58 Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo 2 59 Douglas Frayne Old Babylonian Period (2003ndash1595 BC) (oronto University oforonto Press 1990) 348ndash49

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 291

Te view presented in the Babylonian inscription on the wall

of Sippar reflects the common Near Eastern assumption featured inGenesis 2 of a God king participating in the act of creation from ldquopri-

mordial daysrdquo through structure1048624 As a king Hammurapi assumed

the same role filled by deities who created the universe by giving order

to preexistent chaos In its depiction of Adam as the primordial gar-

dener the Bible relies upon similar imagery

Manrsquos status as the archetypal gardener king in Genesis 2ndash3 con-

tains important parallels with Mesopotamian kingship theory1048580 Sev-eral examples of Mesopotamian iconography feature a depiction of the

tree (or plant) of life over which the king and priests appear pouring

libations In assessing the connection between Mesopotamian kings

and gardeners Geo Widengren cites these statements from the am-

muz text R IV 27 No I

A tamarisk which in the garden has no water to drink

Whose foliage on the plant sends forth no twig

A plant which they water no more in its pot

Whose roots are torn away

A herb which is in the garden has no water to drink

Among the flowers of the garden he sleeps

Among the flowers of the garden he is thrown

According to Widengren ldquothe ree of Life is watered by the kingwho pours out over it the Water of Life which he has in his possession

Te ree of Life constantly needs the Water of Life near which it is

growing in the garden of paradiserdquo983044 Te connection between king

and gardener was widely attested throughout ancient Mesopotamia

60 In his translation Frayne renders the Akkadian word szligi-a-tim as ldquothe pastrdquo Teinscription however clearly relies on creation imagery and I have therefore interpreted

szligiatim as ldquoprimordial daysrdquo in accordance with the information provided in Jeremy BlackAndrew George and Nicholas Postgate A Concise Dictionary o Akkadian (WiesbadenHarrassowitz 2000) 337 61 See Geo Widengren Te King and the ree o Lie in Ancient Near Eastern Reli- gion (Uppsala Uppsala Universitets Aringrsskri 1951) 62 Widengren King and the ree o Lie 15

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2749

292 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Tis portrayal of kingship appears in the birth legend of Sargon

wherein the monarch declaresAkki the waterscooper placed me as his gardenerWhen I was a gardener Ishtar was in love with meTe kingship I exercised during x + 5 years

Tese lines from the tale of Sargon the gardener whom the goddess Ishtarloved seem to provide an especially significant parallel with the biblical view presented in the story of Eden In the words of Nicholas Wyatt ldquotheman in his garden is a symbolic allusion to the king in his sanctuaryrdquo

One of the important connections between humanityrsquos enthrone-ment in the garden and later biblical traditions includes the anointingof an Israelite king in 1 Kings 128ndash40 at the Gihon Spring a rivernamed Gihon was one of the four rivers that flowed out of Eden andround the land of Cush (Genesis 213) Significantly the only otherexplicit reference to the Garden of Eden in the Hebrew Bible appears

in a context that addresses the link between kingship and divinity (seeEzekiel 282ndash13)

Concerning the attestation of biblical rituals that may preserveactual religious rites wherein Israelite kings assumed divinity Wyattargues that

the rituals which transform the status of the earthly kingremoving him from ldquomerely humanrdquo status to that of a sacralfigure to be couched in the form of a narrative about a godcarries with it the hint that the king himself is to be seen astransformed into a god Te enthronement of the king isthus his apotheosis

63 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoInterpreting the Creation and Fall Story in Genesis 2ndash3rdquo Zeit-schrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 931 (1981) 15 64 John van Seters has argued according to the Documentary Hypothesis that the

story of divine kingship in J derives from Babylonian influences and is therefore latepostexilic If P is in part a reaction to the J account then it is difficult to accept vanSetersrsquos dating see John van Seters ldquoTe Creation of Man and the Creation of the KingrdquoZeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 1013 (1989) 333ndash41 65 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinity Some Mythical and Ritual Aspects of WestSemitic Kingshiprdquo Ugarit-Forschungen 31 (1999) 857

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 293

In his exploration of biblical deification Wyatt refers to Psalm 198ndash10

as a possible ritual text transforming the king into a divine beingTe teaching of Yahweh is perfectrestoring the breastTe testimony of Yahweh is certainmaking wise the headTe precepts of Yahweh are uprightrejoicing the heart

Te commandment of Yahweh is puremaking bright the eyesTe speech of Yahweh is ritually purestanding for everTe judgments of Yahweh are truthTey are righteous all togethermore desirable than goldthan much pure goldmore sweet than honeyor the refined combYour servant is indeed illumined by themand in their observance is there great gain

Concerning this possible reference to ritual anointing Wyatt argues

It is true that there is no narrative statement about unc-

tion here oil is not even mentioned But only thus can thesuccessive blessings on various parts of the kingrsquos body beexplained For comparison we should consider the unction ofpriests in Exod 294ndash9 19ndash21 4012ndash5 and Lev 810ndash2 22ndash4where various parts of the priestrsquos body are anointed with oiland blood undoubtedly with some liturgical commentary onthe action such is now narrated in these passages providing

a suitable performative utteranceIf correct Wyattrsquos assessment of Israelite deification proves importantfor an analysis of Adam as divine king in the book of Genesis

66 Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinityrdquo 874ndash75

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2949

294 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

In Genesis chapter 2 Godrsquos initial creative act must be the creation

of man for as a divine king raised ldquofrom the dustrdquo man was specifi-cally formed to assist deity in the creation process God appears as agardener who causes to grow ldquoevery tree that is pleasant to the sightand good for foodrdquo (Genesis 29) Te account declares that the Lordplaced the man in the garden to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo his newly createdoasis (Genesis 215) As a gardener the Lord plants Eden as a gardenerthe Lord mixes the soil to form both man and beast As a gardener the

Lord creates man in his image to perform the work of a God Follow-ing his creation man assumes the role of divine gardenerFrom an ancient Near Eastern perspective the view of Adam as

divine gardener suggests that biblical authors viewed humanity asan earthly extension of the divine council According to the Edenaccount man was immortal (Genesis 217) man had received fromdeity the sacred ldquobreath of liferdquo (Genesis 27) man had been com-missioned to perform the work of a godmdashthat is to till and tend the

divine garden Terefore as an immortal gardener man was alreadyldquolike the godsrdquo prior to partaking of the forbidden fruit

In Mesopotamian myths for example the work of gardening wasassigned to lesser members of the divine council Hence the story ofAtrahasis opens with the following portrayal

When gods were man

Tey did forced labor they bore drudgeryGreat indeed was the drudgery of the godsTe forced labor was heavy the misery too muchTe seven() great Anunna-gods were burdeningTe Igigi-gods with forced labor

Like the account in Genesis the lesser gods of the divine council inAtrahasis were gardeners who did the laborious task of caring for the

canals trees and waterways that sustained the higher gods of the67 For additional examples of Yahweh portrayed in the role of gardener see Num-

bers 246 Psalm 10416 Isaiah 4414 68 Altrahasis II39 1ndash6 translation in Benjamin R Foster Beore the Muses An Anthol-ogy o Akkadian Literature (Bethesda MD CDL 1993) 1159

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 295

assembly Hence Adam as an immortal being clearly reflects the

position of the Igigi in Mesopotamian thought Te questions pre-sented to Job by Eliphaz regarding the primal human seem to share

this notion

Are you the firstborn of the human race

Were you brought forth before the hills

Have you listened in the council of God (Job 157ndash8 NRSV)

As Dexter Callender has observed concerning these questionsldquoTe allusion to the primal human in Job does not give us explicit

details concerning his incorporation into the sacred world It is clear

however that the idea is present in the reference that the primal human

lsquolistenedrsquo in the council of Godrdquo As a member of Godrsquos council man

held a stewardship to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo the deityrsquos garden (Genesis

215) According to the Genesis account when the man and woman

eat from the tree of knowledge God expels the humans from Edenand assigns the cherubim other traditional members of the divine

council to ldquokeeprdquo the garden (Genesis 324) Tis move may suggest

that in biblical thought ldquokeepingrdquo the garden is a task reserved for

members of the divine host As an immortal subordinate assigned an

important council task man however eventually appears in the Gen-

esis account as a being very much like the council deities mentioned

in Psalm 82 who receive the decree of death

I have said Ye are gods and all of you are children of the

most High

But ye shall die like men and fall like one of the princes

(Psalm 826ndash7)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou

shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thoushalt surely die (Genesis 217)

69 Dexter E Callender Jr Adam in Myth and History Ancient Israelite Perspectiveson the Primal Human (Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 2000) 212 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 949

274 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Parker argued that verses one and five in Psalm 82 served as nar-

rative introductions to Yahwehrsquos council address delivered before hisfather Elyon the head of the council In his analysis Parker convinc-ingly illustrates that Yahweh would have originally appeared in Psalm82 as merely one of the assembled participants of deities ldquoHavingthought that the members of the council were all gods (and therefore justmdashand immortal) Yahweh now recognizes that being incorrigi-bly unjust they will perish like mortals fall like some human poten-taterdquo9830441048580 Parkerrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 works well with Petersonrsquos claimthat the text reflects the story of the grand council from the Books ofAbraham and Moses

In an important part of his critique concerning these issuesHeiser argues against the theory endorsed by biblical scholars such asParker and Mark S Smith that in its earliest stages Israelite religionoriginally perceived Yahweh as a son of El ldquoIn terms of an evaluationof the separateness of El and Yahwehrdquo writes Heiser ldquoLatter-day Saint

scholars have too blithely accepted the positions of Smith Parker andBarker All is not nearly as tidy as they proposerdquo (p 234) Heiser forexample maintains that rather than a separate divine father the Elyonor ldquoGod Most Highrdquo presented in Deuteronomy 328ndash9 is none otherthan Yahweh himself In this proposal Heiserrsquos view stands in directcontrast to Mark Smith who argues that ldquoearly on Yahweh is under-stood as Israelrsquos god in distinction to El Deuteronomy 328ndash9 casts

Yahweh in the role of one of the sons of El here called gtelyocircn Tispassage presents an order in which each deity received its own nationIsrael was the nation that Yahweh receivedrdquo983044983044

Te present form of Deuteronomy seems to support Heiserrsquos argu-ment Rather than a separate deity Elyon and Yahweh might appearas a single reference to the head God of the council In addition to thedivine allotment depicted in Deuteronomy 328 the idea of a series of

minor deities that Yahweh had assigned to govern the various nationsappears in Deuteronomy 419ndash20 Tese verses which discuss the

21 Parker ldquoBeginning of the Reign of Godrdquo 539ndash40 22 Mark S Smith Te Early History o God Yahweh and the Other Deities in AncientIsrael (Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2002) 32

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 275

allotment of the host of heaven to the nations of the world parallel

both the vocabulary and the ideology witnessed in 328ndash9 In Deuter-onomy 329 the author uses the same root hlk featured in 420mdashalbeitas a noun Deuteronomy 419ndash20 specifically identifies Yahweh as thedeity who gave each council deity his allotment

And when you look up to the sky and behold the sun and themoon and the stars the whole heavenly host you must not belured into bowing down to them or serving them Tese the

Lord your God allotted to other peoples everywhere underheaven but you the Lord took and brought out of Egypt thatiron blast furnace to be His very own people as is now thecase (Deuteronomy 419ndash20 Jewish Publication Society JPS)983044

Based upon this evidence Heiserrsquos assessment of the view fea-tured in the current form of Deuteronomy may be correct howeverHeiser ultimately fails to address important evidence recognized by

many contemporary biblical scholars that suggests that Israelite the-ology did in fact evolve in a manner consistent with the basic claimsof Parker and Smith983044 For example David Noel Freedman maintainsthat the combination ldquoYahweh Elohimrdquo or ldquoLord Godrdquo found in theearly chapters of Genesis probably derives from an earlier sentencename given the God of Israel namely ldquoYahweh Elrdquo or ldquoGod createsrdquo983044In a related assessment Mark Smith has argued

Te original god of Israel was El Tis reconstruction maybe inferred from two pieces of information First the name

23 Te Jewish Publication Society edition appears in Adele Berlin and Marc Z Brettlereds Te Jewish Study Bible anakh ranslation (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 24 Of course the fact that Deuteronomy 4 simply reflects the language of Deuter-onomy 32 does not automatically mean that both texts derive from the same author Teauthor of Deuteronomy 4 may have simply created his passages concerning Yahweh tointentionally reflect the language and ideology in Deuteronomy 32 in order to present

Yahweh as the chief council deity Tis very real possibility should be considered byHeiser in further research for an introduction to theological changes reflected through-out the book of Deuteronomy see especially Bernard M Levinson Deuteronomy and theHermeneutics o Legal Innovation (New York Oxford University Press 1997) 25 David Noel Freedman ldquoTe Name of the God of Mosesrdquo Journal o Biblical Lit-erature 793 (1960) 156

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1149

276 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of Israel is not a Yahwistic name with the divine element of

Yahweh but an El name with the element lt ēl Tis fact wouldsuggest that El was the original chief god of the group namedIsrael Second Genesis 4924ndash25 presents a series of El epi-thets separate from the mention of Yahweh in verse 18983044

A detailed response to all the evidence amassed by scholars who view a theological evolution in the Hebrew Bible was beyond thescope of Heiserrsquos essay However notwithstanding the probability that

Heiser is correct in linking Elyon with Yahweh in Deuteronomy thisclaim does not negate the likelihood that in ancient Israel Yahwehwas originally a son of Elyon

In the present form of the biblical text the term [gtElyocircn]is understood to be an epithet for Yahweh the God of IsraelIt is possible however as some have argued that the epithetmay conceal a reference to a separate deity possibly an oldergod with whom Yahweh came to be identified983044

LDS scholars have good reason to accept the historical views of schol-ars such as Parker and Smith

Psalm 82 as the Grand Council

Tough helpful to his analysis ultimately Petersonrsquos claims are

not dependent upon the legitimacy of a Parker Smith historical inter-pretation Petersonrsquos argument for interpreting Psalm 82 as a reflec-tion of the grand council story featured in modern revelation findssupport in Near Eastern tradition In the ancient Near East stories ofthe divine council typically begin with a crisis in which the head Godcalls together the gods of the council to resolve the dilemma Duringthe council a series of proposals are offered Finally a ldquosaviorrdquo steps

forward offering his services to the council Tis savior then receives26 Smith Early History o God 32

27 Eric E Elnes and Patrick D Miller ldquoElyonrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demonsin the Bible ed Karel van der oorn Bob Becking and Pieter W van der Horst (LeidenBrill 1995) 560

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 277

a commission to perform his redemptive role983044 Tis common Near

Eastern pattern is seen for example in the Mesopotamian story ofdivine kingship known as Enuma Elish983044 In this Babylonian myththe head god of the pantheon calls together the gods in a council toresolve a dilemma created by the goddess iamat Following a seriesof proposals Marduk the chief god of Babylon receives a commissionas savior Marduk agrees to perform the role of savior on the condi-tion that his father Ea the head god of the council grant Marduk allpower and glory Te same pattern appears in the Assyrian myth ofAnzu However in this version the god Ninurta agrees to serve ascouncil savior while allowing his father to retain his position withinthe council

Like Enuma Elish and Psalm 82 many of the council stories fromthe ancient Near East portray stories of cosmic revolt in which judg-ment is rendered against divine beings Tis pattern is familiar toLatter-day Saints through the council story provided in the Books of

Moses and Abraham (Moses 41ndash4 and Abraham 322ndash28) Althoughsometimes obscured the same pattern is reflected in council tradi-tions featured in the Hebrew Bible Te story of council crisis forexample appears in the Isaiah Apocalypse

On that day [Yahweh] will punishthe host of heaven in heavenand on earth the kings of the earth (Isaiah 2421 NRSV)

Similar language emerges in Isaiah 271

On that day [Yahweh]with his cruel and great and strong swordwill punish Leviathan the fleeing serpent (NRSV)

28 Tis summary is based upon the pattern identified by Simon B Parker ldquoCoun-cilrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 391ndash98 for a consideration of the divine coun-

cil stories within the Bible as ldquotype scenesrdquo see David M Fleming ldquoTe Divine Councilas ype Scene in the Hebrew Biblerdquo (PhD diss Te Southern Baptist Teological Semi-nary 1989) 29 For an English translation of Enuma Elish see Stephanie Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia Creation the Flood Gilgamesh and Others (New York Oxford UniversityPress 1989) 228ndash77

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1349

278 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

For Latter-day Saints these traditions preserved in texts such as Enuma

Elish the book of Isaiah and Psalm 82 provide a type of retellingmdashalbeit sometimes hiddenmdashof the primordial events concerning thegrand council described in modern revelation

In the ancient Near East members of the divine council oenappear to receive a type of reprimand suggestive of the punishmentgiven Lucifer in LDS scripture

Because that Satan rebelled against me and sought to destroy

the agency of man which I the Lord God had given himand also that I should give unto him mine own power by thepower of mine Only Begotten I caused that he should be castdown And he became Satan yea even the devil the father ofall lies to deceive and to blind men and to lead them captiveat his will even as many as would not hearken unto my voice(Moses 43ndash4)

With the words ldquoHere am I send merdquo Latter-day Saints believeJesus Christ stepped forward in the council crisis and volunteered tosave humanity from the challenges associated with mortal probation(Abraham 327) According to the council story depicted in the Bookof Abraham Lucifer ldquowas angry and kept not his first estate and atthat day many followed aer himrdquo (Abraham 328) In his analysisPeterson does well to draw attention to the fact that Isaiahrsquos refer-

ence to ldquoLucifer son of the morningrdquo in Isaiah 1412 ldquodraws us againinto the astronomical imagery oen connected with the divine assem-blyrdquo1048624 In his own studies Heiser has convincingly argued for a similarposition

Ugaritic regularly refers to heavenly beings as p∆r kkbm (the ldquocongregation of the starsrdquo) language corresponding with כוכ י קר (ldquomorning starsrdquo in parallelism with the ldquosons of

Godrdquo in Job 387) and (the ldquostars of Godrdquo Isa 1413)כוכ י לAside from the context of these references each of whichclearly points to personal beings not astronomical phenom-

30 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 533

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 279

ena it is significant that in the entire ancient near eastern lit-

erary record El is never identified with a heavenly body Tusldquothe stars of Elrdquo points to created beings with divine status1048580

For Latter-day Saints recent archaeological and textual discoverieslike those referred to by Heiser are especially intriguing However asPeterson argues in the quotation provided above (p 273) Latter-daySaints do not need the Bible to express a precise parallel with modernrevelation in order to find support for LDS theology

Te fact that texts such as Psalm 82 somewhat parallel Latter-daySaint teachings is sufficient to argue that a more exact version of thegrand council story such as is witnessed in modern revelation mayhave existed in antiquity However notwithstanding his basic agree-ment with Peterson concerning the fundamental role assumed by thecouncil of deities in the Hebrew Bible Heiser ultimately departs fromPetersonrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 suggesting that the biblical view of

the council contains eight fundamental points that conflict with LDStheology

Heiserrsquos Sixteen Points

Heiser provides a list of sixteen arguments outlining his positionregarding Psalm 82 and the divine council He divides these into eightpoints ldquowith which many evangelicals would probably disagree and

with which many Latter-day Saints would likely agreerdquo followed byeight points ldquowith which many Latter-day Saints would probably dis-agree and with which many evangelicals would likely agreerdquo (pp 222ndash24) Heiserrsquos perspectives regarding Psalm 82 are clearly sound Teyinclude such issues as the inadequacy of the term monotheism as areference to Israelite theology and the biblical use of the word elohim as a literal reference to gods rather than human judges While Heiseris certainly correct in suggesting that his first eight views would proveproblematic for many evangelicals but not for most Mormons Heiserrsquoslist of eight statements on Psalm 82 that he assumes many Latter-day

31 Michael S Heiser ldquoDeuteronomy 328 and the Sons of Godrdquo 15 for an electronic version see thedivinecouncilcomD32BibSacpdf (accessed 8 February 2007)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1549

280 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Saints would disagree with indicates a basic lack of exposure to Latter-

day Saint thoughtHeiser is well versed in biblical studies His work has contrib-uted important insights toward a scholarly view of the essential roleassumed by the divine council in Old estament theology but he isnot a Latter-day Saint However Heiser does not consider in his cri-tique the possibility that most Latter-day Saints including Petersondo not believe that the biblical view of the council mirrors preciselywhat Latter-day Saints accept through modern revelation JosephSmithrsquos revelations proclaim our day as the dispensation of the ful-ness of times ldquoaccording to that which was ordained in the midst ofthe Council of the Eternal God of all other gods before this world wasrdquo(DampC 12132) For Latter-day Saints this final dispensation representsthe time decreed by God and his council in which ldquothose things whichnever have been revealed from the foundation of the world but havebeen kept hid from the wise and prudent shall be revealed unto babes

and sucklings in this the dispensation of the fulness of timesrdquo (DampC12818) Terefore Latter-day Saint scholars acknowledge that an LDSunderstanding of the council does not precisely mirror the perspec-tives manifested in the Bible Tat having been said most Latter-daySaints certainly accept the view advocated by Peterson that the bib-lical perspective of the heavenly council of deities is in greater har-mony with LDS belief than with any other contemporary Christian

tradition A recognition that the Bible though not flawless is inspiredof God allows Latter-day Saints to comfortably engage the views putforth by biblical scholars such as Heiser even when those observa-tions prove threatening to our evangelical counterparts

If certain biblical authors for example did in fact believe asHeiser seems to correctly suggest that Yahweh was ldquonot lsquobirthedrsquointo existence by the lsquoolden godsrsquo described in Ugaritic textsrdquo (p 223)Latter-day Saints would have no problem simply accepting the obser- vation as a biblical view Similarly even though Heiser assumes thatmany Mormons would disagree with his opinion that the Bible pre-sents Yahweh the God of Israel as ldquoontologically uniquerdquo (p 223) inreality many Latter-day Saints recognize that this is precisely the case

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 281

Even within LDS theology God the Father stands out as ontologically

unique inasmuch as he created the spirits of all humanity Modernrevelation describes God with the words ldquofrom eternity to eternity Heis the same and His years never failrdquo (DampC 764)

Yahwehrsquos Ontological Uniqueness

In addition to the evidence Heiser presents for what he calls Yah-wehrsquos ontological uniqueness the name Yahweh itself appears vocal-

ized in the Hebrew Bible as a finite Hiphil verb form Te vocalizationof YHWH as ldquoYahwehrdquo carries a specific nuance since ldquoHebrew gram-mars traditionally represent the Hiphil stem as the causative of the Qal

stemrdquo983044 Frank Moore Cross explains that ldquothe accumulated evidence strongly supports the view that the name Yahweh is a causativeimperfect of the Canaanite-Proto-Hebrew verb hwy lsquoto bersquo rdquo Tere-fore the divine name Yahweh according to this view literally means

ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procreatesrdquo One of the inter-esting points to consider concerning the biblical title Yahweh Sabaoth or ldquoLord of Hostsrdquo is that typically in Hebrew proper names do notappear bound to a genitive nounmdashthat is ldquoJohn of Hostsrdquo or ldquoMary ofEarthrdquo etc Since a proper name cannot traditionally function as abound form in a construct chain Cross interprets the King James titleldquoLord of Hostsrdquo as ldquo lsquohe creates the (divine) hostsrsquo rdquo If correct this

view would lend support to Heiserrsquos argument that ldquoYahweh is said32 Bruce K Waltke and M OrsquoConnor An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax

(Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 1990) 433 33 Frank Moore Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge Harvard Uni- versity Press 1973) 65 34 ldquoA proper noun cannot as a rule be followed by a genitiverdquo Paul Jouumlon A Gram-mar o Biblical Hebrew trans and rev Muraoka (Rome Editrice Pontificio IstitutoBiblico 2000) 2481 Admittedly however textual evidence shows that the rule need notapply to divine names see J A Emerton ldquoNew Light on Israelite Religion Te Implica-

tions of the Inscriptions from Kunti llet lsquoAjrudrdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wis-senschaf 94 (1982) 12ndash13 and especially John H Choi ldquoResheph and YHWH IacuteĔBĀlt Ocirc rdquoVetus estamentum 54 (2004) 17ndash28 I offer this assessment of the title Yahweh Sabaothwhich reflects the views of scholars such as David Noel Freedman and Frank MooreCross as merely an intriguing possibility 35 Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic 65 emphasis added

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1749

282 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo (p 250)

Heiser incorrectly assumes that this apparent biblical teaching con-cerning Yahwehrsquos uniqueness among the gods is not inconsistent withLDS theology

Tough Latter-day Saints view God the Father and Jesus Christas two separate divine beings for the Saints the biblical titles associ-ated with these deities are clearly interchangeable Latter-day Saintshave no problem therefore in associating God the Father with thetitle Yahwehmdashthat is ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procre-atesrdquo Te 1916 official declaration presented by the First Presidency ofthe church states ldquoGod the Eternal Father whom we designate by theexalted name-title Elohim is the literal Parent of our Lord and SaviorJesus Christ and of the spirits of the human racerdquo Clearly howeverthe First Presidencyrsquos move toward designating God the Father as Elo-him and Jesus the Son as Jehovah was primarily a move by churchleaders to create uniformity in Latter-day Saint expression In a recent

Ensign article Keith Meservy observed that ldquoin at least three Old es-tament passages it appears that L983151983154983140 [ie Jehovah] applies to Heav-enly Father not Jesus Christ Ps 1101 Ps 27 Isa 5310rdquo No doubtfor many Latter-day Saints this estimate offered by Meservy couldbe greatly augmented LDS teachings therefore do not preclude theontological uniqueness of God the Father that Heiser witnesses in theHebrew Bible

Yahweh as a Being ldquoSpecies-Uniquerdquo

Certainly Heiser is justified in suggesting that the gods of thedivine council appear inferior to Israelrsquos deity He uses this correctobservation however to build an argument that Israelrsquos God wastherefore somehow ldquospecies-uniquerdquo (p 250) In his discussion con-cerning the biblical evidence for Yahweh being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo

Heiser bases his interpretation on five points of evidence (1) ldquoYahweh36 ldquoTe Father and the Son A Doctrinal Exposition by the First Presidency and the

welverdquo as cited in Messages o the First Presidency o the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints ed James R Clark (Salt Lake City Bookcra 1971) 526 emphasis added 37 Keith H Meservy ldquoLORD = Jehovahrdquo Ensign June 2002 29 n 3

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 283

is said to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo

(2) ldquoYahweh was considered pre-existent to all godsrdquo (3) Yahweh hasthe power to strip the other elohim of their immortality (4) Yahwehalone is referred to in the Bible as ha-elohim and (5) ldquothe other godsare commanded to worship Yahwehrdquo (see pp 250ndash57) Tough eachof Heiserrsquos five points of evidence do in fact appear in the Bible con-trary to Heiserrsquos suggestion none of these observations establishesYahweh as being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo In the Bible Yahweh is the God ofgods but the biblical gods were still biblical gods As Paul Sanders hasexplained according to the Deuteronomic vision ldquothe [Sons of Goddescribed in Deuteronomy 328] are relatively independent they havetheir own dominions like YHWHrdquo

Notwithstanding his acceptance of the importance of the divinecouncil of deities in biblical theology Heiserrsquos critique suffers in partthrough his effort to define Israelrsquos deity as a being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo(p 250) He is correct in drawing attention to the fact that biblical

authors viewed their deity as exceptionally powerful in the councilldquoFor the Lord your God is God of godsrdquo proclaims Deuteronomy 1017ldquoand Lord of lordsrdquo Unfortunately however in identifying Yahweh asa being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo Heiser forces the biblical view of deities intoan image somewhat consistent with radical monotheism Contraryto Heiserrsquos suggestion the creative act in and of itself does not set thecreator apart as an exclusive species Te same point also applies tothe issue Heiser raises concerning primogeniture In other words aman for instance may exist before both his children and his siblingsand though preeminence may render the person ldquouniquerdquo on somelevels prior existence would not in this or in any other case rendera being as ldquospecies-uniquerdquo rue the Bible speaks of gods separatefrom Israelrsquos primary deity as elohim a˙erimmdashthat is ldquoother godsrdquo(see Exodus 203 2313 Deuteronomy 57 614 etc) However as YairHoffman has observed ldquoA survey of the use of a˙erim [ldquootherrdquo] shows

38 Paul Sanders Te Provenance o Deuteronomy 32 (Leiden Brill 1996) 37039 Te term radical monotheism refers to the theological position that only one

divine being exists in the universe Te expression was popularized by ikva Frymer-Kensky In the Wake o the Goddesses Women Culture and the Biblical ransormationo Pagan Myth (New York Free Press 1992) 154

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1949

284 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

that when used attributively with regard to garments days messen-

gers and objects it clearly has a relative meaning something differ-ent yet o the same kind rdquo1048624 Terefore ldquothere is no reason to assumethat in the phrase elohim a˙erim the attribute has a more distinctivemeaningrdquo1048580 When all is said and done the biblical deities like Yah-weh himself were still gods

In addition contrary to Heiserrsquos assertion the simple fact that Elo-him possesses the power to strip the other deities of their immortalityin Psalm 82 does not indicate that these gods are of a different spe-cies than Elohim According to the Psalmistrsquos view Elohim is simplymore powerful than the other gods Analogies from the ancient NearEast illustrate the problematic nature of Heiserrsquos claim In the Babylo-nian story Enuma Elish for instance the primordial mother goddessiamat created the god Qingu as chief deity over iamatrsquos militaryforces As a result of his actions taken against the divine council thedeities of the assembly ldquobound [Qingu] and held him in front of Ea

[and they] imposed the penalty on him and cut off his bloodrdquo983044 Tefact that in Enuma Elish the council could strip Qingu of his immor-tality did not mean that the god Qingu was somehow of a different orlesser divine species In the Sumerian myth of Enlil and Ninlil Enlil(one of the ldquogreat godsrdquo of Mesopotamia) is brought to trial for havingraped the goddess Ninlil As Enlil returned to the city of Nippur hewas arrested by the assembly while walking through the temple court

Te trial commenced immediately In the myth the council pre-sented the verdict that ldquothe sex offender Enlil will leave the townrdquoAccordingly the myth reports that Enlil le Nippur headed towardthe netherworld In his assessment of the story Jacobsen points out

40 Yair Hoffman ldquoTe Conception of lsquoOther Godsrsquo in Deuteronomistic Literaturerdquoin Concepts o the Other in Near Eastern Religions ed Ilai Alon Ithamar Gruenwald andItamar Singer (Leiden Brill 1994) 107 emphasis added 41 Hoffman ldquoConception of Other Godsrdquo 107

42 As cited in Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia 261 43 For a summary of the myth see Gwendolyn Leick A Dictionary o Ancient NearEastern Mythology (London Routledge 1998) 47ndash48 for a translation see TorkildJacobsen Te Harps Tat Once Sumerian Poetry in ranslation (New Haven YaleUniversity Press 1987) 167ndash80 44 Jacobsen Harps 174

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 285

that Enlilrsquos descent to Hades may indicate that the high god in Meso-

potamian mythology was originally sentenced to death As notedby James Ackerman in his dissertation concerning Psalm 82 thesetypes of judgment scenes in which the council determines that godswill die like mortals carry important implications for interpreting thecultural background for the biblical text Contrary to Heiserrsquos inter-pretation none of these stories indicate that the dying gods were of adifferent species or order than the gods who issued the sentence

Near Eastern traditions oen place considerable emphasis on thedying-god motif In no sense however are these dying godsmdashevenwhen resurrectedmdashsomehow depicted as a lesser species Heiserrsquos con-fusion concerning the implications of a biblical statement that Godissued a judgment of death to the deities of the divine council illus-trates the fundamental need for biblical scholars to pursue Assyriol-ogy in connection with their efforts to interpret the Hebrew Bible

Also contrary to Heiserrsquos suggestion the punishment meted out

to usurpers in Near Eastern council stories never indicates that thecriminals derived from some sort of exceptional species Te storyof Athtar from ancient Canaan for instance presents the traditionof Athtarrsquos descent to the underworld following the deityrsquos ascensionto the throne of Baal Te details involved in Athtarrsquos story containimportant thematic elements depicted in ancient Near Eastern storiesof cosmic revolt Athtar seems to share some semblance with Baalrsquos

mortal enemy Mot or ldquoDeathrdquo into whom Baal himself descendsHence Hugh Page notes that Athtarrsquos ldquodescent to the underworld implies that on some level Athtar has placed himself in proxim-ity to or relationship with the only god that Baal proves incapable

45 Torkild Jacobsen ldquoAn Ancient Mesopotamian rial for Homiciderdquo in owardthe Image o ammuz and Other Essays on Mesopotamian History and Culture ed Wil-liam L Moran (Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1970) 207 first published inStudia Biblica et Orientalia vol 3 of Analecta Biblica et Orientalia XII (Rome Pontificio

Istituto Biblico 1959) 130ndash50 46 See James S Ackerman ldquoAn Exegetical Study of Psalm 82rdquo (PhD diss HarvardUniversity 1966) 186ndash93 47 For a recent survey of the issue which includes a survey of previous assessmentssee ryggve N D Mettinger Te Riddle o Resurrection ldquoDying and Rising Godsrdquo in the Ancient Near East (Stockholm Almqvist amp Wiksell 2001)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2149

286 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of defeatingrdquo Athtarrsquos assumption of the throne of Baal followed

by his descent to the underworld indicates that this portion of theBaal cycle from ancient Canaan fits the general category of the cosmic

revolt genre witnessed in texts such as Abraham 3 and Psalm 82

1 Kindly El the Compassionate answers

2 ldquoOne so small cannot race

3 with Baal cannot handle the lance

4 with Daganrsquos son when they test one anotherrdquo

5 Lady Athirat of the Sea answers 6 ldquoLet us enthrone Athtar the Strong

7 Let Athtar the Strong be kingrdquo

8 Ten Athtar the Strong

9 ascended the summit of Sapan

10 He sat upon the throne of Mightiest Baal

11 His feet would not reach its footstool

12 His head would not reach its top 13 Athtar the Strong answered

14 ldquoI cannot rule on the summit of Sapanrdquo

15 Athtar the Strong descended

16 He descended from the throne of Mightiest Baal

17 And he ruled over the underworld god of all of it

18 drew in barrels

19 drew in jars (KU 1649ndash67 translation)

Te fact that Athtar the Strong experienced a type of ldquodeathrdquo in which

he ldquoruled over the underworldrdquo following his descent from Baalrsquos

throne does not suggest that Athtar was a ldquobeing species-uniquerdquo from

the other deities any more than Inanna or Ishtar the Mesopotamian

goddesses who experienced a type of death in the underworld were of

a different species than the gods Ea Enki Marduk and so forth48 Hugh R Page Jr Te Myth o Cosmic Rebellion A Study o Its Reflexes in Ugaritic

and Biblical Literature (Leiden Brill 1996) 92 Pagersquos views concerning the Athtar mythhave been criticized by Gregorio del Olmo Lete ldquoIn Search of the Canaanite Luciferrdquo Aula Orientalis 19 (2001) 125ndash32

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 287

Still in his efforts to present Yahweh as a being species-unique

Heiser correctly draws attention to the other gods of the council whoare commanded to worship Yahweh In his analysis he focuses uponthe call given to the gods in Psalm 291ndash2 ldquoAscribe to Yahweh O sons ofGod ascribe to Yahweh glory and strength Ascribe to Yahweh the gloryof his name worship Yahweh in the splendor of holinessrdquo (as quotedon p 256) While Heiserrsquos observations certainly illustrate that biblicalauthors viewed their deity as uniquemdashthat is exceptionalmdashthroughout

Near Eastern tradition lesser gods regularly appear in a position inwhich they offer praise service and devotion to the higher gods of thecouncil Richard J Clifford explains that in the Phoenician view of theassembly ldquoas elsewhere in the ancient Near East the assemblies are pic-tured as subordinate to individual gods although the assemblyrsquos con-sent seems necessary for important decisionsrdquo Simply because ancienttextsmdashincluding the Biblemdashdepict the members of the assemblies asldquosubordinate to individual godsrdquo this in no way implies that the higher

deities somehow belonged to a separate species Ancient Near Easterntexts such as Mursilirsquos Hymn and Prayer to the Sun-goddess o Arinna (CH 376A) establish the fact that Near Eastern peoples believed thatgods of the same species paid homage to higher deities in a way compa-rable to the biblical view

You O Sun-goddess of Arinna are honored goddess Your

name is honored among names and your divinity is honoredamong gods Furthermore among the gods you are the mosthonored and the greatest Tere is no other god more honoredor greater than you You are the lord of just judgment Youcontrol the kingship of heaven and earth1048624

Holding the position ldquomost honoredrdquo among the gods did not estab-lish Arinna as species-unique Arinna was simply the god before

whom from the authorrsquos perspective the other gods would regularly49 Richard J Clifford ldquoPhoenician Religionrdquo Bulletin o the American Schools o

Oriental Research 279 (1990) 57 50 As cited in Itamar Singer Hittite Prayers (Atlanta Society of Biblical Literature2002) 51

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2349

288 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquofall downrdquo1048580 For the ancients the Near Eastern view of the divine

court clearly reflected or were expressed in terms of earthly realityTerefore just as the high king before whom other humans paid hom-age was still a human being so the god to whom other deities paidhomage was still a god matching in species For biblical authors Yah-weh stood at the head of the hierarchy in Israelite thought Yahwehwas unique as the God of gods but he was not unique in his divinityFrom a biblical perspective Yahweh even shared this divinity withhumanity

Humans as Teomorphic Beings

In his discussion concerning the biblical view regarding theomor-phic humans Peterson draws attention to Paulrsquos New estament ser-mon presented in Acts 1728ndash29

For in him we live and move and have our being as

certain also of your own poets have said For we are also hisoffspring

Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God we oughtnot to think that the Godhead is like unto gold or silver orstone graven by art and manrsquos device

Peterson in part argues for a biblical connection between God andhumanity based on the fact that ldquothe word rendered lsquooffspringrsquo by the

King James translators is the Greek genos which is cognate with theLatin genus and means lsquofamilyrsquo or lsquoracersquo or lsquokindrsquo or even and mostespecially interesting lsquodescendants of a common ancestorrsquo rdquo983044 ForLatter-day Saints human beings are literally the offspring of God andtherefore intrinsically theomorphic Part of the strength of Petersonrsquosessay lies in his recognition that like Latter-day Saints biblical authorsregularly blur the distinction between humanity and divine beings

Not only does Peterson draw attention to the prophetic interactionwith the council as support for his thesis but he also places consider-

51 Singer Hittite Prayers 51 52 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 542ndash43 53 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 289

able emphasis upon the deified dead in the Hebrew Bible and the early

Christian teaching regarding deification Heiser notwithstandingPetersonrsquos evidence rejects the idea that a genus equation of God and

humankind appears in the Bible

For his criticisms of Petersonrsquos views Heiser places considerable

weight on the notion that ldquothe concept of the image of God does not

advance the idea that there is a genus equation of God and human-

kind or that God was once a manrdquo (p 224) On some levels Heiserrsquos

point concerning the word tzelem or ldquoimagerdquo in Genesis 126ndash27is correct Concerning this controversial term Marc Z Brettler has

recently explained

Te word tzelem (ldquoimagerdquo) elsewhere always refers to a

physical representation For example the Book of Ezekiel

uses tzelem when it refers to ldquomen sculptured upon the walls

figures of Chaldeans drawn in vermilionrdquo (2314) or when it

accuses Israel of fornicating with ldquophallic imagesrdquo (1617) Teword oen refers to idols (eg Num 3352 Ezek 720 Amos

526 2 Chron 2317) It always signifies a concrete entity

rather than an abstract one Tis is not surprising since the

Bible (in contrast to most medieval philosophical traditions

both Jewish and Christian) oen depicts God in corporeal

terms

Genesis 126ndash27 suggests that Godrsquos physical likeness is similar to

humanityrsquos but Heiser is correct that the statement does not indicate

that biblical authors viewed humans as gods or that God himself was

once a human However many other texts from the Bible do present a

theomorphic view of humanity Peterson therefore is precisely correct

in stating that ldquothe Latter-day Saint understanding that humans are of

the same genus or species as God is thus clearly biblicalrdquo54 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509ndash28

55 Marc Z Brettler How to Read the Bible (Philadelphia Jewish Publication Society2005) 43ndash44 Hebrew word deleted 56 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 547

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2549

290 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Adam as a Divine Council Member

In addition to associating humanity with the tzelem of God theBible describes the first man as a deified member of the divine council

In the Eden story the Lord took advantage of the wet claylike soil and

ldquoformed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils

the breath of life and man became a living soulrdquo (Genesis 27) In an

important study concerning this imagery Walter Brueggemann has

shown that a biblical connection exists between being raised from the

dust and enthronement ldquoo be taken lsquofrom the dustrsquo means to be

elevated from obscurity to royal office and to return to dust means to

be deprived of that office and returned to obscurityrdquo Imagery such

as that witnessed in 1 Kings 162 supports Brueggemannrsquos interpreta-

tion ldquoForasmuch as I [God] exalted thee [Jehu] out of the dust and

made thee prince over my people Israel rdquo (1 Kings 162) Hence the

notion of the God raising man ldquofrom the dust of the earthrdquo in Genesis

27 in part suggests that Yahweh begins his creative activity by form-

ing a divine king According to Genesis 215 this divine king through

a type of imitatio dei would continue to perform the work of Yahweh

who ldquoplantedrdquo the garden ldquoAnd the Lord God took the man and put

him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep itrdquo In a simi-

lar fashion Mesopotamian kings such as Hammurapi glorified their

efforts through the use of creation and agricultural imageryI encircled [the wall] with a swamp I dug the Euphrates

as far as Sippar (and) made it reach a prosperous quay

I Hammu-rāpi who builds up the land caused Sippar

and Babylon to dwell in peaceful abodes forever What

from [primordial days] no one among the kings had done I

did in a grand fashion for the god Šamaš my lord

57 Walter Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestament-liche Wissenschaf 841 (1972) 1ndash18 58 Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo 2 59 Douglas Frayne Old Babylonian Period (2003ndash1595 BC) (oronto University oforonto Press 1990) 348ndash49

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 291

Te view presented in the Babylonian inscription on the wall

of Sippar reflects the common Near Eastern assumption featured inGenesis 2 of a God king participating in the act of creation from ldquopri-

mordial daysrdquo through structure1048624 As a king Hammurapi assumed

the same role filled by deities who created the universe by giving order

to preexistent chaos In its depiction of Adam as the primordial gar-

dener the Bible relies upon similar imagery

Manrsquos status as the archetypal gardener king in Genesis 2ndash3 con-

tains important parallels with Mesopotamian kingship theory1048580 Sev-eral examples of Mesopotamian iconography feature a depiction of the

tree (or plant) of life over which the king and priests appear pouring

libations In assessing the connection between Mesopotamian kings

and gardeners Geo Widengren cites these statements from the am-

muz text R IV 27 No I

A tamarisk which in the garden has no water to drink

Whose foliage on the plant sends forth no twig

A plant which they water no more in its pot

Whose roots are torn away

A herb which is in the garden has no water to drink

Among the flowers of the garden he sleeps

Among the flowers of the garden he is thrown

According to Widengren ldquothe ree of Life is watered by the kingwho pours out over it the Water of Life which he has in his possession

Te ree of Life constantly needs the Water of Life near which it is

growing in the garden of paradiserdquo983044 Te connection between king

and gardener was widely attested throughout ancient Mesopotamia

60 In his translation Frayne renders the Akkadian word szligi-a-tim as ldquothe pastrdquo Teinscription however clearly relies on creation imagery and I have therefore interpreted

szligiatim as ldquoprimordial daysrdquo in accordance with the information provided in Jeremy BlackAndrew George and Nicholas Postgate A Concise Dictionary o Akkadian (WiesbadenHarrassowitz 2000) 337 61 See Geo Widengren Te King and the ree o Lie in Ancient Near Eastern Reli- gion (Uppsala Uppsala Universitets Aringrsskri 1951) 62 Widengren King and the ree o Lie 15

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2749

292 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Tis portrayal of kingship appears in the birth legend of Sargon

wherein the monarch declaresAkki the waterscooper placed me as his gardenerWhen I was a gardener Ishtar was in love with meTe kingship I exercised during x + 5 years

Tese lines from the tale of Sargon the gardener whom the goddess Ishtarloved seem to provide an especially significant parallel with the biblical view presented in the story of Eden In the words of Nicholas Wyatt ldquotheman in his garden is a symbolic allusion to the king in his sanctuaryrdquo

One of the important connections between humanityrsquos enthrone-ment in the garden and later biblical traditions includes the anointingof an Israelite king in 1 Kings 128ndash40 at the Gihon Spring a rivernamed Gihon was one of the four rivers that flowed out of Eden andround the land of Cush (Genesis 213) Significantly the only otherexplicit reference to the Garden of Eden in the Hebrew Bible appears

in a context that addresses the link between kingship and divinity (seeEzekiel 282ndash13)

Concerning the attestation of biblical rituals that may preserveactual religious rites wherein Israelite kings assumed divinity Wyattargues that

the rituals which transform the status of the earthly kingremoving him from ldquomerely humanrdquo status to that of a sacralfigure to be couched in the form of a narrative about a godcarries with it the hint that the king himself is to be seen astransformed into a god Te enthronement of the king isthus his apotheosis

63 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoInterpreting the Creation and Fall Story in Genesis 2ndash3rdquo Zeit-schrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 931 (1981) 15 64 John van Seters has argued according to the Documentary Hypothesis that the

story of divine kingship in J derives from Babylonian influences and is therefore latepostexilic If P is in part a reaction to the J account then it is difficult to accept vanSetersrsquos dating see John van Seters ldquoTe Creation of Man and the Creation of the KingrdquoZeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 1013 (1989) 333ndash41 65 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinity Some Mythical and Ritual Aspects of WestSemitic Kingshiprdquo Ugarit-Forschungen 31 (1999) 857

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 293

In his exploration of biblical deification Wyatt refers to Psalm 198ndash10

as a possible ritual text transforming the king into a divine beingTe teaching of Yahweh is perfectrestoring the breastTe testimony of Yahweh is certainmaking wise the headTe precepts of Yahweh are uprightrejoicing the heart

Te commandment of Yahweh is puremaking bright the eyesTe speech of Yahweh is ritually purestanding for everTe judgments of Yahweh are truthTey are righteous all togethermore desirable than goldthan much pure goldmore sweet than honeyor the refined combYour servant is indeed illumined by themand in their observance is there great gain

Concerning this possible reference to ritual anointing Wyatt argues

It is true that there is no narrative statement about unc-

tion here oil is not even mentioned But only thus can thesuccessive blessings on various parts of the kingrsquos body beexplained For comparison we should consider the unction ofpriests in Exod 294ndash9 19ndash21 4012ndash5 and Lev 810ndash2 22ndash4where various parts of the priestrsquos body are anointed with oiland blood undoubtedly with some liturgical commentary onthe action such is now narrated in these passages providing

a suitable performative utteranceIf correct Wyattrsquos assessment of Israelite deification proves importantfor an analysis of Adam as divine king in the book of Genesis

66 Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinityrdquo 874ndash75

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2949

294 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

In Genesis chapter 2 Godrsquos initial creative act must be the creation

of man for as a divine king raised ldquofrom the dustrdquo man was specifi-cally formed to assist deity in the creation process God appears as agardener who causes to grow ldquoevery tree that is pleasant to the sightand good for foodrdquo (Genesis 29) Te account declares that the Lordplaced the man in the garden to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo his newly createdoasis (Genesis 215) As a gardener the Lord plants Eden as a gardenerthe Lord mixes the soil to form both man and beast As a gardener the

Lord creates man in his image to perform the work of a God Follow-ing his creation man assumes the role of divine gardenerFrom an ancient Near Eastern perspective the view of Adam as

divine gardener suggests that biblical authors viewed humanity asan earthly extension of the divine council According to the Edenaccount man was immortal (Genesis 217) man had received fromdeity the sacred ldquobreath of liferdquo (Genesis 27) man had been com-missioned to perform the work of a godmdashthat is to till and tend the

divine garden Terefore as an immortal gardener man was alreadyldquolike the godsrdquo prior to partaking of the forbidden fruit

In Mesopotamian myths for example the work of gardening wasassigned to lesser members of the divine council Hence the story ofAtrahasis opens with the following portrayal

When gods were man

Tey did forced labor they bore drudgeryGreat indeed was the drudgery of the godsTe forced labor was heavy the misery too muchTe seven() great Anunna-gods were burdeningTe Igigi-gods with forced labor

Like the account in Genesis the lesser gods of the divine council inAtrahasis were gardeners who did the laborious task of caring for the

canals trees and waterways that sustained the higher gods of the67 For additional examples of Yahweh portrayed in the role of gardener see Num-

bers 246 Psalm 10416 Isaiah 4414 68 Altrahasis II39 1ndash6 translation in Benjamin R Foster Beore the Muses An Anthol-ogy o Akkadian Literature (Bethesda MD CDL 1993) 1159

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 295

assembly Hence Adam as an immortal being clearly reflects the

position of the Igigi in Mesopotamian thought Te questions pre-sented to Job by Eliphaz regarding the primal human seem to share

this notion

Are you the firstborn of the human race

Were you brought forth before the hills

Have you listened in the council of God (Job 157ndash8 NRSV)

As Dexter Callender has observed concerning these questionsldquoTe allusion to the primal human in Job does not give us explicit

details concerning his incorporation into the sacred world It is clear

however that the idea is present in the reference that the primal human

lsquolistenedrsquo in the council of Godrdquo As a member of Godrsquos council man

held a stewardship to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo the deityrsquos garden (Genesis

215) According to the Genesis account when the man and woman

eat from the tree of knowledge God expels the humans from Edenand assigns the cherubim other traditional members of the divine

council to ldquokeeprdquo the garden (Genesis 324) Tis move may suggest

that in biblical thought ldquokeepingrdquo the garden is a task reserved for

members of the divine host As an immortal subordinate assigned an

important council task man however eventually appears in the Gen-

esis account as a being very much like the council deities mentioned

in Psalm 82 who receive the decree of death

I have said Ye are gods and all of you are children of the

most High

But ye shall die like men and fall like one of the princes

(Psalm 826ndash7)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou

shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thoushalt surely die (Genesis 217)

69 Dexter E Callender Jr Adam in Myth and History Ancient Israelite Perspectiveson the Primal Human (Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 2000) 212 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 275

allotment of the host of heaven to the nations of the world parallel

both the vocabulary and the ideology witnessed in 328ndash9 In Deuter-onomy 329 the author uses the same root hlk featured in 420mdashalbeitas a noun Deuteronomy 419ndash20 specifically identifies Yahweh as thedeity who gave each council deity his allotment

And when you look up to the sky and behold the sun and themoon and the stars the whole heavenly host you must not belured into bowing down to them or serving them Tese the

Lord your God allotted to other peoples everywhere underheaven but you the Lord took and brought out of Egypt thatiron blast furnace to be His very own people as is now thecase (Deuteronomy 419ndash20 Jewish Publication Society JPS)983044

Based upon this evidence Heiserrsquos assessment of the view fea-tured in the current form of Deuteronomy may be correct howeverHeiser ultimately fails to address important evidence recognized by

many contemporary biblical scholars that suggests that Israelite the-ology did in fact evolve in a manner consistent with the basic claimsof Parker and Smith983044 For example David Noel Freedman maintainsthat the combination ldquoYahweh Elohimrdquo or ldquoLord Godrdquo found in theearly chapters of Genesis probably derives from an earlier sentencename given the God of Israel namely ldquoYahweh Elrdquo or ldquoGod createsrdquo983044In a related assessment Mark Smith has argued

Te original god of Israel was El Tis reconstruction maybe inferred from two pieces of information First the name

23 Te Jewish Publication Society edition appears in Adele Berlin and Marc Z Brettlereds Te Jewish Study Bible anakh ranslation (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 24 Of course the fact that Deuteronomy 4 simply reflects the language of Deuter-onomy 32 does not automatically mean that both texts derive from the same author Teauthor of Deuteronomy 4 may have simply created his passages concerning Yahweh tointentionally reflect the language and ideology in Deuteronomy 32 in order to present

Yahweh as the chief council deity Tis very real possibility should be considered byHeiser in further research for an introduction to theological changes reflected through-out the book of Deuteronomy see especially Bernard M Levinson Deuteronomy and theHermeneutics o Legal Innovation (New York Oxford University Press 1997) 25 David Noel Freedman ldquoTe Name of the God of Mosesrdquo Journal o Biblical Lit-erature 793 (1960) 156

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1149

276 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of Israel is not a Yahwistic name with the divine element of

Yahweh but an El name with the element lt ēl Tis fact wouldsuggest that El was the original chief god of the group namedIsrael Second Genesis 4924ndash25 presents a series of El epi-thets separate from the mention of Yahweh in verse 18983044

A detailed response to all the evidence amassed by scholars who view a theological evolution in the Hebrew Bible was beyond thescope of Heiserrsquos essay However notwithstanding the probability that

Heiser is correct in linking Elyon with Yahweh in Deuteronomy thisclaim does not negate the likelihood that in ancient Israel Yahwehwas originally a son of Elyon

In the present form of the biblical text the term [gtElyocircn]is understood to be an epithet for Yahweh the God of IsraelIt is possible however as some have argued that the epithetmay conceal a reference to a separate deity possibly an oldergod with whom Yahweh came to be identified983044

LDS scholars have good reason to accept the historical views of schol-ars such as Parker and Smith

Psalm 82 as the Grand Council

Tough helpful to his analysis ultimately Petersonrsquos claims are

not dependent upon the legitimacy of a Parker Smith historical inter-pretation Petersonrsquos argument for interpreting Psalm 82 as a reflec-tion of the grand council story featured in modern revelation findssupport in Near Eastern tradition In the ancient Near East stories ofthe divine council typically begin with a crisis in which the head Godcalls together the gods of the council to resolve the dilemma Duringthe council a series of proposals are offered Finally a ldquosaviorrdquo steps

forward offering his services to the council Tis savior then receives26 Smith Early History o God 32

27 Eric E Elnes and Patrick D Miller ldquoElyonrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demonsin the Bible ed Karel van der oorn Bob Becking and Pieter W van der Horst (LeidenBrill 1995) 560

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 277

a commission to perform his redemptive role983044 Tis common Near

Eastern pattern is seen for example in the Mesopotamian story ofdivine kingship known as Enuma Elish983044 In this Babylonian myththe head god of the pantheon calls together the gods in a council toresolve a dilemma created by the goddess iamat Following a seriesof proposals Marduk the chief god of Babylon receives a commissionas savior Marduk agrees to perform the role of savior on the condi-tion that his father Ea the head god of the council grant Marduk allpower and glory Te same pattern appears in the Assyrian myth ofAnzu However in this version the god Ninurta agrees to serve ascouncil savior while allowing his father to retain his position withinthe council

Like Enuma Elish and Psalm 82 many of the council stories fromthe ancient Near East portray stories of cosmic revolt in which judg-ment is rendered against divine beings Tis pattern is familiar toLatter-day Saints through the council story provided in the Books of

Moses and Abraham (Moses 41ndash4 and Abraham 322ndash28) Althoughsometimes obscured the same pattern is reflected in council tradi-tions featured in the Hebrew Bible Te story of council crisis forexample appears in the Isaiah Apocalypse

On that day [Yahweh] will punishthe host of heaven in heavenand on earth the kings of the earth (Isaiah 2421 NRSV)

Similar language emerges in Isaiah 271

On that day [Yahweh]with his cruel and great and strong swordwill punish Leviathan the fleeing serpent (NRSV)

28 Tis summary is based upon the pattern identified by Simon B Parker ldquoCoun-cilrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 391ndash98 for a consideration of the divine coun-

cil stories within the Bible as ldquotype scenesrdquo see David M Fleming ldquoTe Divine Councilas ype Scene in the Hebrew Biblerdquo (PhD diss Te Southern Baptist Teological Semi-nary 1989) 29 For an English translation of Enuma Elish see Stephanie Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia Creation the Flood Gilgamesh and Others (New York Oxford UniversityPress 1989) 228ndash77

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1349

278 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

For Latter-day Saints these traditions preserved in texts such as Enuma

Elish the book of Isaiah and Psalm 82 provide a type of retellingmdashalbeit sometimes hiddenmdashof the primordial events concerning thegrand council described in modern revelation

In the ancient Near East members of the divine council oenappear to receive a type of reprimand suggestive of the punishmentgiven Lucifer in LDS scripture

Because that Satan rebelled against me and sought to destroy

the agency of man which I the Lord God had given himand also that I should give unto him mine own power by thepower of mine Only Begotten I caused that he should be castdown And he became Satan yea even the devil the father ofall lies to deceive and to blind men and to lead them captiveat his will even as many as would not hearken unto my voice(Moses 43ndash4)

With the words ldquoHere am I send merdquo Latter-day Saints believeJesus Christ stepped forward in the council crisis and volunteered tosave humanity from the challenges associated with mortal probation(Abraham 327) According to the council story depicted in the Bookof Abraham Lucifer ldquowas angry and kept not his first estate and atthat day many followed aer himrdquo (Abraham 328) In his analysisPeterson does well to draw attention to the fact that Isaiahrsquos refer-

ence to ldquoLucifer son of the morningrdquo in Isaiah 1412 ldquodraws us againinto the astronomical imagery oen connected with the divine assem-blyrdquo1048624 In his own studies Heiser has convincingly argued for a similarposition

Ugaritic regularly refers to heavenly beings as p∆r kkbm (the ldquocongregation of the starsrdquo) language corresponding with כוכ י קר (ldquomorning starsrdquo in parallelism with the ldquosons of

Godrdquo in Job 387) and (the ldquostars of Godrdquo Isa 1413)כוכ י לAside from the context of these references each of whichclearly points to personal beings not astronomical phenom-

30 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 533

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 279

ena it is significant that in the entire ancient near eastern lit-

erary record El is never identified with a heavenly body Tusldquothe stars of Elrdquo points to created beings with divine status1048580

For Latter-day Saints recent archaeological and textual discoverieslike those referred to by Heiser are especially intriguing However asPeterson argues in the quotation provided above (p 273) Latter-daySaints do not need the Bible to express a precise parallel with modernrevelation in order to find support for LDS theology

Te fact that texts such as Psalm 82 somewhat parallel Latter-daySaint teachings is sufficient to argue that a more exact version of thegrand council story such as is witnessed in modern revelation mayhave existed in antiquity However notwithstanding his basic agree-ment with Peterson concerning the fundamental role assumed by thecouncil of deities in the Hebrew Bible Heiser ultimately departs fromPetersonrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 suggesting that the biblical view of

the council contains eight fundamental points that conflict with LDStheology

Heiserrsquos Sixteen Points

Heiser provides a list of sixteen arguments outlining his positionregarding Psalm 82 and the divine council He divides these into eightpoints ldquowith which many evangelicals would probably disagree and

with which many Latter-day Saints would likely agreerdquo followed byeight points ldquowith which many Latter-day Saints would probably dis-agree and with which many evangelicals would likely agreerdquo (pp 222ndash24) Heiserrsquos perspectives regarding Psalm 82 are clearly sound Teyinclude such issues as the inadequacy of the term monotheism as areference to Israelite theology and the biblical use of the word elohim as a literal reference to gods rather than human judges While Heiseris certainly correct in suggesting that his first eight views would proveproblematic for many evangelicals but not for most Mormons Heiserrsquoslist of eight statements on Psalm 82 that he assumes many Latter-day

31 Michael S Heiser ldquoDeuteronomy 328 and the Sons of Godrdquo 15 for an electronic version see thedivinecouncilcomD32BibSacpdf (accessed 8 February 2007)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1549

280 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Saints would disagree with indicates a basic lack of exposure to Latter-

day Saint thoughtHeiser is well versed in biblical studies His work has contrib-uted important insights toward a scholarly view of the essential roleassumed by the divine council in Old estament theology but he isnot a Latter-day Saint However Heiser does not consider in his cri-tique the possibility that most Latter-day Saints including Petersondo not believe that the biblical view of the council mirrors preciselywhat Latter-day Saints accept through modern revelation JosephSmithrsquos revelations proclaim our day as the dispensation of the ful-ness of times ldquoaccording to that which was ordained in the midst ofthe Council of the Eternal God of all other gods before this world wasrdquo(DampC 12132) For Latter-day Saints this final dispensation representsthe time decreed by God and his council in which ldquothose things whichnever have been revealed from the foundation of the world but havebeen kept hid from the wise and prudent shall be revealed unto babes

and sucklings in this the dispensation of the fulness of timesrdquo (DampC12818) Terefore Latter-day Saint scholars acknowledge that an LDSunderstanding of the council does not precisely mirror the perspec-tives manifested in the Bible Tat having been said most Latter-daySaints certainly accept the view advocated by Peterson that the bib-lical perspective of the heavenly council of deities is in greater har-mony with LDS belief than with any other contemporary Christian

tradition A recognition that the Bible though not flawless is inspiredof God allows Latter-day Saints to comfortably engage the views putforth by biblical scholars such as Heiser even when those observa-tions prove threatening to our evangelical counterparts

If certain biblical authors for example did in fact believe asHeiser seems to correctly suggest that Yahweh was ldquonot lsquobirthedrsquointo existence by the lsquoolden godsrsquo described in Ugaritic textsrdquo (p 223)Latter-day Saints would have no problem simply accepting the obser- vation as a biblical view Similarly even though Heiser assumes thatmany Mormons would disagree with his opinion that the Bible pre-sents Yahweh the God of Israel as ldquoontologically uniquerdquo (p 223) inreality many Latter-day Saints recognize that this is precisely the case

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 281

Even within LDS theology God the Father stands out as ontologically

unique inasmuch as he created the spirits of all humanity Modernrevelation describes God with the words ldquofrom eternity to eternity Heis the same and His years never failrdquo (DampC 764)

Yahwehrsquos Ontological Uniqueness

In addition to the evidence Heiser presents for what he calls Yah-wehrsquos ontological uniqueness the name Yahweh itself appears vocal-

ized in the Hebrew Bible as a finite Hiphil verb form Te vocalizationof YHWH as ldquoYahwehrdquo carries a specific nuance since ldquoHebrew gram-mars traditionally represent the Hiphil stem as the causative of the Qal

stemrdquo983044 Frank Moore Cross explains that ldquothe accumulated evidence strongly supports the view that the name Yahweh is a causativeimperfect of the Canaanite-Proto-Hebrew verb hwy lsquoto bersquo rdquo Tere-fore the divine name Yahweh according to this view literally means

ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procreatesrdquo One of the inter-esting points to consider concerning the biblical title Yahweh Sabaoth or ldquoLord of Hostsrdquo is that typically in Hebrew proper names do notappear bound to a genitive nounmdashthat is ldquoJohn of Hostsrdquo or ldquoMary ofEarthrdquo etc Since a proper name cannot traditionally function as abound form in a construct chain Cross interprets the King James titleldquoLord of Hostsrdquo as ldquo lsquohe creates the (divine) hostsrsquo rdquo If correct this

view would lend support to Heiserrsquos argument that ldquoYahweh is said32 Bruce K Waltke and M OrsquoConnor An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax

(Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 1990) 433 33 Frank Moore Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge Harvard Uni- versity Press 1973) 65 34 ldquoA proper noun cannot as a rule be followed by a genitiverdquo Paul Jouumlon A Gram-mar o Biblical Hebrew trans and rev Muraoka (Rome Editrice Pontificio IstitutoBiblico 2000) 2481 Admittedly however textual evidence shows that the rule need notapply to divine names see J A Emerton ldquoNew Light on Israelite Religion Te Implica-

tions of the Inscriptions from Kunti llet lsquoAjrudrdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wis-senschaf 94 (1982) 12ndash13 and especially John H Choi ldquoResheph and YHWH IacuteĔBĀlt Ocirc rdquoVetus estamentum 54 (2004) 17ndash28 I offer this assessment of the title Yahweh Sabaothwhich reflects the views of scholars such as David Noel Freedman and Frank MooreCross as merely an intriguing possibility 35 Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic 65 emphasis added

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1749

282 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo (p 250)

Heiser incorrectly assumes that this apparent biblical teaching con-cerning Yahwehrsquos uniqueness among the gods is not inconsistent withLDS theology

Tough Latter-day Saints view God the Father and Jesus Christas two separate divine beings for the Saints the biblical titles associ-ated with these deities are clearly interchangeable Latter-day Saintshave no problem therefore in associating God the Father with thetitle Yahwehmdashthat is ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procre-atesrdquo Te 1916 official declaration presented by the First Presidency ofthe church states ldquoGod the Eternal Father whom we designate by theexalted name-title Elohim is the literal Parent of our Lord and SaviorJesus Christ and of the spirits of the human racerdquo Clearly howeverthe First Presidencyrsquos move toward designating God the Father as Elo-him and Jesus the Son as Jehovah was primarily a move by churchleaders to create uniformity in Latter-day Saint expression In a recent

Ensign article Keith Meservy observed that ldquoin at least three Old es-tament passages it appears that L983151983154983140 [ie Jehovah] applies to Heav-enly Father not Jesus Christ Ps 1101 Ps 27 Isa 5310rdquo No doubtfor many Latter-day Saints this estimate offered by Meservy couldbe greatly augmented LDS teachings therefore do not preclude theontological uniqueness of God the Father that Heiser witnesses in theHebrew Bible

Yahweh as a Being ldquoSpecies-Uniquerdquo

Certainly Heiser is justified in suggesting that the gods of thedivine council appear inferior to Israelrsquos deity He uses this correctobservation however to build an argument that Israelrsquos God wastherefore somehow ldquospecies-uniquerdquo (p 250) In his discussion con-cerning the biblical evidence for Yahweh being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo

Heiser bases his interpretation on five points of evidence (1) ldquoYahweh36 ldquoTe Father and the Son A Doctrinal Exposition by the First Presidency and the

welverdquo as cited in Messages o the First Presidency o the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints ed James R Clark (Salt Lake City Bookcra 1971) 526 emphasis added 37 Keith H Meservy ldquoLORD = Jehovahrdquo Ensign June 2002 29 n 3

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 283

is said to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo

(2) ldquoYahweh was considered pre-existent to all godsrdquo (3) Yahweh hasthe power to strip the other elohim of their immortality (4) Yahwehalone is referred to in the Bible as ha-elohim and (5) ldquothe other godsare commanded to worship Yahwehrdquo (see pp 250ndash57) Tough eachof Heiserrsquos five points of evidence do in fact appear in the Bible con-trary to Heiserrsquos suggestion none of these observations establishesYahweh as being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo In the Bible Yahweh is the God ofgods but the biblical gods were still biblical gods As Paul Sanders hasexplained according to the Deuteronomic vision ldquothe [Sons of Goddescribed in Deuteronomy 328] are relatively independent they havetheir own dominions like YHWHrdquo

Notwithstanding his acceptance of the importance of the divinecouncil of deities in biblical theology Heiserrsquos critique suffers in partthrough his effort to define Israelrsquos deity as a being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo(p 250) He is correct in drawing attention to the fact that biblical

authors viewed their deity as exceptionally powerful in the councilldquoFor the Lord your God is God of godsrdquo proclaims Deuteronomy 1017ldquoand Lord of lordsrdquo Unfortunately however in identifying Yahweh asa being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo Heiser forces the biblical view of deities intoan image somewhat consistent with radical monotheism Contraryto Heiserrsquos suggestion the creative act in and of itself does not set thecreator apart as an exclusive species Te same point also applies tothe issue Heiser raises concerning primogeniture In other words aman for instance may exist before both his children and his siblingsand though preeminence may render the person ldquouniquerdquo on somelevels prior existence would not in this or in any other case rendera being as ldquospecies-uniquerdquo rue the Bible speaks of gods separatefrom Israelrsquos primary deity as elohim a˙erimmdashthat is ldquoother godsrdquo(see Exodus 203 2313 Deuteronomy 57 614 etc) However as YairHoffman has observed ldquoA survey of the use of a˙erim [ldquootherrdquo] shows

38 Paul Sanders Te Provenance o Deuteronomy 32 (Leiden Brill 1996) 37039 Te term radical monotheism refers to the theological position that only one

divine being exists in the universe Te expression was popularized by ikva Frymer-Kensky In the Wake o the Goddesses Women Culture and the Biblical ransormationo Pagan Myth (New York Free Press 1992) 154

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1949

284 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

that when used attributively with regard to garments days messen-

gers and objects it clearly has a relative meaning something differ-ent yet o the same kind rdquo1048624 Terefore ldquothere is no reason to assumethat in the phrase elohim a˙erim the attribute has a more distinctivemeaningrdquo1048580 When all is said and done the biblical deities like Yah-weh himself were still gods

In addition contrary to Heiserrsquos assertion the simple fact that Elo-him possesses the power to strip the other deities of their immortalityin Psalm 82 does not indicate that these gods are of a different spe-cies than Elohim According to the Psalmistrsquos view Elohim is simplymore powerful than the other gods Analogies from the ancient NearEast illustrate the problematic nature of Heiserrsquos claim In the Babylo-nian story Enuma Elish for instance the primordial mother goddessiamat created the god Qingu as chief deity over iamatrsquos militaryforces As a result of his actions taken against the divine council thedeities of the assembly ldquobound [Qingu] and held him in front of Ea

[and they] imposed the penalty on him and cut off his bloodrdquo983044 Tefact that in Enuma Elish the council could strip Qingu of his immor-tality did not mean that the god Qingu was somehow of a different orlesser divine species In the Sumerian myth of Enlil and Ninlil Enlil(one of the ldquogreat godsrdquo of Mesopotamia) is brought to trial for havingraped the goddess Ninlil As Enlil returned to the city of Nippur hewas arrested by the assembly while walking through the temple court

Te trial commenced immediately In the myth the council pre-sented the verdict that ldquothe sex offender Enlil will leave the townrdquoAccordingly the myth reports that Enlil le Nippur headed towardthe netherworld In his assessment of the story Jacobsen points out

40 Yair Hoffman ldquoTe Conception of lsquoOther Godsrsquo in Deuteronomistic Literaturerdquoin Concepts o the Other in Near Eastern Religions ed Ilai Alon Ithamar Gruenwald andItamar Singer (Leiden Brill 1994) 107 emphasis added 41 Hoffman ldquoConception of Other Godsrdquo 107

42 As cited in Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia 261 43 For a summary of the myth see Gwendolyn Leick A Dictionary o Ancient NearEastern Mythology (London Routledge 1998) 47ndash48 for a translation see TorkildJacobsen Te Harps Tat Once Sumerian Poetry in ranslation (New Haven YaleUniversity Press 1987) 167ndash80 44 Jacobsen Harps 174

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 285

that Enlilrsquos descent to Hades may indicate that the high god in Meso-

potamian mythology was originally sentenced to death As notedby James Ackerman in his dissertation concerning Psalm 82 thesetypes of judgment scenes in which the council determines that godswill die like mortals carry important implications for interpreting thecultural background for the biblical text Contrary to Heiserrsquos inter-pretation none of these stories indicate that the dying gods were of adifferent species or order than the gods who issued the sentence

Near Eastern traditions oen place considerable emphasis on thedying-god motif In no sense however are these dying godsmdashevenwhen resurrectedmdashsomehow depicted as a lesser species Heiserrsquos con-fusion concerning the implications of a biblical statement that Godissued a judgment of death to the deities of the divine council illus-trates the fundamental need for biblical scholars to pursue Assyriol-ogy in connection with their efforts to interpret the Hebrew Bible

Also contrary to Heiserrsquos suggestion the punishment meted out

to usurpers in Near Eastern council stories never indicates that thecriminals derived from some sort of exceptional species Te storyof Athtar from ancient Canaan for instance presents the traditionof Athtarrsquos descent to the underworld following the deityrsquos ascensionto the throne of Baal Te details involved in Athtarrsquos story containimportant thematic elements depicted in ancient Near Eastern storiesof cosmic revolt Athtar seems to share some semblance with Baalrsquos

mortal enemy Mot or ldquoDeathrdquo into whom Baal himself descendsHence Hugh Page notes that Athtarrsquos ldquodescent to the underworld implies that on some level Athtar has placed himself in proxim-ity to or relationship with the only god that Baal proves incapable

45 Torkild Jacobsen ldquoAn Ancient Mesopotamian rial for Homiciderdquo in owardthe Image o ammuz and Other Essays on Mesopotamian History and Culture ed Wil-liam L Moran (Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1970) 207 first published inStudia Biblica et Orientalia vol 3 of Analecta Biblica et Orientalia XII (Rome Pontificio

Istituto Biblico 1959) 130ndash50 46 See James S Ackerman ldquoAn Exegetical Study of Psalm 82rdquo (PhD diss HarvardUniversity 1966) 186ndash93 47 For a recent survey of the issue which includes a survey of previous assessmentssee ryggve N D Mettinger Te Riddle o Resurrection ldquoDying and Rising Godsrdquo in the Ancient Near East (Stockholm Almqvist amp Wiksell 2001)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2149

286 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of defeatingrdquo Athtarrsquos assumption of the throne of Baal followed

by his descent to the underworld indicates that this portion of theBaal cycle from ancient Canaan fits the general category of the cosmic

revolt genre witnessed in texts such as Abraham 3 and Psalm 82

1 Kindly El the Compassionate answers

2 ldquoOne so small cannot race

3 with Baal cannot handle the lance

4 with Daganrsquos son when they test one anotherrdquo

5 Lady Athirat of the Sea answers 6 ldquoLet us enthrone Athtar the Strong

7 Let Athtar the Strong be kingrdquo

8 Ten Athtar the Strong

9 ascended the summit of Sapan

10 He sat upon the throne of Mightiest Baal

11 His feet would not reach its footstool

12 His head would not reach its top 13 Athtar the Strong answered

14 ldquoI cannot rule on the summit of Sapanrdquo

15 Athtar the Strong descended

16 He descended from the throne of Mightiest Baal

17 And he ruled over the underworld god of all of it

18 drew in barrels

19 drew in jars (KU 1649ndash67 translation)

Te fact that Athtar the Strong experienced a type of ldquodeathrdquo in which

he ldquoruled over the underworldrdquo following his descent from Baalrsquos

throne does not suggest that Athtar was a ldquobeing species-uniquerdquo from

the other deities any more than Inanna or Ishtar the Mesopotamian

goddesses who experienced a type of death in the underworld were of

a different species than the gods Ea Enki Marduk and so forth48 Hugh R Page Jr Te Myth o Cosmic Rebellion A Study o Its Reflexes in Ugaritic

and Biblical Literature (Leiden Brill 1996) 92 Pagersquos views concerning the Athtar mythhave been criticized by Gregorio del Olmo Lete ldquoIn Search of the Canaanite Luciferrdquo Aula Orientalis 19 (2001) 125ndash32

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 287

Still in his efforts to present Yahweh as a being species-unique

Heiser correctly draws attention to the other gods of the council whoare commanded to worship Yahweh In his analysis he focuses uponthe call given to the gods in Psalm 291ndash2 ldquoAscribe to Yahweh O sons ofGod ascribe to Yahweh glory and strength Ascribe to Yahweh the gloryof his name worship Yahweh in the splendor of holinessrdquo (as quotedon p 256) While Heiserrsquos observations certainly illustrate that biblicalauthors viewed their deity as uniquemdashthat is exceptionalmdashthroughout

Near Eastern tradition lesser gods regularly appear in a position inwhich they offer praise service and devotion to the higher gods of thecouncil Richard J Clifford explains that in the Phoenician view of theassembly ldquoas elsewhere in the ancient Near East the assemblies are pic-tured as subordinate to individual gods although the assemblyrsquos con-sent seems necessary for important decisionsrdquo Simply because ancienttextsmdashincluding the Biblemdashdepict the members of the assemblies asldquosubordinate to individual godsrdquo this in no way implies that the higher

deities somehow belonged to a separate species Ancient Near Easterntexts such as Mursilirsquos Hymn and Prayer to the Sun-goddess o Arinna (CH 376A) establish the fact that Near Eastern peoples believed thatgods of the same species paid homage to higher deities in a way compa-rable to the biblical view

You O Sun-goddess of Arinna are honored goddess Your

name is honored among names and your divinity is honoredamong gods Furthermore among the gods you are the mosthonored and the greatest Tere is no other god more honoredor greater than you You are the lord of just judgment Youcontrol the kingship of heaven and earth1048624

Holding the position ldquomost honoredrdquo among the gods did not estab-lish Arinna as species-unique Arinna was simply the god before

whom from the authorrsquos perspective the other gods would regularly49 Richard J Clifford ldquoPhoenician Religionrdquo Bulletin o the American Schools o

Oriental Research 279 (1990) 57 50 As cited in Itamar Singer Hittite Prayers (Atlanta Society of Biblical Literature2002) 51

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2349

288 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquofall downrdquo1048580 For the ancients the Near Eastern view of the divine

court clearly reflected or were expressed in terms of earthly realityTerefore just as the high king before whom other humans paid hom-age was still a human being so the god to whom other deities paidhomage was still a god matching in species For biblical authors Yah-weh stood at the head of the hierarchy in Israelite thought Yahwehwas unique as the God of gods but he was not unique in his divinityFrom a biblical perspective Yahweh even shared this divinity withhumanity

Humans as Teomorphic Beings

In his discussion concerning the biblical view regarding theomor-phic humans Peterson draws attention to Paulrsquos New estament ser-mon presented in Acts 1728ndash29

For in him we live and move and have our being as

certain also of your own poets have said For we are also hisoffspring

Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God we oughtnot to think that the Godhead is like unto gold or silver orstone graven by art and manrsquos device

Peterson in part argues for a biblical connection between God andhumanity based on the fact that ldquothe word rendered lsquooffspringrsquo by the

King James translators is the Greek genos which is cognate with theLatin genus and means lsquofamilyrsquo or lsquoracersquo or lsquokindrsquo or even and mostespecially interesting lsquodescendants of a common ancestorrsquo rdquo983044 ForLatter-day Saints human beings are literally the offspring of God andtherefore intrinsically theomorphic Part of the strength of Petersonrsquosessay lies in his recognition that like Latter-day Saints biblical authorsregularly blur the distinction between humanity and divine beings

Not only does Peterson draw attention to the prophetic interactionwith the council as support for his thesis but he also places consider-

51 Singer Hittite Prayers 51 52 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 542ndash43 53 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 289

able emphasis upon the deified dead in the Hebrew Bible and the early

Christian teaching regarding deification Heiser notwithstandingPetersonrsquos evidence rejects the idea that a genus equation of God and

humankind appears in the Bible

For his criticisms of Petersonrsquos views Heiser places considerable

weight on the notion that ldquothe concept of the image of God does not

advance the idea that there is a genus equation of God and human-

kind or that God was once a manrdquo (p 224) On some levels Heiserrsquos

point concerning the word tzelem or ldquoimagerdquo in Genesis 126ndash27is correct Concerning this controversial term Marc Z Brettler has

recently explained

Te word tzelem (ldquoimagerdquo) elsewhere always refers to a

physical representation For example the Book of Ezekiel

uses tzelem when it refers to ldquomen sculptured upon the walls

figures of Chaldeans drawn in vermilionrdquo (2314) or when it

accuses Israel of fornicating with ldquophallic imagesrdquo (1617) Teword oen refers to idols (eg Num 3352 Ezek 720 Amos

526 2 Chron 2317) It always signifies a concrete entity

rather than an abstract one Tis is not surprising since the

Bible (in contrast to most medieval philosophical traditions

both Jewish and Christian) oen depicts God in corporeal

terms

Genesis 126ndash27 suggests that Godrsquos physical likeness is similar to

humanityrsquos but Heiser is correct that the statement does not indicate

that biblical authors viewed humans as gods or that God himself was

once a human However many other texts from the Bible do present a

theomorphic view of humanity Peterson therefore is precisely correct

in stating that ldquothe Latter-day Saint understanding that humans are of

the same genus or species as God is thus clearly biblicalrdquo54 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509ndash28

55 Marc Z Brettler How to Read the Bible (Philadelphia Jewish Publication Society2005) 43ndash44 Hebrew word deleted 56 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 547

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2549

290 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Adam as a Divine Council Member

In addition to associating humanity with the tzelem of God theBible describes the first man as a deified member of the divine council

In the Eden story the Lord took advantage of the wet claylike soil and

ldquoformed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils

the breath of life and man became a living soulrdquo (Genesis 27) In an

important study concerning this imagery Walter Brueggemann has

shown that a biblical connection exists between being raised from the

dust and enthronement ldquoo be taken lsquofrom the dustrsquo means to be

elevated from obscurity to royal office and to return to dust means to

be deprived of that office and returned to obscurityrdquo Imagery such

as that witnessed in 1 Kings 162 supports Brueggemannrsquos interpreta-

tion ldquoForasmuch as I [God] exalted thee [Jehu] out of the dust and

made thee prince over my people Israel rdquo (1 Kings 162) Hence the

notion of the God raising man ldquofrom the dust of the earthrdquo in Genesis

27 in part suggests that Yahweh begins his creative activity by form-

ing a divine king According to Genesis 215 this divine king through

a type of imitatio dei would continue to perform the work of Yahweh

who ldquoplantedrdquo the garden ldquoAnd the Lord God took the man and put

him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep itrdquo In a simi-

lar fashion Mesopotamian kings such as Hammurapi glorified their

efforts through the use of creation and agricultural imageryI encircled [the wall] with a swamp I dug the Euphrates

as far as Sippar (and) made it reach a prosperous quay

I Hammu-rāpi who builds up the land caused Sippar

and Babylon to dwell in peaceful abodes forever What

from [primordial days] no one among the kings had done I

did in a grand fashion for the god Šamaš my lord

57 Walter Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestament-liche Wissenschaf 841 (1972) 1ndash18 58 Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo 2 59 Douglas Frayne Old Babylonian Period (2003ndash1595 BC) (oronto University oforonto Press 1990) 348ndash49

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 291

Te view presented in the Babylonian inscription on the wall

of Sippar reflects the common Near Eastern assumption featured inGenesis 2 of a God king participating in the act of creation from ldquopri-

mordial daysrdquo through structure1048624 As a king Hammurapi assumed

the same role filled by deities who created the universe by giving order

to preexistent chaos In its depiction of Adam as the primordial gar-

dener the Bible relies upon similar imagery

Manrsquos status as the archetypal gardener king in Genesis 2ndash3 con-

tains important parallels with Mesopotamian kingship theory1048580 Sev-eral examples of Mesopotamian iconography feature a depiction of the

tree (or plant) of life over which the king and priests appear pouring

libations In assessing the connection between Mesopotamian kings

and gardeners Geo Widengren cites these statements from the am-

muz text R IV 27 No I

A tamarisk which in the garden has no water to drink

Whose foliage on the plant sends forth no twig

A plant which they water no more in its pot

Whose roots are torn away

A herb which is in the garden has no water to drink

Among the flowers of the garden he sleeps

Among the flowers of the garden he is thrown

According to Widengren ldquothe ree of Life is watered by the kingwho pours out over it the Water of Life which he has in his possession

Te ree of Life constantly needs the Water of Life near which it is

growing in the garden of paradiserdquo983044 Te connection between king

and gardener was widely attested throughout ancient Mesopotamia

60 In his translation Frayne renders the Akkadian word szligi-a-tim as ldquothe pastrdquo Teinscription however clearly relies on creation imagery and I have therefore interpreted

szligiatim as ldquoprimordial daysrdquo in accordance with the information provided in Jeremy BlackAndrew George and Nicholas Postgate A Concise Dictionary o Akkadian (WiesbadenHarrassowitz 2000) 337 61 See Geo Widengren Te King and the ree o Lie in Ancient Near Eastern Reli- gion (Uppsala Uppsala Universitets Aringrsskri 1951) 62 Widengren King and the ree o Lie 15

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2749

292 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Tis portrayal of kingship appears in the birth legend of Sargon

wherein the monarch declaresAkki the waterscooper placed me as his gardenerWhen I was a gardener Ishtar was in love with meTe kingship I exercised during x + 5 years

Tese lines from the tale of Sargon the gardener whom the goddess Ishtarloved seem to provide an especially significant parallel with the biblical view presented in the story of Eden In the words of Nicholas Wyatt ldquotheman in his garden is a symbolic allusion to the king in his sanctuaryrdquo

One of the important connections between humanityrsquos enthrone-ment in the garden and later biblical traditions includes the anointingof an Israelite king in 1 Kings 128ndash40 at the Gihon Spring a rivernamed Gihon was one of the four rivers that flowed out of Eden andround the land of Cush (Genesis 213) Significantly the only otherexplicit reference to the Garden of Eden in the Hebrew Bible appears

in a context that addresses the link between kingship and divinity (seeEzekiel 282ndash13)

Concerning the attestation of biblical rituals that may preserveactual religious rites wherein Israelite kings assumed divinity Wyattargues that

the rituals which transform the status of the earthly kingremoving him from ldquomerely humanrdquo status to that of a sacralfigure to be couched in the form of a narrative about a godcarries with it the hint that the king himself is to be seen astransformed into a god Te enthronement of the king isthus his apotheosis

63 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoInterpreting the Creation and Fall Story in Genesis 2ndash3rdquo Zeit-schrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 931 (1981) 15 64 John van Seters has argued according to the Documentary Hypothesis that the

story of divine kingship in J derives from Babylonian influences and is therefore latepostexilic If P is in part a reaction to the J account then it is difficult to accept vanSetersrsquos dating see John van Seters ldquoTe Creation of Man and the Creation of the KingrdquoZeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 1013 (1989) 333ndash41 65 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinity Some Mythical and Ritual Aspects of WestSemitic Kingshiprdquo Ugarit-Forschungen 31 (1999) 857

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 293

In his exploration of biblical deification Wyatt refers to Psalm 198ndash10

as a possible ritual text transforming the king into a divine beingTe teaching of Yahweh is perfectrestoring the breastTe testimony of Yahweh is certainmaking wise the headTe precepts of Yahweh are uprightrejoicing the heart

Te commandment of Yahweh is puremaking bright the eyesTe speech of Yahweh is ritually purestanding for everTe judgments of Yahweh are truthTey are righteous all togethermore desirable than goldthan much pure goldmore sweet than honeyor the refined combYour servant is indeed illumined by themand in their observance is there great gain

Concerning this possible reference to ritual anointing Wyatt argues

It is true that there is no narrative statement about unc-

tion here oil is not even mentioned But only thus can thesuccessive blessings on various parts of the kingrsquos body beexplained For comparison we should consider the unction ofpriests in Exod 294ndash9 19ndash21 4012ndash5 and Lev 810ndash2 22ndash4where various parts of the priestrsquos body are anointed with oiland blood undoubtedly with some liturgical commentary onthe action such is now narrated in these passages providing

a suitable performative utteranceIf correct Wyattrsquos assessment of Israelite deification proves importantfor an analysis of Adam as divine king in the book of Genesis

66 Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinityrdquo 874ndash75

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2949

294 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

In Genesis chapter 2 Godrsquos initial creative act must be the creation

of man for as a divine king raised ldquofrom the dustrdquo man was specifi-cally formed to assist deity in the creation process God appears as agardener who causes to grow ldquoevery tree that is pleasant to the sightand good for foodrdquo (Genesis 29) Te account declares that the Lordplaced the man in the garden to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo his newly createdoasis (Genesis 215) As a gardener the Lord plants Eden as a gardenerthe Lord mixes the soil to form both man and beast As a gardener the

Lord creates man in his image to perform the work of a God Follow-ing his creation man assumes the role of divine gardenerFrom an ancient Near Eastern perspective the view of Adam as

divine gardener suggests that biblical authors viewed humanity asan earthly extension of the divine council According to the Edenaccount man was immortal (Genesis 217) man had received fromdeity the sacred ldquobreath of liferdquo (Genesis 27) man had been com-missioned to perform the work of a godmdashthat is to till and tend the

divine garden Terefore as an immortal gardener man was alreadyldquolike the godsrdquo prior to partaking of the forbidden fruit

In Mesopotamian myths for example the work of gardening wasassigned to lesser members of the divine council Hence the story ofAtrahasis opens with the following portrayal

When gods were man

Tey did forced labor they bore drudgeryGreat indeed was the drudgery of the godsTe forced labor was heavy the misery too muchTe seven() great Anunna-gods were burdeningTe Igigi-gods with forced labor

Like the account in Genesis the lesser gods of the divine council inAtrahasis were gardeners who did the laborious task of caring for the

canals trees and waterways that sustained the higher gods of the67 For additional examples of Yahweh portrayed in the role of gardener see Num-

bers 246 Psalm 10416 Isaiah 4414 68 Altrahasis II39 1ndash6 translation in Benjamin R Foster Beore the Muses An Anthol-ogy o Akkadian Literature (Bethesda MD CDL 1993) 1159

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 295

assembly Hence Adam as an immortal being clearly reflects the

position of the Igigi in Mesopotamian thought Te questions pre-sented to Job by Eliphaz regarding the primal human seem to share

this notion

Are you the firstborn of the human race

Were you brought forth before the hills

Have you listened in the council of God (Job 157ndash8 NRSV)

As Dexter Callender has observed concerning these questionsldquoTe allusion to the primal human in Job does not give us explicit

details concerning his incorporation into the sacred world It is clear

however that the idea is present in the reference that the primal human

lsquolistenedrsquo in the council of Godrdquo As a member of Godrsquos council man

held a stewardship to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo the deityrsquos garden (Genesis

215) According to the Genesis account when the man and woman

eat from the tree of knowledge God expels the humans from Edenand assigns the cherubim other traditional members of the divine

council to ldquokeeprdquo the garden (Genesis 324) Tis move may suggest

that in biblical thought ldquokeepingrdquo the garden is a task reserved for

members of the divine host As an immortal subordinate assigned an

important council task man however eventually appears in the Gen-

esis account as a being very much like the council deities mentioned

in Psalm 82 who receive the decree of death

I have said Ye are gods and all of you are children of the

most High

But ye shall die like men and fall like one of the princes

(Psalm 826ndash7)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou

shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thoushalt surely die (Genesis 217)

69 Dexter E Callender Jr Adam in Myth and History Ancient Israelite Perspectiveson the Primal Human (Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 2000) 212 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1149

276 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of Israel is not a Yahwistic name with the divine element of

Yahweh but an El name with the element lt ēl Tis fact wouldsuggest that El was the original chief god of the group namedIsrael Second Genesis 4924ndash25 presents a series of El epi-thets separate from the mention of Yahweh in verse 18983044

A detailed response to all the evidence amassed by scholars who view a theological evolution in the Hebrew Bible was beyond thescope of Heiserrsquos essay However notwithstanding the probability that

Heiser is correct in linking Elyon with Yahweh in Deuteronomy thisclaim does not negate the likelihood that in ancient Israel Yahwehwas originally a son of Elyon

In the present form of the biblical text the term [gtElyocircn]is understood to be an epithet for Yahweh the God of IsraelIt is possible however as some have argued that the epithetmay conceal a reference to a separate deity possibly an oldergod with whom Yahweh came to be identified983044

LDS scholars have good reason to accept the historical views of schol-ars such as Parker and Smith

Psalm 82 as the Grand Council

Tough helpful to his analysis ultimately Petersonrsquos claims are

not dependent upon the legitimacy of a Parker Smith historical inter-pretation Petersonrsquos argument for interpreting Psalm 82 as a reflec-tion of the grand council story featured in modern revelation findssupport in Near Eastern tradition In the ancient Near East stories ofthe divine council typically begin with a crisis in which the head Godcalls together the gods of the council to resolve the dilemma Duringthe council a series of proposals are offered Finally a ldquosaviorrdquo steps

forward offering his services to the council Tis savior then receives26 Smith Early History o God 32

27 Eric E Elnes and Patrick D Miller ldquoElyonrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demonsin the Bible ed Karel van der oorn Bob Becking and Pieter W van der Horst (LeidenBrill 1995) 560

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 277

a commission to perform his redemptive role983044 Tis common Near

Eastern pattern is seen for example in the Mesopotamian story ofdivine kingship known as Enuma Elish983044 In this Babylonian myththe head god of the pantheon calls together the gods in a council toresolve a dilemma created by the goddess iamat Following a seriesof proposals Marduk the chief god of Babylon receives a commissionas savior Marduk agrees to perform the role of savior on the condi-tion that his father Ea the head god of the council grant Marduk allpower and glory Te same pattern appears in the Assyrian myth ofAnzu However in this version the god Ninurta agrees to serve ascouncil savior while allowing his father to retain his position withinthe council

Like Enuma Elish and Psalm 82 many of the council stories fromthe ancient Near East portray stories of cosmic revolt in which judg-ment is rendered against divine beings Tis pattern is familiar toLatter-day Saints through the council story provided in the Books of

Moses and Abraham (Moses 41ndash4 and Abraham 322ndash28) Althoughsometimes obscured the same pattern is reflected in council tradi-tions featured in the Hebrew Bible Te story of council crisis forexample appears in the Isaiah Apocalypse

On that day [Yahweh] will punishthe host of heaven in heavenand on earth the kings of the earth (Isaiah 2421 NRSV)

Similar language emerges in Isaiah 271

On that day [Yahweh]with his cruel and great and strong swordwill punish Leviathan the fleeing serpent (NRSV)

28 Tis summary is based upon the pattern identified by Simon B Parker ldquoCoun-cilrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 391ndash98 for a consideration of the divine coun-

cil stories within the Bible as ldquotype scenesrdquo see David M Fleming ldquoTe Divine Councilas ype Scene in the Hebrew Biblerdquo (PhD diss Te Southern Baptist Teological Semi-nary 1989) 29 For an English translation of Enuma Elish see Stephanie Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia Creation the Flood Gilgamesh and Others (New York Oxford UniversityPress 1989) 228ndash77

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1349

278 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

For Latter-day Saints these traditions preserved in texts such as Enuma

Elish the book of Isaiah and Psalm 82 provide a type of retellingmdashalbeit sometimes hiddenmdashof the primordial events concerning thegrand council described in modern revelation

In the ancient Near East members of the divine council oenappear to receive a type of reprimand suggestive of the punishmentgiven Lucifer in LDS scripture

Because that Satan rebelled against me and sought to destroy

the agency of man which I the Lord God had given himand also that I should give unto him mine own power by thepower of mine Only Begotten I caused that he should be castdown And he became Satan yea even the devil the father ofall lies to deceive and to blind men and to lead them captiveat his will even as many as would not hearken unto my voice(Moses 43ndash4)

With the words ldquoHere am I send merdquo Latter-day Saints believeJesus Christ stepped forward in the council crisis and volunteered tosave humanity from the challenges associated with mortal probation(Abraham 327) According to the council story depicted in the Bookof Abraham Lucifer ldquowas angry and kept not his first estate and atthat day many followed aer himrdquo (Abraham 328) In his analysisPeterson does well to draw attention to the fact that Isaiahrsquos refer-

ence to ldquoLucifer son of the morningrdquo in Isaiah 1412 ldquodraws us againinto the astronomical imagery oen connected with the divine assem-blyrdquo1048624 In his own studies Heiser has convincingly argued for a similarposition

Ugaritic regularly refers to heavenly beings as p∆r kkbm (the ldquocongregation of the starsrdquo) language corresponding with כוכ י קר (ldquomorning starsrdquo in parallelism with the ldquosons of

Godrdquo in Job 387) and (the ldquostars of Godrdquo Isa 1413)כוכ י לAside from the context of these references each of whichclearly points to personal beings not astronomical phenom-

30 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 533

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 279

ena it is significant that in the entire ancient near eastern lit-

erary record El is never identified with a heavenly body Tusldquothe stars of Elrdquo points to created beings with divine status1048580

For Latter-day Saints recent archaeological and textual discoverieslike those referred to by Heiser are especially intriguing However asPeterson argues in the quotation provided above (p 273) Latter-daySaints do not need the Bible to express a precise parallel with modernrevelation in order to find support for LDS theology

Te fact that texts such as Psalm 82 somewhat parallel Latter-daySaint teachings is sufficient to argue that a more exact version of thegrand council story such as is witnessed in modern revelation mayhave existed in antiquity However notwithstanding his basic agree-ment with Peterson concerning the fundamental role assumed by thecouncil of deities in the Hebrew Bible Heiser ultimately departs fromPetersonrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 suggesting that the biblical view of

the council contains eight fundamental points that conflict with LDStheology

Heiserrsquos Sixteen Points

Heiser provides a list of sixteen arguments outlining his positionregarding Psalm 82 and the divine council He divides these into eightpoints ldquowith which many evangelicals would probably disagree and

with which many Latter-day Saints would likely agreerdquo followed byeight points ldquowith which many Latter-day Saints would probably dis-agree and with which many evangelicals would likely agreerdquo (pp 222ndash24) Heiserrsquos perspectives regarding Psalm 82 are clearly sound Teyinclude such issues as the inadequacy of the term monotheism as areference to Israelite theology and the biblical use of the word elohim as a literal reference to gods rather than human judges While Heiseris certainly correct in suggesting that his first eight views would proveproblematic for many evangelicals but not for most Mormons Heiserrsquoslist of eight statements on Psalm 82 that he assumes many Latter-day

31 Michael S Heiser ldquoDeuteronomy 328 and the Sons of Godrdquo 15 for an electronic version see thedivinecouncilcomD32BibSacpdf (accessed 8 February 2007)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1549

280 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Saints would disagree with indicates a basic lack of exposure to Latter-

day Saint thoughtHeiser is well versed in biblical studies His work has contrib-uted important insights toward a scholarly view of the essential roleassumed by the divine council in Old estament theology but he isnot a Latter-day Saint However Heiser does not consider in his cri-tique the possibility that most Latter-day Saints including Petersondo not believe that the biblical view of the council mirrors preciselywhat Latter-day Saints accept through modern revelation JosephSmithrsquos revelations proclaim our day as the dispensation of the ful-ness of times ldquoaccording to that which was ordained in the midst ofthe Council of the Eternal God of all other gods before this world wasrdquo(DampC 12132) For Latter-day Saints this final dispensation representsthe time decreed by God and his council in which ldquothose things whichnever have been revealed from the foundation of the world but havebeen kept hid from the wise and prudent shall be revealed unto babes

and sucklings in this the dispensation of the fulness of timesrdquo (DampC12818) Terefore Latter-day Saint scholars acknowledge that an LDSunderstanding of the council does not precisely mirror the perspec-tives manifested in the Bible Tat having been said most Latter-daySaints certainly accept the view advocated by Peterson that the bib-lical perspective of the heavenly council of deities is in greater har-mony with LDS belief than with any other contemporary Christian

tradition A recognition that the Bible though not flawless is inspiredof God allows Latter-day Saints to comfortably engage the views putforth by biblical scholars such as Heiser even when those observa-tions prove threatening to our evangelical counterparts

If certain biblical authors for example did in fact believe asHeiser seems to correctly suggest that Yahweh was ldquonot lsquobirthedrsquointo existence by the lsquoolden godsrsquo described in Ugaritic textsrdquo (p 223)Latter-day Saints would have no problem simply accepting the obser- vation as a biblical view Similarly even though Heiser assumes thatmany Mormons would disagree with his opinion that the Bible pre-sents Yahweh the God of Israel as ldquoontologically uniquerdquo (p 223) inreality many Latter-day Saints recognize that this is precisely the case

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 281

Even within LDS theology God the Father stands out as ontologically

unique inasmuch as he created the spirits of all humanity Modernrevelation describes God with the words ldquofrom eternity to eternity Heis the same and His years never failrdquo (DampC 764)

Yahwehrsquos Ontological Uniqueness

In addition to the evidence Heiser presents for what he calls Yah-wehrsquos ontological uniqueness the name Yahweh itself appears vocal-

ized in the Hebrew Bible as a finite Hiphil verb form Te vocalizationof YHWH as ldquoYahwehrdquo carries a specific nuance since ldquoHebrew gram-mars traditionally represent the Hiphil stem as the causative of the Qal

stemrdquo983044 Frank Moore Cross explains that ldquothe accumulated evidence strongly supports the view that the name Yahweh is a causativeimperfect of the Canaanite-Proto-Hebrew verb hwy lsquoto bersquo rdquo Tere-fore the divine name Yahweh according to this view literally means

ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procreatesrdquo One of the inter-esting points to consider concerning the biblical title Yahweh Sabaoth or ldquoLord of Hostsrdquo is that typically in Hebrew proper names do notappear bound to a genitive nounmdashthat is ldquoJohn of Hostsrdquo or ldquoMary ofEarthrdquo etc Since a proper name cannot traditionally function as abound form in a construct chain Cross interprets the King James titleldquoLord of Hostsrdquo as ldquo lsquohe creates the (divine) hostsrsquo rdquo If correct this

view would lend support to Heiserrsquos argument that ldquoYahweh is said32 Bruce K Waltke and M OrsquoConnor An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax

(Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 1990) 433 33 Frank Moore Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge Harvard Uni- versity Press 1973) 65 34 ldquoA proper noun cannot as a rule be followed by a genitiverdquo Paul Jouumlon A Gram-mar o Biblical Hebrew trans and rev Muraoka (Rome Editrice Pontificio IstitutoBiblico 2000) 2481 Admittedly however textual evidence shows that the rule need notapply to divine names see J A Emerton ldquoNew Light on Israelite Religion Te Implica-

tions of the Inscriptions from Kunti llet lsquoAjrudrdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wis-senschaf 94 (1982) 12ndash13 and especially John H Choi ldquoResheph and YHWH IacuteĔBĀlt Ocirc rdquoVetus estamentum 54 (2004) 17ndash28 I offer this assessment of the title Yahweh Sabaothwhich reflects the views of scholars such as David Noel Freedman and Frank MooreCross as merely an intriguing possibility 35 Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic 65 emphasis added

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1749

282 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo (p 250)

Heiser incorrectly assumes that this apparent biblical teaching con-cerning Yahwehrsquos uniqueness among the gods is not inconsistent withLDS theology

Tough Latter-day Saints view God the Father and Jesus Christas two separate divine beings for the Saints the biblical titles associ-ated with these deities are clearly interchangeable Latter-day Saintshave no problem therefore in associating God the Father with thetitle Yahwehmdashthat is ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procre-atesrdquo Te 1916 official declaration presented by the First Presidency ofthe church states ldquoGod the Eternal Father whom we designate by theexalted name-title Elohim is the literal Parent of our Lord and SaviorJesus Christ and of the spirits of the human racerdquo Clearly howeverthe First Presidencyrsquos move toward designating God the Father as Elo-him and Jesus the Son as Jehovah was primarily a move by churchleaders to create uniformity in Latter-day Saint expression In a recent

Ensign article Keith Meservy observed that ldquoin at least three Old es-tament passages it appears that L983151983154983140 [ie Jehovah] applies to Heav-enly Father not Jesus Christ Ps 1101 Ps 27 Isa 5310rdquo No doubtfor many Latter-day Saints this estimate offered by Meservy couldbe greatly augmented LDS teachings therefore do not preclude theontological uniqueness of God the Father that Heiser witnesses in theHebrew Bible

Yahweh as a Being ldquoSpecies-Uniquerdquo

Certainly Heiser is justified in suggesting that the gods of thedivine council appear inferior to Israelrsquos deity He uses this correctobservation however to build an argument that Israelrsquos God wastherefore somehow ldquospecies-uniquerdquo (p 250) In his discussion con-cerning the biblical evidence for Yahweh being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo

Heiser bases his interpretation on five points of evidence (1) ldquoYahweh36 ldquoTe Father and the Son A Doctrinal Exposition by the First Presidency and the

welverdquo as cited in Messages o the First Presidency o the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints ed James R Clark (Salt Lake City Bookcra 1971) 526 emphasis added 37 Keith H Meservy ldquoLORD = Jehovahrdquo Ensign June 2002 29 n 3

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 283

is said to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo

(2) ldquoYahweh was considered pre-existent to all godsrdquo (3) Yahweh hasthe power to strip the other elohim of their immortality (4) Yahwehalone is referred to in the Bible as ha-elohim and (5) ldquothe other godsare commanded to worship Yahwehrdquo (see pp 250ndash57) Tough eachof Heiserrsquos five points of evidence do in fact appear in the Bible con-trary to Heiserrsquos suggestion none of these observations establishesYahweh as being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo In the Bible Yahweh is the God ofgods but the biblical gods were still biblical gods As Paul Sanders hasexplained according to the Deuteronomic vision ldquothe [Sons of Goddescribed in Deuteronomy 328] are relatively independent they havetheir own dominions like YHWHrdquo

Notwithstanding his acceptance of the importance of the divinecouncil of deities in biblical theology Heiserrsquos critique suffers in partthrough his effort to define Israelrsquos deity as a being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo(p 250) He is correct in drawing attention to the fact that biblical

authors viewed their deity as exceptionally powerful in the councilldquoFor the Lord your God is God of godsrdquo proclaims Deuteronomy 1017ldquoand Lord of lordsrdquo Unfortunately however in identifying Yahweh asa being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo Heiser forces the biblical view of deities intoan image somewhat consistent with radical monotheism Contraryto Heiserrsquos suggestion the creative act in and of itself does not set thecreator apart as an exclusive species Te same point also applies tothe issue Heiser raises concerning primogeniture In other words aman for instance may exist before both his children and his siblingsand though preeminence may render the person ldquouniquerdquo on somelevels prior existence would not in this or in any other case rendera being as ldquospecies-uniquerdquo rue the Bible speaks of gods separatefrom Israelrsquos primary deity as elohim a˙erimmdashthat is ldquoother godsrdquo(see Exodus 203 2313 Deuteronomy 57 614 etc) However as YairHoffman has observed ldquoA survey of the use of a˙erim [ldquootherrdquo] shows

38 Paul Sanders Te Provenance o Deuteronomy 32 (Leiden Brill 1996) 37039 Te term radical monotheism refers to the theological position that only one

divine being exists in the universe Te expression was popularized by ikva Frymer-Kensky In the Wake o the Goddesses Women Culture and the Biblical ransormationo Pagan Myth (New York Free Press 1992) 154

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1949

284 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

that when used attributively with regard to garments days messen-

gers and objects it clearly has a relative meaning something differ-ent yet o the same kind rdquo1048624 Terefore ldquothere is no reason to assumethat in the phrase elohim a˙erim the attribute has a more distinctivemeaningrdquo1048580 When all is said and done the biblical deities like Yah-weh himself were still gods

In addition contrary to Heiserrsquos assertion the simple fact that Elo-him possesses the power to strip the other deities of their immortalityin Psalm 82 does not indicate that these gods are of a different spe-cies than Elohim According to the Psalmistrsquos view Elohim is simplymore powerful than the other gods Analogies from the ancient NearEast illustrate the problematic nature of Heiserrsquos claim In the Babylo-nian story Enuma Elish for instance the primordial mother goddessiamat created the god Qingu as chief deity over iamatrsquos militaryforces As a result of his actions taken against the divine council thedeities of the assembly ldquobound [Qingu] and held him in front of Ea

[and they] imposed the penalty on him and cut off his bloodrdquo983044 Tefact that in Enuma Elish the council could strip Qingu of his immor-tality did not mean that the god Qingu was somehow of a different orlesser divine species In the Sumerian myth of Enlil and Ninlil Enlil(one of the ldquogreat godsrdquo of Mesopotamia) is brought to trial for havingraped the goddess Ninlil As Enlil returned to the city of Nippur hewas arrested by the assembly while walking through the temple court

Te trial commenced immediately In the myth the council pre-sented the verdict that ldquothe sex offender Enlil will leave the townrdquoAccordingly the myth reports that Enlil le Nippur headed towardthe netherworld In his assessment of the story Jacobsen points out

40 Yair Hoffman ldquoTe Conception of lsquoOther Godsrsquo in Deuteronomistic Literaturerdquoin Concepts o the Other in Near Eastern Religions ed Ilai Alon Ithamar Gruenwald andItamar Singer (Leiden Brill 1994) 107 emphasis added 41 Hoffman ldquoConception of Other Godsrdquo 107

42 As cited in Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia 261 43 For a summary of the myth see Gwendolyn Leick A Dictionary o Ancient NearEastern Mythology (London Routledge 1998) 47ndash48 for a translation see TorkildJacobsen Te Harps Tat Once Sumerian Poetry in ranslation (New Haven YaleUniversity Press 1987) 167ndash80 44 Jacobsen Harps 174

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 285

that Enlilrsquos descent to Hades may indicate that the high god in Meso-

potamian mythology was originally sentenced to death As notedby James Ackerman in his dissertation concerning Psalm 82 thesetypes of judgment scenes in which the council determines that godswill die like mortals carry important implications for interpreting thecultural background for the biblical text Contrary to Heiserrsquos inter-pretation none of these stories indicate that the dying gods were of adifferent species or order than the gods who issued the sentence

Near Eastern traditions oen place considerable emphasis on thedying-god motif In no sense however are these dying godsmdashevenwhen resurrectedmdashsomehow depicted as a lesser species Heiserrsquos con-fusion concerning the implications of a biblical statement that Godissued a judgment of death to the deities of the divine council illus-trates the fundamental need for biblical scholars to pursue Assyriol-ogy in connection with their efforts to interpret the Hebrew Bible

Also contrary to Heiserrsquos suggestion the punishment meted out

to usurpers in Near Eastern council stories never indicates that thecriminals derived from some sort of exceptional species Te storyof Athtar from ancient Canaan for instance presents the traditionof Athtarrsquos descent to the underworld following the deityrsquos ascensionto the throne of Baal Te details involved in Athtarrsquos story containimportant thematic elements depicted in ancient Near Eastern storiesof cosmic revolt Athtar seems to share some semblance with Baalrsquos

mortal enemy Mot or ldquoDeathrdquo into whom Baal himself descendsHence Hugh Page notes that Athtarrsquos ldquodescent to the underworld implies that on some level Athtar has placed himself in proxim-ity to or relationship with the only god that Baal proves incapable

45 Torkild Jacobsen ldquoAn Ancient Mesopotamian rial for Homiciderdquo in owardthe Image o ammuz and Other Essays on Mesopotamian History and Culture ed Wil-liam L Moran (Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1970) 207 first published inStudia Biblica et Orientalia vol 3 of Analecta Biblica et Orientalia XII (Rome Pontificio

Istituto Biblico 1959) 130ndash50 46 See James S Ackerman ldquoAn Exegetical Study of Psalm 82rdquo (PhD diss HarvardUniversity 1966) 186ndash93 47 For a recent survey of the issue which includes a survey of previous assessmentssee ryggve N D Mettinger Te Riddle o Resurrection ldquoDying and Rising Godsrdquo in the Ancient Near East (Stockholm Almqvist amp Wiksell 2001)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2149

286 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of defeatingrdquo Athtarrsquos assumption of the throne of Baal followed

by his descent to the underworld indicates that this portion of theBaal cycle from ancient Canaan fits the general category of the cosmic

revolt genre witnessed in texts such as Abraham 3 and Psalm 82

1 Kindly El the Compassionate answers

2 ldquoOne so small cannot race

3 with Baal cannot handle the lance

4 with Daganrsquos son when they test one anotherrdquo

5 Lady Athirat of the Sea answers 6 ldquoLet us enthrone Athtar the Strong

7 Let Athtar the Strong be kingrdquo

8 Ten Athtar the Strong

9 ascended the summit of Sapan

10 He sat upon the throne of Mightiest Baal

11 His feet would not reach its footstool

12 His head would not reach its top 13 Athtar the Strong answered

14 ldquoI cannot rule on the summit of Sapanrdquo

15 Athtar the Strong descended

16 He descended from the throne of Mightiest Baal

17 And he ruled over the underworld god of all of it

18 drew in barrels

19 drew in jars (KU 1649ndash67 translation)

Te fact that Athtar the Strong experienced a type of ldquodeathrdquo in which

he ldquoruled over the underworldrdquo following his descent from Baalrsquos

throne does not suggest that Athtar was a ldquobeing species-uniquerdquo from

the other deities any more than Inanna or Ishtar the Mesopotamian

goddesses who experienced a type of death in the underworld were of

a different species than the gods Ea Enki Marduk and so forth48 Hugh R Page Jr Te Myth o Cosmic Rebellion A Study o Its Reflexes in Ugaritic

and Biblical Literature (Leiden Brill 1996) 92 Pagersquos views concerning the Athtar mythhave been criticized by Gregorio del Olmo Lete ldquoIn Search of the Canaanite Luciferrdquo Aula Orientalis 19 (2001) 125ndash32

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 287

Still in his efforts to present Yahweh as a being species-unique

Heiser correctly draws attention to the other gods of the council whoare commanded to worship Yahweh In his analysis he focuses uponthe call given to the gods in Psalm 291ndash2 ldquoAscribe to Yahweh O sons ofGod ascribe to Yahweh glory and strength Ascribe to Yahweh the gloryof his name worship Yahweh in the splendor of holinessrdquo (as quotedon p 256) While Heiserrsquos observations certainly illustrate that biblicalauthors viewed their deity as uniquemdashthat is exceptionalmdashthroughout

Near Eastern tradition lesser gods regularly appear in a position inwhich they offer praise service and devotion to the higher gods of thecouncil Richard J Clifford explains that in the Phoenician view of theassembly ldquoas elsewhere in the ancient Near East the assemblies are pic-tured as subordinate to individual gods although the assemblyrsquos con-sent seems necessary for important decisionsrdquo Simply because ancienttextsmdashincluding the Biblemdashdepict the members of the assemblies asldquosubordinate to individual godsrdquo this in no way implies that the higher

deities somehow belonged to a separate species Ancient Near Easterntexts such as Mursilirsquos Hymn and Prayer to the Sun-goddess o Arinna (CH 376A) establish the fact that Near Eastern peoples believed thatgods of the same species paid homage to higher deities in a way compa-rable to the biblical view

You O Sun-goddess of Arinna are honored goddess Your

name is honored among names and your divinity is honoredamong gods Furthermore among the gods you are the mosthonored and the greatest Tere is no other god more honoredor greater than you You are the lord of just judgment Youcontrol the kingship of heaven and earth1048624

Holding the position ldquomost honoredrdquo among the gods did not estab-lish Arinna as species-unique Arinna was simply the god before

whom from the authorrsquos perspective the other gods would regularly49 Richard J Clifford ldquoPhoenician Religionrdquo Bulletin o the American Schools o

Oriental Research 279 (1990) 57 50 As cited in Itamar Singer Hittite Prayers (Atlanta Society of Biblical Literature2002) 51

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2349

288 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquofall downrdquo1048580 For the ancients the Near Eastern view of the divine

court clearly reflected or were expressed in terms of earthly realityTerefore just as the high king before whom other humans paid hom-age was still a human being so the god to whom other deities paidhomage was still a god matching in species For biblical authors Yah-weh stood at the head of the hierarchy in Israelite thought Yahwehwas unique as the God of gods but he was not unique in his divinityFrom a biblical perspective Yahweh even shared this divinity withhumanity

Humans as Teomorphic Beings

In his discussion concerning the biblical view regarding theomor-phic humans Peterson draws attention to Paulrsquos New estament ser-mon presented in Acts 1728ndash29

For in him we live and move and have our being as

certain also of your own poets have said For we are also hisoffspring

Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God we oughtnot to think that the Godhead is like unto gold or silver orstone graven by art and manrsquos device

Peterson in part argues for a biblical connection between God andhumanity based on the fact that ldquothe word rendered lsquooffspringrsquo by the

King James translators is the Greek genos which is cognate with theLatin genus and means lsquofamilyrsquo or lsquoracersquo or lsquokindrsquo or even and mostespecially interesting lsquodescendants of a common ancestorrsquo rdquo983044 ForLatter-day Saints human beings are literally the offspring of God andtherefore intrinsically theomorphic Part of the strength of Petersonrsquosessay lies in his recognition that like Latter-day Saints biblical authorsregularly blur the distinction between humanity and divine beings

Not only does Peterson draw attention to the prophetic interactionwith the council as support for his thesis but he also places consider-

51 Singer Hittite Prayers 51 52 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 542ndash43 53 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 289

able emphasis upon the deified dead in the Hebrew Bible and the early

Christian teaching regarding deification Heiser notwithstandingPetersonrsquos evidence rejects the idea that a genus equation of God and

humankind appears in the Bible

For his criticisms of Petersonrsquos views Heiser places considerable

weight on the notion that ldquothe concept of the image of God does not

advance the idea that there is a genus equation of God and human-

kind or that God was once a manrdquo (p 224) On some levels Heiserrsquos

point concerning the word tzelem or ldquoimagerdquo in Genesis 126ndash27is correct Concerning this controversial term Marc Z Brettler has

recently explained

Te word tzelem (ldquoimagerdquo) elsewhere always refers to a

physical representation For example the Book of Ezekiel

uses tzelem when it refers to ldquomen sculptured upon the walls

figures of Chaldeans drawn in vermilionrdquo (2314) or when it

accuses Israel of fornicating with ldquophallic imagesrdquo (1617) Teword oen refers to idols (eg Num 3352 Ezek 720 Amos

526 2 Chron 2317) It always signifies a concrete entity

rather than an abstract one Tis is not surprising since the

Bible (in contrast to most medieval philosophical traditions

both Jewish and Christian) oen depicts God in corporeal

terms

Genesis 126ndash27 suggests that Godrsquos physical likeness is similar to

humanityrsquos but Heiser is correct that the statement does not indicate

that biblical authors viewed humans as gods or that God himself was

once a human However many other texts from the Bible do present a

theomorphic view of humanity Peterson therefore is precisely correct

in stating that ldquothe Latter-day Saint understanding that humans are of

the same genus or species as God is thus clearly biblicalrdquo54 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509ndash28

55 Marc Z Brettler How to Read the Bible (Philadelphia Jewish Publication Society2005) 43ndash44 Hebrew word deleted 56 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 547

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2549

290 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Adam as a Divine Council Member

In addition to associating humanity with the tzelem of God theBible describes the first man as a deified member of the divine council

In the Eden story the Lord took advantage of the wet claylike soil and

ldquoformed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils

the breath of life and man became a living soulrdquo (Genesis 27) In an

important study concerning this imagery Walter Brueggemann has

shown that a biblical connection exists between being raised from the

dust and enthronement ldquoo be taken lsquofrom the dustrsquo means to be

elevated from obscurity to royal office and to return to dust means to

be deprived of that office and returned to obscurityrdquo Imagery such

as that witnessed in 1 Kings 162 supports Brueggemannrsquos interpreta-

tion ldquoForasmuch as I [God] exalted thee [Jehu] out of the dust and

made thee prince over my people Israel rdquo (1 Kings 162) Hence the

notion of the God raising man ldquofrom the dust of the earthrdquo in Genesis

27 in part suggests that Yahweh begins his creative activity by form-

ing a divine king According to Genesis 215 this divine king through

a type of imitatio dei would continue to perform the work of Yahweh

who ldquoplantedrdquo the garden ldquoAnd the Lord God took the man and put

him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep itrdquo In a simi-

lar fashion Mesopotamian kings such as Hammurapi glorified their

efforts through the use of creation and agricultural imageryI encircled [the wall] with a swamp I dug the Euphrates

as far as Sippar (and) made it reach a prosperous quay

I Hammu-rāpi who builds up the land caused Sippar

and Babylon to dwell in peaceful abodes forever What

from [primordial days] no one among the kings had done I

did in a grand fashion for the god Šamaš my lord

57 Walter Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestament-liche Wissenschaf 841 (1972) 1ndash18 58 Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo 2 59 Douglas Frayne Old Babylonian Period (2003ndash1595 BC) (oronto University oforonto Press 1990) 348ndash49

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 291

Te view presented in the Babylonian inscription on the wall

of Sippar reflects the common Near Eastern assumption featured inGenesis 2 of a God king participating in the act of creation from ldquopri-

mordial daysrdquo through structure1048624 As a king Hammurapi assumed

the same role filled by deities who created the universe by giving order

to preexistent chaos In its depiction of Adam as the primordial gar-

dener the Bible relies upon similar imagery

Manrsquos status as the archetypal gardener king in Genesis 2ndash3 con-

tains important parallels with Mesopotamian kingship theory1048580 Sev-eral examples of Mesopotamian iconography feature a depiction of the

tree (or plant) of life over which the king and priests appear pouring

libations In assessing the connection between Mesopotamian kings

and gardeners Geo Widengren cites these statements from the am-

muz text R IV 27 No I

A tamarisk which in the garden has no water to drink

Whose foliage on the plant sends forth no twig

A plant which they water no more in its pot

Whose roots are torn away

A herb which is in the garden has no water to drink

Among the flowers of the garden he sleeps

Among the flowers of the garden he is thrown

According to Widengren ldquothe ree of Life is watered by the kingwho pours out over it the Water of Life which he has in his possession

Te ree of Life constantly needs the Water of Life near which it is

growing in the garden of paradiserdquo983044 Te connection between king

and gardener was widely attested throughout ancient Mesopotamia

60 In his translation Frayne renders the Akkadian word szligi-a-tim as ldquothe pastrdquo Teinscription however clearly relies on creation imagery and I have therefore interpreted

szligiatim as ldquoprimordial daysrdquo in accordance with the information provided in Jeremy BlackAndrew George and Nicholas Postgate A Concise Dictionary o Akkadian (WiesbadenHarrassowitz 2000) 337 61 See Geo Widengren Te King and the ree o Lie in Ancient Near Eastern Reli- gion (Uppsala Uppsala Universitets Aringrsskri 1951) 62 Widengren King and the ree o Lie 15

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2749

292 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Tis portrayal of kingship appears in the birth legend of Sargon

wherein the monarch declaresAkki the waterscooper placed me as his gardenerWhen I was a gardener Ishtar was in love with meTe kingship I exercised during x + 5 years

Tese lines from the tale of Sargon the gardener whom the goddess Ishtarloved seem to provide an especially significant parallel with the biblical view presented in the story of Eden In the words of Nicholas Wyatt ldquotheman in his garden is a symbolic allusion to the king in his sanctuaryrdquo

One of the important connections between humanityrsquos enthrone-ment in the garden and later biblical traditions includes the anointingof an Israelite king in 1 Kings 128ndash40 at the Gihon Spring a rivernamed Gihon was one of the four rivers that flowed out of Eden andround the land of Cush (Genesis 213) Significantly the only otherexplicit reference to the Garden of Eden in the Hebrew Bible appears

in a context that addresses the link between kingship and divinity (seeEzekiel 282ndash13)

Concerning the attestation of biblical rituals that may preserveactual religious rites wherein Israelite kings assumed divinity Wyattargues that

the rituals which transform the status of the earthly kingremoving him from ldquomerely humanrdquo status to that of a sacralfigure to be couched in the form of a narrative about a godcarries with it the hint that the king himself is to be seen astransformed into a god Te enthronement of the king isthus his apotheosis

63 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoInterpreting the Creation and Fall Story in Genesis 2ndash3rdquo Zeit-schrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 931 (1981) 15 64 John van Seters has argued according to the Documentary Hypothesis that the

story of divine kingship in J derives from Babylonian influences and is therefore latepostexilic If P is in part a reaction to the J account then it is difficult to accept vanSetersrsquos dating see John van Seters ldquoTe Creation of Man and the Creation of the KingrdquoZeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 1013 (1989) 333ndash41 65 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinity Some Mythical and Ritual Aspects of WestSemitic Kingshiprdquo Ugarit-Forschungen 31 (1999) 857

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 293

In his exploration of biblical deification Wyatt refers to Psalm 198ndash10

as a possible ritual text transforming the king into a divine beingTe teaching of Yahweh is perfectrestoring the breastTe testimony of Yahweh is certainmaking wise the headTe precepts of Yahweh are uprightrejoicing the heart

Te commandment of Yahweh is puremaking bright the eyesTe speech of Yahweh is ritually purestanding for everTe judgments of Yahweh are truthTey are righteous all togethermore desirable than goldthan much pure goldmore sweet than honeyor the refined combYour servant is indeed illumined by themand in their observance is there great gain

Concerning this possible reference to ritual anointing Wyatt argues

It is true that there is no narrative statement about unc-

tion here oil is not even mentioned But only thus can thesuccessive blessings on various parts of the kingrsquos body beexplained For comparison we should consider the unction ofpriests in Exod 294ndash9 19ndash21 4012ndash5 and Lev 810ndash2 22ndash4where various parts of the priestrsquos body are anointed with oiland blood undoubtedly with some liturgical commentary onthe action such is now narrated in these passages providing

a suitable performative utteranceIf correct Wyattrsquos assessment of Israelite deification proves importantfor an analysis of Adam as divine king in the book of Genesis

66 Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinityrdquo 874ndash75

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2949

294 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

In Genesis chapter 2 Godrsquos initial creative act must be the creation

of man for as a divine king raised ldquofrom the dustrdquo man was specifi-cally formed to assist deity in the creation process God appears as agardener who causes to grow ldquoevery tree that is pleasant to the sightand good for foodrdquo (Genesis 29) Te account declares that the Lordplaced the man in the garden to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo his newly createdoasis (Genesis 215) As a gardener the Lord plants Eden as a gardenerthe Lord mixes the soil to form both man and beast As a gardener the

Lord creates man in his image to perform the work of a God Follow-ing his creation man assumes the role of divine gardenerFrom an ancient Near Eastern perspective the view of Adam as

divine gardener suggests that biblical authors viewed humanity asan earthly extension of the divine council According to the Edenaccount man was immortal (Genesis 217) man had received fromdeity the sacred ldquobreath of liferdquo (Genesis 27) man had been com-missioned to perform the work of a godmdashthat is to till and tend the

divine garden Terefore as an immortal gardener man was alreadyldquolike the godsrdquo prior to partaking of the forbidden fruit

In Mesopotamian myths for example the work of gardening wasassigned to lesser members of the divine council Hence the story ofAtrahasis opens with the following portrayal

When gods were man

Tey did forced labor they bore drudgeryGreat indeed was the drudgery of the godsTe forced labor was heavy the misery too muchTe seven() great Anunna-gods were burdeningTe Igigi-gods with forced labor

Like the account in Genesis the lesser gods of the divine council inAtrahasis were gardeners who did the laborious task of caring for the

canals trees and waterways that sustained the higher gods of the67 For additional examples of Yahweh portrayed in the role of gardener see Num-

bers 246 Psalm 10416 Isaiah 4414 68 Altrahasis II39 1ndash6 translation in Benjamin R Foster Beore the Muses An Anthol-ogy o Akkadian Literature (Bethesda MD CDL 1993) 1159

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 295

assembly Hence Adam as an immortal being clearly reflects the

position of the Igigi in Mesopotamian thought Te questions pre-sented to Job by Eliphaz regarding the primal human seem to share

this notion

Are you the firstborn of the human race

Were you brought forth before the hills

Have you listened in the council of God (Job 157ndash8 NRSV)

As Dexter Callender has observed concerning these questionsldquoTe allusion to the primal human in Job does not give us explicit

details concerning his incorporation into the sacred world It is clear

however that the idea is present in the reference that the primal human

lsquolistenedrsquo in the council of Godrdquo As a member of Godrsquos council man

held a stewardship to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo the deityrsquos garden (Genesis

215) According to the Genesis account when the man and woman

eat from the tree of knowledge God expels the humans from Edenand assigns the cherubim other traditional members of the divine

council to ldquokeeprdquo the garden (Genesis 324) Tis move may suggest

that in biblical thought ldquokeepingrdquo the garden is a task reserved for

members of the divine host As an immortal subordinate assigned an

important council task man however eventually appears in the Gen-

esis account as a being very much like the council deities mentioned

in Psalm 82 who receive the decree of death

I have said Ye are gods and all of you are children of the

most High

But ye shall die like men and fall like one of the princes

(Psalm 826ndash7)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou

shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thoushalt surely die (Genesis 217)

69 Dexter E Callender Jr Adam in Myth and History Ancient Israelite Perspectiveson the Primal Human (Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 2000) 212 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 277

a commission to perform his redemptive role983044 Tis common Near

Eastern pattern is seen for example in the Mesopotamian story ofdivine kingship known as Enuma Elish983044 In this Babylonian myththe head god of the pantheon calls together the gods in a council toresolve a dilemma created by the goddess iamat Following a seriesof proposals Marduk the chief god of Babylon receives a commissionas savior Marduk agrees to perform the role of savior on the condi-tion that his father Ea the head god of the council grant Marduk allpower and glory Te same pattern appears in the Assyrian myth ofAnzu However in this version the god Ninurta agrees to serve ascouncil savior while allowing his father to retain his position withinthe council

Like Enuma Elish and Psalm 82 many of the council stories fromthe ancient Near East portray stories of cosmic revolt in which judg-ment is rendered against divine beings Tis pattern is familiar toLatter-day Saints through the council story provided in the Books of

Moses and Abraham (Moses 41ndash4 and Abraham 322ndash28) Althoughsometimes obscured the same pattern is reflected in council tradi-tions featured in the Hebrew Bible Te story of council crisis forexample appears in the Isaiah Apocalypse

On that day [Yahweh] will punishthe host of heaven in heavenand on earth the kings of the earth (Isaiah 2421 NRSV)

Similar language emerges in Isaiah 271

On that day [Yahweh]with his cruel and great and strong swordwill punish Leviathan the fleeing serpent (NRSV)

28 Tis summary is based upon the pattern identified by Simon B Parker ldquoCoun-cilrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 391ndash98 for a consideration of the divine coun-

cil stories within the Bible as ldquotype scenesrdquo see David M Fleming ldquoTe Divine Councilas ype Scene in the Hebrew Biblerdquo (PhD diss Te Southern Baptist Teological Semi-nary 1989) 29 For an English translation of Enuma Elish see Stephanie Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia Creation the Flood Gilgamesh and Others (New York Oxford UniversityPress 1989) 228ndash77

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1349

278 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

For Latter-day Saints these traditions preserved in texts such as Enuma

Elish the book of Isaiah and Psalm 82 provide a type of retellingmdashalbeit sometimes hiddenmdashof the primordial events concerning thegrand council described in modern revelation

In the ancient Near East members of the divine council oenappear to receive a type of reprimand suggestive of the punishmentgiven Lucifer in LDS scripture

Because that Satan rebelled against me and sought to destroy

the agency of man which I the Lord God had given himand also that I should give unto him mine own power by thepower of mine Only Begotten I caused that he should be castdown And he became Satan yea even the devil the father ofall lies to deceive and to blind men and to lead them captiveat his will even as many as would not hearken unto my voice(Moses 43ndash4)

With the words ldquoHere am I send merdquo Latter-day Saints believeJesus Christ stepped forward in the council crisis and volunteered tosave humanity from the challenges associated with mortal probation(Abraham 327) According to the council story depicted in the Bookof Abraham Lucifer ldquowas angry and kept not his first estate and atthat day many followed aer himrdquo (Abraham 328) In his analysisPeterson does well to draw attention to the fact that Isaiahrsquos refer-

ence to ldquoLucifer son of the morningrdquo in Isaiah 1412 ldquodraws us againinto the astronomical imagery oen connected with the divine assem-blyrdquo1048624 In his own studies Heiser has convincingly argued for a similarposition

Ugaritic regularly refers to heavenly beings as p∆r kkbm (the ldquocongregation of the starsrdquo) language corresponding with כוכ י קר (ldquomorning starsrdquo in parallelism with the ldquosons of

Godrdquo in Job 387) and (the ldquostars of Godrdquo Isa 1413)כוכ י לAside from the context of these references each of whichclearly points to personal beings not astronomical phenom-

30 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 533

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 279

ena it is significant that in the entire ancient near eastern lit-

erary record El is never identified with a heavenly body Tusldquothe stars of Elrdquo points to created beings with divine status1048580

For Latter-day Saints recent archaeological and textual discoverieslike those referred to by Heiser are especially intriguing However asPeterson argues in the quotation provided above (p 273) Latter-daySaints do not need the Bible to express a precise parallel with modernrevelation in order to find support for LDS theology

Te fact that texts such as Psalm 82 somewhat parallel Latter-daySaint teachings is sufficient to argue that a more exact version of thegrand council story such as is witnessed in modern revelation mayhave existed in antiquity However notwithstanding his basic agree-ment with Peterson concerning the fundamental role assumed by thecouncil of deities in the Hebrew Bible Heiser ultimately departs fromPetersonrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 suggesting that the biblical view of

the council contains eight fundamental points that conflict with LDStheology

Heiserrsquos Sixteen Points

Heiser provides a list of sixteen arguments outlining his positionregarding Psalm 82 and the divine council He divides these into eightpoints ldquowith which many evangelicals would probably disagree and

with which many Latter-day Saints would likely agreerdquo followed byeight points ldquowith which many Latter-day Saints would probably dis-agree and with which many evangelicals would likely agreerdquo (pp 222ndash24) Heiserrsquos perspectives regarding Psalm 82 are clearly sound Teyinclude such issues as the inadequacy of the term monotheism as areference to Israelite theology and the biblical use of the word elohim as a literal reference to gods rather than human judges While Heiseris certainly correct in suggesting that his first eight views would proveproblematic for many evangelicals but not for most Mormons Heiserrsquoslist of eight statements on Psalm 82 that he assumes many Latter-day

31 Michael S Heiser ldquoDeuteronomy 328 and the Sons of Godrdquo 15 for an electronic version see thedivinecouncilcomD32BibSacpdf (accessed 8 February 2007)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1549

280 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Saints would disagree with indicates a basic lack of exposure to Latter-

day Saint thoughtHeiser is well versed in biblical studies His work has contrib-uted important insights toward a scholarly view of the essential roleassumed by the divine council in Old estament theology but he isnot a Latter-day Saint However Heiser does not consider in his cri-tique the possibility that most Latter-day Saints including Petersondo not believe that the biblical view of the council mirrors preciselywhat Latter-day Saints accept through modern revelation JosephSmithrsquos revelations proclaim our day as the dispensation of the ful-ness of times ldquoaccording to that which was ordained in the midst ofthe Council of the Eternal God of all other gods before this world wasrdquo(DampC 12132) For Latter-day Saints this final dispensation representsthe time decreed by God and his council in which ldquothose things whichnever have been revealed from the foundation of the world but havebeen kept hid from the wise and prudent shall be revealed unto babes

and sucklings in this the dispensation of the fulness of timesrdquo (DampC12818) Terefore Latter-day Saint scholars acknowledge that an LDSunderstanding of the council does not precisely mirror the perspec-tives manifested in the Bible Tat having been said most Latter-daySaints certainly accept the view advocated by Peterson that the bib-lical perspective of the heavenly council of deities is in greater har-mony with LDS belief than with any other contemporary Christian

tradition A recognition that the Bible though not flawless is inspiredof God allows Latter-day Saints to comfortably engage the views putforth by biblical scholars such as Heiser even when those observa-tions prove threatening to our evangelical counterparts

If certain biblical authors for example did in fact believe asHeiser seems to correctly suggest that Yahweh was ldquonot lsquobirthedrsquointo existence by the lsquoolden godsrsquo described in Ugaritic textsrdquo (p 223)Latter-day Saints would have no problem simply accepting the obser- vation as a biblical view Similarly even though Heiser assumes thatmany Mormons would disagree with his opinion that the Bible pre-sents Yahweh the God of Israel as ldquoontologically uniquerdquo (p 223) inreality many Latter-day Saints recognize that this is precisely the case

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 281

Even within LDS theology God the Father stands out as ontologically

unique inasmuch as he created the spirits of all humanity Modernrevelation describes God with the words ldquofrom eternity to eternity Heis the same and His years never failrdquo (DampC 764)

Yahwehrsquos Ontological Uniqueness

In addition to the evidence Heiser presents for what he calls Yah-wehrsquos ontological uniqueness the name Yahweh itself appears vocal-

ized in the Hebrew Bible as a finite Hiphil verb form Te vocalizationof YHWH as ldquoYahwehrdquo carries a specific nuance since ldquoHebrew gram-mars traditionally represent the Hiphil stem as the causative of the Qal

stemrdquo983044 Frank Moore Cross explains that ldquothe accumulated evidence strongly supports the view that the name Yahweh is a causativeimperfect of the Canaanite-Proto-Hebrew verb hwy lsquoto bersquo rdquo Tere-fore the divine name Yahweh according to this view literally means

ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procreatesrdquo One of the inter-esting points to consider concerning the biblical title Yahweh Sabaoth or ldquoLord of Hostsrdquo is that typically in Hebrew proper names do notappear bound to a genitive nounmdashthat is ldquoJohn of Hostsrdquo or ldquoMary ofEarthrdquo etc Since a proper name cannot traditionally function as abound form in a construct chain Cross interprets the King James titleldquoLord of Hostsrdquo as ldquo lsquohe creates the (divine) hostsrsquo rdquo If correct this

view would lend support to Heiserrsquos argument that ldquoYahweh is said32 Bruce K Waltke and M OrsquoConnor An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax

(Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 1990) 433 33 Frank Moore Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge Harvard Uni- versity Press 1973) 65 34 ldquoA proper noun cannot as a rule be followed by a genitiverdquo Paul Jouumlon A Gram-mar o Biblical Hebrew trans and rev Muraoka (Rome Editrice Pontificio IstitutoBiblico 2000) 2481 Admittedly however textual evidence shows that the rule need notapply to divine names see J A Emerton ldquoNew Light on Israelite Religion Te Implica-

tions of the Inscriptions from Kunti llet lsquoAjrudrdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wis-senschaf 94 (1982) 12ndash13 and especially John H Choi ldquoResheph and YHWH IacuteĔBĀlt Ocirc rdquoVetus estamentum 54 (2004) 17ndash28 I offer this assessment of the title Yahweh Sabaothwhich reflects the views of scholars such as David Noel Freedman and Frank MooreCross as merely an intriguing possibility 35 Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic 65 emphasis added

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1749

282 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo (p 250)

Heiser incorrectly assumes that this apparent biblical teaching con-cerning Yahwehrsquos uniqueness among the gods is not inconsistent withLDS theology

Tough Latter-day Saints view God the Father and Jesus Christas two separate divine beings for the Saints the biblical titles associ-ated with these deities are clearly interchangeable Latter-day Saintshave no problem therefore in associating God the Father with thetitle Yahwehmdashthat is ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procre-atesrdquo Te 1916 official declaration presented by the First Presidency ofthe church states ldquoGod the Eternal Father whom we designate by theexalted name-title Elohim is the literal Parent of our Lord and SaviorJesus Christ and of the spirits of the human racerdquo Clearly howeverthe First Presidencyrsquos move toward designating God the Father as Elo-him and Jesus the Son as Jehovah was primarily a move by churchleaders to create uniformity in Latter-day Saint expression In a recent

Ensign article Keith Meservy observed that ldquoin at least three Old es-tament passages it appears that L983151983154983140 [ie Jehovah] applies to Heav-enly Father not Jesus Christ Ps 1101 Ps 27 Isa 5310rdquo No doubtfor many Latter-day Saints this estimate offered by Meservy couldbe greatly augmented LDS teachings therefore do not preclude theontological uniqueness of God the Father that Heiser witnesses in theHebrew Bible

Yahweh as a Being ldquoSpecies-Uniquerdquo

Certainly Heiser is justified in suggesting that the gods of thedivine council appear inferior to Israelrsquos deity He uses this correctobservation however to build an argument that Israelrsquos God wastherefore somehow ldquospecies-uniquerdquo (p 250) In his discussion con-cerning the biblical evidence for Yahweh being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo

Heiser bases his interpretation on five points of evidence (1) ldquoYahweh36 ldquoTe Father and the Son A Doctrinal Exposition by the First Presidency and the

welverdquo as cited in Messages o the First Presidency o the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints ed James R Clark (Salt Lake City Bookcra 1971) 526 emphasis added 37 Keith H Meservy ldquoLORD = Jehovahrdquo Ensign June 2002 29 n 3

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 283

is said to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo

(2) ldquoYahweh was considered pre-existent to all godsrdquo (3) Yahweh hasthe power to strip the other elohim of their immortality (4) Yahwehalone is referred to in the Bible as ha-elohim and (5) ldquothe other godsare commanded to worship Yahwehrdquo (see pp 250ndash57) Tough eachof Heiserrsquos five points of evidence do in fact appear in the Bible con-trary to Heiserrsquos suggestion none of these observations establishesYahweh as being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo In the Bible Yahweh is the God ofgods but the biblical gods were still biblical gods As Paul Sanders hasexplained according to the Deuteronomic vision ldquothe [Sons of Goddescribed in Deuteronomy 328] are relatively independent they havetheir own dominions like YHWHrdquo

Notwithstanding his acceptance of the importance of the divinecouncil of deities in biblical theology Heiserrsquos critique suffers in partthrough his effort to define Israelrsquos deity as a being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo(p 250) He is correct in drawing attention to the fact that biblical

authors viewed their deity as exceptionally powerful in the councilldquoFor the Lord your God is God of godsrdquo proclaims Deuteronomy 1017ldquoand Lord of lordsrdquo Unfortunately however in identifying Yahweh asa being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo Heiser forces the biblical view of deities intoan image somewhat consistent with radical monotheism Contraryto Heiserrsquos suggestion the creative act in and of itself does not set thecreator apart as an exclusive species Te same point also applies tothe issue Heiser raises concerning primogeniture In other words aman for instance may exist before both his children and his siblingsand though preeminence may render the person ldquouniquerdquo on somelevels prior existence would not in this or in any other case rendera being as ldquospecies-uniquerdquo rue the Bible speaks of gods separatefrom Israelrsquos primary deity as elohim a˙erimmdashthat is ldquoother godsrdquo(see Exodus 203 2313 Deuteronomy 57 614 etc) However as YairHoffman has observed ldquoA survey of the use of a˙erim [ldquootherrdquo] shows

38 Paul Sanders Te Provenance o Deuteronomy 32 (Leiden Brill 1996) 37039 Te term radical monotheism refers to the theological position that only one

divine being exists in the universe Te expression was popularized by ikva Frymer-Kensky In the Wake o the Goddesses Women Culture and the Biblical ransormationo Pagan Myth (New York Free Press 1992) 154

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1949

284 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

that when used attributively with regard to garments days messen-

gers and objects it clearly has a relative meaning something differ-ent yet o the same kind rdquo1048624 Terefore ldquothere is no reason to assumethat in the phrase elohim a˙erim the attribute has a more distinctivemeaningrdquo1048580 When all is said and done the biblical deities like Yah-weh himself were still gods

In addition contrary to Heiserrsquos assertion the simple fact that Elo-him possesses the power to strip the other deities of their immortalityin Psalm 82 does not indicate that these gods are of a different spe-cies than Elohim According to the Psalmistrsquos view Elohim is simplymore powerful than the other gods Analogies from the ancient NearEast illustrate the problematic nature of Heiserrsquos claim In the Babylo-nian story Enuma Elish for instance the primordial mother goddessiamat created the god Qingu as chief deity over iamatrsquos militaryforces As a result of his actions taken against the divine council thedeities of the assembly ldquobound [Qingu] and held him in front of Ea

[and they] imposed the penalty on him and cut off his bloodrdquo983044 Tefact that in Enuma Elish the council could strip Qingu of his immor-tality did not mean that the god Qingu was somehow of a different orlesser divine species In the Sumerian myth of Enlil and Ninlil Enlil(one of the ldquogreat godsrdquo of Mesopotamia) is brought to trial for havingraped the goddess Ninlil As Enlil returned to the city of Nippur hewas arrested by the assembly while walking through the temple court

Te trial commenced immediately In the myth the council pre-sented the verdict that ldquothe sex offender Enlil will leave the townrdquoAccordingly the myth reports that Enlil le Nippur headed towardthe netherworld In his assessment of the story Jacobsen points out

40 Yair Hoffman ldquoTe Conception of lsquoOther Godsrsquo in Deuteronomistic Literaturerdquoin Concepts o the Other in Near Eastern Religions ed Ilai Alon Ithamar Gruenwald andItamar Singer (Leiden Brill 1994) 107 emphasis added 41 Hoffman ldquoConception of Other Godsrdquo 107

42 As cited in Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia 261 43 For a summary of the myth see Gwendolyn Leick A Dictionary o Ancient NearEastern Mythology (London Routledge 1998) 47ndash48 for a translation see TorkildJacobsen Te Harps Tat Once Sumerian Poetry in ranslation (New Haven YaleUniversity Press 1987) 167ndash80 44 Jacobsen Harps 174

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 285

that Enlilrsquos descent to Hades may indicate that the high god in Meso-

potamian mythology was originally sentenced to death As notedby James Ackerman in his dissertation concerning Psalm 82 thesetypes of judgment scenes in which the council determines that godswill die like mortals carry important implications for interpreting thecultural background for the biblical text Contrary to Heiserrsquos inter-pretation none of these stories indicate that the dying gods were of adifferent species or order than the gods who issued the sentence

Near Eastern traditions oen place considerable emphasis on thedying-god motif In no sense however are these dying godsmdashevenwhen resurrectedmdashsomehow depicted as a lesser species Heiserrsquos con-fusion concerning the implications of a biblical statement that Godissued a judgment of death to the deities of the divine council illus-trates the fundamental need for biblical scholars to pursue Assyriol-ogy in connection with their efforts to interpret the Hebrew Bible

Also contrary to Heiserrsquos suggestion the punishment meted out

to usurpers in Near Eastern council stories never indicates that thecriminals derived from some sort of exceptional species Te storyof Athtar from ancient Canaan for instance presents the traditionof Athtarrsquos descent to the underworld following the deityrsquos ascensionto the throne of Baal Te details involved in Athtarrsquos story containimportant thematic elements depicted in ancient Near Eastern storiesof cosmic revolt Athtar seems to share some semblance with Baalrsquos

mortal enemy Mot or ldquoDeathrdquo into whom Baal himself descendsHence Hugh Page notes that Athtarrsquos ldquodescent to the underworld implies that on some level Athtar has placed himself in proxim-ity to or relationship with the only god that Baal proves incapable

45 Torkild Jacobsen ldquoAn Ancient Mesopotamian rial for Homiciderdquo in owardthe Image o ammuz and Other Essays on Mesopotamian History and Culture ed Wil-liam L Moran (Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1970) 207 first published inStudia Biblica et Orientalia vol 3 of Analecta Biblica et Orientalia XII (Rome Pontificio

Istituto Biblico 1959) 130ndash50 46 See James S Ackerman ldquoAn Exegetical Study of Psalm 82rdquo (PhD diss HarvardUniversity 1966) 186ndash93 47 For a recent survey of the issue which includes a survey of previous assessmentssee ryggve N D Mettinger Te Riddle o Resurrection ldquoDying and Rising Godsrdquo in the Ancient Near East (Stockholm Almqvist amp Wiksell 2001)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2149

286 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of defeatingrdquo Athtarrsquos assumption of the throne of Baal followed

by his descent to the underworld indicates that this portion of theBaal cycle from ancient Canaan fits the general category of the cosmic

revolt genre witnessed in texts such as Abraham 3 and Psalm 82

1 Kindly El the Compassionate answers

2 ldquoOne so small cannot race

3 with Baal cannot handle the lance

4 with Daganrsquos son when they test one anotherrdquo

5 Lady Athirat of the Sea answers 6 ldquoLet us enthrone Athtar the Strong

7 Let Athtar the Strong be kingrdquo

8 Ten Athtar the Strong

9 ascended the summit of Sapan

10 He sat upon the throne of Mightiest Baal

11 His feet would not reach its footstool

12 His head would not reach its top 13 Athtar the Strong answered

14 ldquoI cannot rule on the summit of Sapanrdquo

15 Athtar the Strong descended

16 He descended from the throne of Mightiest Baal

17 And he ruled over the underworld god of all of it

18 drew in barrels

19 drew in jars (KU 1649ndash67 translation)

Te fact that Athtar the Strong experienced a type of ldquodeathrdquo in which

he ldquoruled over the underworldrdquo following his descent from Baalrsquos

throne does not suggest that Athtar was a ldquobeing species-uniquerdquo from

the other deities any more than Inanna or Ishtar the Mesopotamian

goddesses who experienced a type of death in the underworld were of

a different species than the gods Ea Enki Marduk and so forth48 Hugh R Page Jr Te Myth o Cosmic Rebellion A Study o Its Reflexes in Ugaritic

and Biblical Literature (Leiden Brill 1996) 92 Pagersquos views concerning the Athtar mythhave been criticized by Gregorio del Olmo Lete ldquoIn Search of the Canaanite Luciferrdquo Aula Orientalis 19 (2001) 125ndash32

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 287

Still in his efforts to present Yahweh as a being species-unique

Heiser correctly draws attention to the other gods of the council whoare commanded to worship Yahweh In his analysis he focuses uponthe call given to the gods in Psalm 291ndash2 ldquoAscribe to Yahweh O sons ofGod ascribe to Yahweh glory and strength Ascribe to Yahweh the gloryof his name worship Yahweh in the splendor of holinessrdquo (as quotedon p 256) While Heiserrsquos observations certainly illustrate that biblicalauthors viewed their deity as uniquemdashthat is exceptionalmdashthroughout

Near Eastern tradition lesser gods regularly appear in a position inwhich they offer praise service and devotion to the higher gods of thecouncil Richard J Clifford explains that in the Phoenician view of theassembly ldquoas elsewhere in the ancient Near East the assemblies are pic-tured as subordinate to individual gods although the assemblyrsquos con-sent seems necessary for important decisionsrdquo Simply because ancienttextsmdashincluding the Biblemdashdepict the members of the assemblies asldquosubordinate to individual godsrdquo this in no way implies that the higher

deities somehow belonged to a separate species Ancient Near Easterntexts such as Mursilirsquos Hymn and Prayer to the Sun-goddess o Arinna (CH 376A) establish the fact that Near Eastern peoples believed thatgods of the same species paid homage to higher deities in a way compa-rable to the biblical view

You O Sun-goddess of Arinna are honored goddess Your

name is honored among names and your divinity is honoredamong gods Furthermore among the gods you are the mosthonored and the greatest Tere is no other god more honoredor greater than you You are the lord of just judgment Youcontrol the kingship of heaven and earth1048624

Holding the position ldquomost honoredrdquo among the gods did not estab-lish Arinna as species-unique Arinna was simply the god before

whom from the authorrsquos perspective the other gods would regularly49 Richard J Clifford ldquoPhoenician Religionrdquo Bulletin o the American Schools o

Oriental Research 279 (1990) 57 50 As cited in Itamar Singer Hittite Prayers (Atlanta Society of Biblical Literature2002) 51

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2349

288 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquofall downrdquo1048580 For the ancients the Near Eastern view of the divine

court clearly reflected or were expressed in terms of earthly realityTerefore just as the high king before whom other humans paid hom-age was still a human being so the god to whom other deities paidhomage was still a god matching in species For biblical authors Yah-weh stood at the head of the hierarchy in Israelite thought Yahwehwas unique as the God of gods but he was not unique in his divinityFrom a biblical perspective Yahweh even shared this divinity withhumanity

Humans as Teomorphic Beings

In his discussion concerning the biblical view regarding theomor-phic humans Peterson draws attention to Paulrsquos New estament ser-mon presented in Acts 1728ndash29

For in him we live and move and have our being as

certain also of your own poets have said For we are also hisoffspring

Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God we oughtnot to think that the Godhead is like unto gold or silver orstone graven by art and manrsquos device

Peterson in part argues for a biblical connection between God andhumanity based on the fact that ldquothe word rendered lsquooffspringrsquo by the

King James translators is the Greek genos which is cognate with theLatin genus and means lsquofamilyrsquo or lsquoracersquo or lsquokindrsquo or even and mostespecially interesting lsquodescendants of a common ancestorrsquo rdquo983044 ForLatter-day Saints human beings are literally the offspring of God andtherefore intrinsically theomorphic Part of the strength of Petersonrsquosessay lies in his recognition that like Latter-day Saints biblical authorsregularly blur the distinction between humanity and divine beings

Not only does Peterson draw attention to the prophetic interactionwith the council as support for his thesis but he also places consider-

51 Singer Hittite Prayers 51 52 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 542ndash43 53 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 289

able emphasis upon the deified dead in the Hebrew Bible and the early

Christian teaching regarding deification Heiser notwithstandingPetersonrsquos evidence rejects the idea that a genus equation of God and

humankind appears in the Bible

For his criticisms of Petersonrsquos views Heiser places considerable

weight on the notion that ldquothe concept of the image of God does not

advance the idea that there is a genus equation of God and human-

kind or that God was once a manrdquo (p 224) On some levels Heiserrsquos

point concerning the word tzelem or ldquoimagerdquo in Genesis 126ndash27is correct Concerning this controversial term Marc Z Brettler has

recently explained

Te word tzelem (ldquoimagerdquo) elsewhere always refers to a

physical representation For example the Book of Ezekiel

uses tzelem when it refers to ldquomen sculptured upon the walls

figures of Chaldeans drawn in vermilionrdquo (2314) or when it

accuses Israel of fornicating with ldquophallic imagesrdquo (1617) Teword oen refers to idols (eg Num 3352 Ezek 720 Amos

526 2 Chron 2317) It always signifies a concrete entity

rather than an abstract one Tis is not surprising since the

Bible (in contrast to most medieval philosophical traditions

both Jewish and Christian) oen depicts God in corporeal

terms

Genesis 126ndash27 suggests that Godrsquos physical likeness is similar to

humanityrsquos but Heiser is correct that the statement does not indicate

that biblical authors viewed humans as gods or that God himself was

once a human However many other texts from the Bible do present a

theomorphic view of humanity Peterson therefore is precisely correct

in stating that ldquothe Latter-day Saint understanding that humans are of

the same genus or species as God is thus clearly biblicalrdquo54 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509ndash28

55 Marc Z Brettler How to Read the Bible (Philadelphia Jewish Publication Society2005) 43ndash44 Hebrew word deleted 56 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 547

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2549

290 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Adam as a Divine Council Member

In addition to associating humanity with the tzelem of God theBible describes the first man as a deified member of the divine council

In the Eden story the Lord took advantage of the wet claylike soil and

ldquoformed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils

the breath of life and man became a living soulrdquo (Genesis 27) In an

important study concerning this imagery Walter Brueggemann has

shown that a biblical connection exists between being raised from the

dust and enthronement ldquoo be taken lsquofrom the dustrsquo means to be

elevated from obscurity to royal office and to return to dust means to

be deprived of that office and returned to obscurityrdquo Imagery such

as that witnessed in 1 Kings 162 supports Brueggemannrsquos interpreta-

tion ldquoForasmuch as I [God] exalted thee [Jehu] out of the dust and

made thee prince over my people Israel rdquo (1 Kings 162) Hence the

notion of the God raising man ldquofrom the dust of the earthrdquo in Genesis

27 in part suggests that Yahweh begins his creative activity by form-

ing a divine king According to Genesis 215 this divine king through

a type of imitatio dei would continue to perform the work of Yahweh

who ldquoplantedrdquo the garden ldquoAnd the Lord God took the man and put

him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep itrdquo In a simi-

lar fashion Mesopotamian kings such as Hammurapi glorified their

efforts through the use of creation and agricultural imageryI encircled [the wall] with a swamp I dug the Euphrates

as far as Sippar (and) made it reach a prosperous quay

I Hammu-rāpi who builds up the land caused Sippar

and Babylon to dwell in peaceful abodes forever What

from [primordial days] no one among the kings had done I

did in a grand fashion for the god Šamaš my lord

57 Walter Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestament-liche Wissenschaf 841 (1972) 1ndash18 58 Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo 2 59 Douglas Frayne Old Babylonian Period (2003ndash1595 BC) (oronto University oforonto Press 1990) 348ndash49

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 291

Te view presented in the Babylonian inscription on the wall

of Sippar reflects the common Near Eastern assumption featured inGenesis 2 of a God king participating in the act of creation from ldquopri-

mordial daysrdquo through structure1048624 As a king Hammurapi assumed

the same role filled by deities who created the universe by giving order

to preexistent chaos In its depiction of Adam as the primordial gar-

dener the Bible relies upon similar imagery

Manrsquos status as the archetypal gardener king in Genesis 2ndash3 con-

tains important parallels with Mesopotamian kingship theory1048580 Sev-eral examples of Mesopotamian iconography feature a depiction of the

tree (or plant) of life over which the king and priests appear pouring

libations In assessing the connection between Mesopotamian kings

and gardeners Geo Widengren cites these statements from the am-

muz text R IV 27 No I

A tamarisk which in the garden has no water to drink

Whose foliage on the plant sends forth no twig

A plant which they water no more in its pot

Whose roots are torn away

A herb which is in the garden has no water to drink

Among the flowers of the garden he sleeps

Among the flowers of the garden he is thrown

According to Widengren ldquothe ree of Life is watered by the kingwho pours out over it the Water of Life which he has in his possession

Te ree of Life constantly needs the Water of Life near which it is

growing in the garden of paradiserdquo983044 Te connection between king

and gardener was widely attested throughout ancient Mesopotamia

60 In his translation Frayne renders the Akkadian word szligi-a-tim as ldquothe pastrdquo Teinscription however clearly relies on creation imagery and I have therefore interpreted

szligiatim as ldquoprimordial daysrdquo in accordance with the information provided in Jeremy BlackAndrew George and Nicholas Postgate A Concise Dictionary o Akkadian (WiesbadenHarrassowitz 2000) 337 61 See Geo Widengren Te King and the ree o Lie in Ancient Near Eastern Reli- gion (Uppsala Uppsala Universitets Aringrsskri 1951) 62 Widengren King and the ree o Lie 15

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2749

292 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Tis portrayal of kingship appears in the birth legend of Sargon

wherein the monarch declaresAkki the waterscooper placed me as his gardenerWhen I was a gardener Ishtar was in love with meTe kingship I exercised during x + 5 years

Tese lines from the tale of Sargon the gardener whom the goddess Ishtarloved seem to provide an especially significant parallel with the biblical view presented in the story of Eden In the words of Nicholas Wyatt ldquotheman in his garden is a symbolic allusion to the king in his sanctuaryrdquo

One of the important connections between humanityrsquos enthrone-ment in the garden and later biblical traditions includes the anointingof an Israelite king in 1 Kings 128ndash40 at the Gihon Spring a rivernamed Gihon was one of the four rivers that flowed out of Eden andround the land of Cush (Genesis 213) Significantly the only otherexplicit reference to the Garden of Eden in the Hebrew Bible appears

in a context that addresses the link between kingship and divinity (seeEzekiel 282ndash13)

Concerning the attestation of biblical rituals that may preserveactual religious rites wherein Israelite kings assumed divinity Wyattargues that

the rituals which transform the status of the earthly kingremoving him from ldquomerely humanrdquo status to that of a sacralfigure to be couched in the form of a narrative about a godcarries with it the hint that the king himself is to be seen astransformed into a god Te enthronement of the king isthus his apotheosis

63 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoInterpreting the Creation and Fall Story in Genesis 2ndash3rdquo Zeit-schrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 931 (1981) 15 64 John van Seters has argued according to the Documentary Hypothesis that the

story of divine kingship in J derives from Babylonian influences and is therefore latepostexilic If P is in part a reaction to the J account then it is difficult to accept vanSetersrsquos dating see John van Seters ldquoTe Creation of Man and the Creation of the KingrdquoZeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 1013 (1989) 333ndash41 65 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinity Some Mythical and Ritual Aspects of WestSemitic Kingshiprdquo Ugarit-Forschungen 31 (1999) 857

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 293

In his exploration of biblical deification Wyatt refers to Psalm 198ndash10

as a possible ritual text transforming the king into a divine beingTe teaching of Yahweh is perfectrestoring the breastTe testimony of Yahweh is certainmaking wise the headTe precepts of Yahweh are uprightrejoicing the heart

Te commandment of Yahweh is puremaking bright the eyesTe speech of Yahweh is ritually purestanding for everTe judgments of Yahweh are truthTey are righteous all togethermore desirable than goldthan much pure goldmore sweet than honeyor the refined combYour servant is indeed illumined by themand in their observance is there great gain

Concerning this possible reference to ritual anointing Wyatt argues

It is true that there is no narrative statement about unc-

tion here oil is not even mentioned But only thus can thesuccessive blessings on various parts of the kingrsquos body beexplained For comparison we should consider the unction ofpriests in Exod 294ndash9 19ndash21 4012ndash5 and Lev 810ndash2 22ndash4where various parts of the priestrsquos body are anointed with oiland blood undoubtedly with some liturgical commentary onthe action such is now narrated in these passages providing

a suitable performative utteranceIf correct Wyattrsquos assessment of Israelite deification proves importantfor an analysis of Adam as divine king in the book of Genesis

66 Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinityrdquo 874ndash75

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2949

294 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

In Genesis chapter 2 Godrsquos initial creative act must be the creation

of man for as a divine king raised ldquofrom the dustrdquo man was specifi-cally formed to assist deity in the creation process God appears as agardener who causes to grow ldquoevery tree that is pleasant to the sightand good for foodrdquo (Genesis 29) Te account declares that the Lordplaced the man in the garden to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo his newly createdoasis (Genesis 215) As a gardener the Lord plants Eden as a gardenerthe Lord mixes the soil to form both man and beast As a gardener the

Lord creates man in his image to perform the work of a God Follow-ing his creation man assumes the role of divine gardenerFrom an ancient Near Eastern perspective the view of Adam as

divine gardener suggests that biblical authors viewed humanity asan earthly extension of the divine council According to the Edenaccount man was immortal (Genesis 217) man had received fromdeity the sacred ldquobreath of liferdquo (Genesis 27) man had been com-missioned to perform the work of a godmdashthat is to till and tend the

divine garden Terefore as an immortal gardener man was alreadyldquolike the godsrdquo prior to partaking of the forbidden fruit

In Mesopotamian myths for example the work of gardening wasassigned to lesser members of the divine council Hence the story ofAtrahasis opens with the following portrayal

When gods were man

Tey did forced labor they bore drudgeryGreat indeed was the drudgery of the godsTe forced labor was heavy the misery too muchTe seven() great Anunna-gods were burdeningTe Igigi-gods with forced labor

Like the account in Genesis the lesser gods of the divine council inAtrahasis were gardeners who did the laborious task of caring for the

canals trees and waterways that sustained the higher gods of the67 For additional examples of Yahweh portrayed in the role of gardener see Num-

bers 246 Psalm 10416 Isaiah 4414 68 Altrahasis II39 1ndash6 translation in Benjamin R Foster Beore the Muses An Anthol-ogy o Akkadian Literature (Bethesda MD CDL 1993) 1159

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 295

assembly Hence Adam as an immortal being clearly reflects the

position of the Igigi in Mesopotamian thought Te questions pre-sented to Job by Eliphaz regarding the primal human seem to share

this notion

Are you the firstborn of the human race

Were you brought forth before the hills

Have you listened in the council of God (Job 157ndash8 NRSV)

As Dexter Callender has observed concerning these questionsldquoTe allusion to the primal human in Job does not give us explicit

details concerning his incorporation into the sacred world It is clear

however that the idea is present in the reference that the primal human

lsquolistenedrsquo in the council of Godrdquo As a member of Godrsquos council man

held a stewardship to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo the deityrsquos garden (Genesis

215) According to the Genesis account when the man and woman

eat from the tree of knowledge God expels the humans from Edenand assigns the cherubim other traditional members of the divine

council to ldquokeeprdquo the garden (Genesis 324) Tis move may suggest

that in biblical thought ldquokeepingrdquo the garden is a task reserved for

members of the divine host As an immortal subordinate assigned an

important council task man however eventually appears in the Gen-

esis account as a being very much like the council deities mentioned

in Psalm 82 who receive the decree of death

I have said Ye are gods and all of you are children of the

most High

But ye shall die like men and fall like one of the princes

(Psalm 826ndash7)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou

shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thoushalt surely die (Genesis 217)

69 Dexter E Callender Jr Adam in Myth and History Ancient Israelite Perspectiveson the Primal Human (Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 2000) 212 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1349

278 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

For Latter-day Saints these traditions preserved in texts such as Enuma

Elish the book of Isaiah and Psalm 82 provide a type of retellingmdashalbeit sometimes hiddenmdashof the primordial events concerning thegrand council described in modern revelation

In the ancient Near East members of the divine council oenappear to receive a type of reprimand suggestive of the punishmentgiven Lucifer in LDS scripture

Because that Satan rebelled against me and sought to destroy

the agency of man which I the Lord God had given himand also that I should give unto him mine own power by thepower of mine Only Begotten I caused that he should be castdown And he became Satan yea even the devil the father ofall lies to deceive and to blind men and to lead them captiveat his will even as many as would not hearken unto my voice(Moses 43ndash4)

With the words ldquoHere am I send merdquo Latter-day Saints believeJesus Christ stepped forward in the council crisis and volunteered tosave humanity from the challenges associated with mortal probation(Abraham 327) According to the council story depicted in the Bookof Abraham Lucifer ldquowas angry and kept not his first estate and atthat day many followed aer himrdquo (Abraham 328) In his analysisPeterson does well to draw attention to the fact that Isaiahrsquos refer-

ence to ldquoLucifer son of the morningrdquo in Isaiah 1412 ldquodraws us againinto the astronomical imagery oen connected with the divine assem-blyrdquo1048624 In his own studies Heiser has convincingly argued for a similarposition

Ugaritic regularly refers to heavenly beings as p∆r kkbm (the ldquocongregation of the starsrdquo) language corresponding with כוכ י קר (ldquomorning starsrdquo in parallelism with the ldquosons of

Godrdquo in Job 387) and (the ldquostars of Godrdquo Isa 1413)כוכ י לAside from the context of these references each of whichclearly points to personal beings not astronomical phenom-

30 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 533

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 279

ena it is significant that in the entire ancient near eastern lit-

erary record El is never identified with a heavenly body Tusldquothe stars of Elrdquo points to created beings with divine status1048580

For Latter-day Saints recent archaeological and textual discoverieslike those referred to by Heiser are especially intriguing However asPeterson argues in the quotation provided above (p 273) Latter-daySaints do not need the Bible to express a precise parallel with modernrevelation in order to find support for LDS theology

Te fact that texts such as Psalm 82 somewhat parallel Latter-daySaint teachings is sufficient to argue that a more exact version of thegrand council story such as is witnessed in modern revelation mayhave existed in antiquity However notwithstanding his basic agree-ment with Peterson concerning the fundamental role assumed by thecouncil of deities in the Hebrew Bible Heiser ultimately departs fromPetersonrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 suggesting that the biblical view of

the council contains eight fundamental points that conflict with LDStheology

Heiserrsquos Sixteen Points

Heiser provides a list of sixteen arguments outlining his positionregarding Psalm 82 and the divine council He divides these into eightpoints ldquowith which many evangelicals would probably disagree and

with which many Latter-day Saints would likely agreerdquo followed byeight points ldquowith which many Latter-day Saints would probably dis-agree and with which many evangelicals would likely agreerdquo (pp 222ndash24) Heiserrsquos perspectives regarding Psalm 82 are clearly sound Teyinclude such issues as the inadequacy of the term monotheism as areference to Israelite theology and the biblical use of the word elohim as a literal reference to gods rather than human judges While Heiseris certainly correct in suggesting that his first eight views would proveproblematic for many evangelicals but not for most Mormons Heiserrsquoslist of eight statements on Psalm 82 that he assumes many Latter-day

31 Michael S Heiser ldquoDeuteronomy 328 and the Sons of Godrdquo 15 for an electronic version see thedivinecouncilcomD32BibSacpdf (accessed 8 February 2007)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1549

280 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Saints would disagree with indicates a basic lack of exposure to Latter-

day Saint thoughtHeiser is well versed in biblical studies His work has contrib-uted important insights toward a scholarly view of the essential roleassumed by the divine council in Old estament theology but he isnot a Latter-day Saint However Heiser does not consider in his cri-tique the possibility that most Latter-day Saints including Petersondo not believe that the biblical view of the council mirrors preciselywhat Latter-day Saints accept through modern revelation JosephSmithrsquos revelations proclaim our day as the dispensation of the ful-ness of times ldquoaccording to that which was ordained in the midst ofthe Council of the Eternal God of all other gods before this world wasrdquo(DampC 12132) For Latter-day Saints this final dispensation representsthe time decreed by God and his council in which ldquothose things whichnever have been revealed from the foundation of the world but havebeen kept hid from the wise and prudent shall be revealed unto babes

and sucklings in this the dispensation of the fulness of timesrdquo (DampC12818) Terefore Latter-day Saint scholars acknowledge that an LDSunderstanding of the council does not precisely mirror the perspec-tives manifested in the Bible Tat having been said most Latter-daySaints certainly accept the view advocated by Peterson that the bib-lical perspective of the heavenly council of deities is in greater har-mony with LDS belief than with any other contemporary Christian

tradition A recognition that the Bible though not flawless is inspiredof God allows Latter-day Saints to comfortably engage the views putforth by biblical scholars such as Heiser even when those observa-tions prove threatening to our evangelical counterparts

If certain biblical authors for example did in fact believe asHeiser seems to correctly suggest that Yahweh was ldquonot lsquobirthedrsquointo existence by the lsquoolden godsrsquo described in Ugaritic textsrdquo (p 223)Latter-day Saints would have no problem simply accepting the obser- vation as a biblical view Similarly even though Heiser assumes thatmany Mormons would disagree with his opinion that the Bible pre-sents Yahweh the God of Israel as ldquoontologically uniquerdquo (p 223) inreality many Latter-day Saints recognize that this is precisely the case

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 281

Even within LDS theology God the Father stands out as ontologically

unique inasmuch as he created the spirits of all humanity Modernrevelation describes God with the words ldquofrom eternity to eternity Heis the same and His years never failrdquo (DampC 764)

Yahwehrsquos Ontological Uniqueness

In addition to the evidence Heiser presents for what he calls Yah-wehrsquos ontological uniqueness the name Yahweh itself appears vocal-

ized in the Hebrew Bible as a finite Hiphil verb form Te vocalizationof YHWH as ldquoYahwehrdquo carries a specific nuance since ldquoHebrew gram-mars traditionally represent the Hiphil stem as the causative of the Qal

stemrdquo983044 Frank Moore Cross explains that ldquothe accumulated evidence strongly supports the view that the name Yahweh is a causativeimperfect of the Canaanite-Proto-Hebrew verb hwy lsquoto bersquo rdquo Tere-fore the divine name Yahweh according to this view literally means

ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procreatesrdquo One of the inter-esting points to consider concerning the biblical title Yahweh Sabaoth or ldquoLord of Hostsrdquo is that typically in Hebrew proper names do notappear bound to a genitive nounmdashthat is ldquoJohn of Hostsrdquo or ldquoMary ofEarthrdquo etc Since a proper name cannot traditionally function as abound form in a construct chain Cross interprets the King James titleldquoLord of Hostsrdquo as ldquo lsquohe creates the (divine) hostsrsquo rdquo If correct this

view would lend support to Heiserrsquos argument that ldquoYahweh is said32 Bruce K Waltke and M OrsquoConnor An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax

(Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 1990) 433 33 Frank Moore Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge Harvard Uni- versity Press 1973) 65 34 ldquoA proper noun cannot as a rule be followed by a genitiverdquo Paul Jouumlon A Gram-mar o Biblical Hebrew trans and rev Muraoka (Rome Editrice Pontificio IstitutoBiblico 2000) 2481 Admittedly however textual evidence shows that the rule need notapply to divine names see J A Emerton ldquoNew Light on Israelite Religion Te Implica-

tions of the Inscriptions from Kunti llet lsquoAjrudrdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wis-senschaf 94 (1982) 12ndash13 and especially John H Choi ldquoResheph and YHWH IacuteĔBĀlt Ocirc rdquoVetus estamentum 54 (2004) 17ndash28 I offer this assessment of the title Yahweh Sabaothwhich reflects the views of scholars such as David Noel Freedman and Frank MooreCross as merely an intriguing possibility 35 Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic 65 emphasis added

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1749

282 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo (p 250)

Heiser incorrectly assumes that this apparent biblical teaching con-cerning Yahwehrsquos uniqueness among the gods is not inconsistent withLDS theology

Tough Latter-day Saints view God the Father and Jesus Christas two separate divine beings for the Saints the biblical titles associ-ated with these deities are clearly interchangeable Latter-day Saintshave no problem therefore in associating God the Father with thetitle Yahwehmdashthat is ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procre-atesrdquo Te 1916 official declaration presented by the First Presidency ofthe church states ldquoGod the Eternal Father whom we designate by theexalted name-title Elohim is the literal Parent of our Lord and SaviorJesus Christ and of the spirits of the human racerdquo Clearly howeverthe First Presidencyrsquos move toward designating God the Father as Elo-him and Jesus the Son as Jehovah was primarily a move by churchleaders to create uniformity in Latter-day Saint expression In a recent

Ensign article Keith Meservy observed that ldquoin at least three Old es-tament passages it appears that L983151983154983140 [ie Jehovah] applies to Heav-enly Father not Jesus Christ Ps 1101 Ps 27 Isa 5310rdquo No doubtfor many Latter-day Saints this estimate offered by Meservy couldbe greatly augmented LDS teachings therefore do not preclude theontological uniqueness of God the Father that Heiser witnesses in theHebrew Bible

Yahweh as a Being ldquoSpecies-Uniquerdquo

Certainly Heiser is justified in suggesting that the gods of thedivine council appear inferior to Israelrsquos deity He uses this correctobservation however to build an argument that Israelrsquos God wastherefore somehow ldquospecies-uniquerdquo (p 250) In his discussion con-cerning the biblical evidence for Yahweh being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo

Heiser bases his interpretation on five points of evidence (1) ldquoYahweh36 ldquoTe Father and the Son A Doctrinal Exposition by the First Presidency and the

welverdquo as cited in Messages o the First Presidency o the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints ed James R Clark (Salt Lake City Bookcra 1971) 526 emphasis added 37 Keith H Meservy ldquoLORD = Jehovahrdquo Ensign June 2002 29 n 3

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 283

is said to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo

(2) ldquoYahweh was considered pre-existent to all godsrdquo (3) Yahweh hasthe power to strip the other elohim of their immortality (4) Yahwehalone is referred to in the Bible as ha-elohim and (5) ldquothe other godsare commanded to worship Yahwehrdquo (see pp 250ndash57) Tough eachof Heiserrsquos five points of evidence do in fact appear in the Bible con-trary to Heiserrsquos suggestion none of these observations establishesYahweh as being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo In the Bible Yahweh is the God ofgods but the biblical gods were still biblical gods As Paul Sanders hasexplained according to the Deuteronomic vision ldquothe [Sons of Goddescribed in Deuteronomy 328] are relatively independent they havetheir own dominions like YHWHrdquo

Notwithstanding his acceptance of the importance of the divinecouncil of deities in biblical theology Heiserrsquos critique suffers in partthrough his effort to define Israelrsquos deity as a being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo(p 250) He is correct in drawing attention to the fact that biblical

authors viewed their deity as exceptionally powerful in the councilldquoFor the Lord your God is God of godsrdquo proclaims Deuteronomy 1017ldquoand Lord of lordsrdquo Unfortunately however in identifying Yahweh asa being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo Heiser forces the biblical view of deities intoan image somewhat consistent with radical monotheism Contraryto Heiserrsquos suggestion the creative act in and of itself does not set thecreator apart as an exclusive species Te same point also applies tothe issue Heiser raises concerning primogeniture In other words aman for instance may exist before both his children and his siblingsand though preeminence may render the person ldquouniquerdquo on somelevels prior existence would not in this or in any other case rendera being as ldquospecies-uniquerdquo rue the Bible speaks of gods separatefrom Israelrsquos primary deity as elohim a˙erimmdashthat is ldquoother godsrdquo(see Exodus 203 2313 Deuteronomy 57 614 etc) However as YairHoffman has observed ldquoA survey of the use of a˙erim [ldquootherrdquo] shows

38 Paul Sanders Te Provenance o Deuteronomy 32 (Leiden Brill 1996) 37039 Te term radical monotheism refers to the theological position that only one

divine being exists in the universe Te expression was popularized by ikva Frymer-Kensky In the Wake o the Goddesses Women Culture and the Biblical ransormationo Pagan Myth (New York Free Press 1992) 154

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1949

284 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

that when used attributively with regard to garments days messen-

gers and objects it clearly has a relative meaning something differ-ent yet o the same kind rdquo1048624 Terefore ldquothere is no reason to assumethat in the phrase elohim a˙erim the attribute has a more distinctivemeaningrdquo1048580 When all is said and done the biblical deities like Yah-weh himself were still gods

In addition contrary to Heiserrsquos assertion the simple fact that Elo-him possesses the power to strip the other deities of their immortalityin Psalm 82 does not indicate that these gods are of a different spe-cies than Elohim According to the Psalmistrsquos view Elohim is simplymore powerful than the other gods Analogies from the ancient NearEast illustrate the problematic nature of Heiserrsquos claim In the Babylo-nian story Enuma Elish for instance the primordial mother goddessiamat created the god Qingu as chief deity over iamatrsquos militaryforces As a result of his actions taken against the divine council thedeities of the assembly ldquobound [Qingu] and held him in front of Ea

[and they] imposed the penalty on him and cut off his bloodrdquo983044 Tefact that in Enuma Elish the council could strip Qingu of his immor-tality did not mean that the god Qingu was somehow of a different orlesser divine species In the Sumerian myth of Enlil and Ninlil Enlil(one of the ldquogreat godsrdquo of Mesopotamia) is brought to trial for havingraped the goddess Ninlil As Enlil returned to the city of Nippur hewas arrested by the assembly while walking through the temple court

Te trial commenced immediately In the myth the council pre-sented the verdict that ldquothe sex offender Enlil will leave the townrdquoAccordingly the myth reports that Enlil le Nippur headed towardthe netherworld In his assessment of the story Jacobsen points out

40 Yair Hoffman ldquoTe Conception of lsquoOther Godsrsquo in Deuteronomistic Literaturerdquoin Concepts o the Other in Near Eastern Religions ed Ilai Alon Ithamar Gruenwald andItamar Singer (Leiden Brill 1994) 107 emphasis added 41 Hoffman ldquoConception of Other Godsrdquo 107

42 As cited in Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia 261 43 For a summary of the myth see Gwendolyn Leick A Dictionary o Ancient NearEastern Mythology (London Routledge 1998) 47ndash48 for a translation see TorkildJacobsen Te Harps Tat Once Sumerian Poetry in ranslation (New Haven YaleUniversity Press 1987) 167ndash80 44 Jacobsen Harps 174

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 285

that Enlilrsquos descent to Hades may indicate that the high god in Meso-

potamian mythology was originally sentenced to death As notedby James Ackerman in his dissertation concerning Psalm 82 thesetypes of judgment scenes in which the council determines that godswill die like mortals carry important implications for interpreting thecultural background for the biblical text Contrary to Heiserrsquos inter-pretation none of these stories indicate that the dying gods were of adifferent species or order than the gods who issued the sentence

Near Eastern traditions oen place considerable emphasis on thedying-god motif In no sense however are these dying godsmdashevenwhen resurrectedmdashsomehow depicted as a lesser species Heiserrsquos con-fusion concerning the implications of a biblical statement that Godissued a judgment of death to the deities of the divine council illus-trates the fundamental need for biblical scholars to pursue Assyriol-ogy in connection with their efforts to interpret the Hebrew Bible

Also contrary to Heiserrsquos suggestion the punishment meted out

to usurpers in Near Eastern council stories never indicates that thecriminals derived from some sort of exceptional species Te storyof Athtar from ancient Canaan for instance presents the traditionof Athtarrsquos descent to the underworld following the deityrsquos ascensionto the throne of Baal Te details involved in Athtarrsquos story containimportant thematic elements depicted in ancient Near Eastern storiesof cosmic revolt Athtar seems to share some semblance with Baalrsquos

mortal enemy Mot or ldquoDeathrdquo into whom Baal himself descendsHence Hugh Page notes that Athtarrsquos ldquodescent to the underworld implies that on some level Athtar has placed himself in proxim-ity to or relationship with the only god that Baal proves incapable

45 Torkild Jacobsen ldquoAn Ancient Mesopotamian rial for Homiciderdquo in owardthe Image o ammuz and Other Essays on Mesopotamian History and Culture ed Wil-liam L Moran (Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1970) 207 first published inStudia Biblica et Orientalia vol 3 of Analecta Biblica et Orientalia XII (Rome Pontificio

Istituto Biblico 1959) 130ndash50 46 See James S Ackerman ldquoAn Exegetical Study of Psalm 82rdquo (PhD diss HarvardUniversity 1966) 186ndash93 47 For a recent survey of the issue which includes a survey of previous assessmentssee ryggve N D Mettinger Te Riddle o Resurrection ldquoDying and Rising Godsrdquo in the Ancient Near East (Stockholm Almqvist amp Wiksell 2001)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2149

286 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of defeatingrdquo Athtarrsquos assumption of the throne of Baal followed

by his descent to the underworld indicates that this portion of theBaal cycle from ancient Canaan fits the general category of the cosmic

revolt genre witnessed in texts such as Abraham 3 and Psalm 82

1 Kindly El the Compassionate answers

2 ldquoOne so small cannot race

3 with Baal cannot handle the lance

4 with Daganrsquos son when they test one anotherrdquo

5 Lady Athirat of the Sea answers 6 ldquoLet us enthrone Athtar the Strong

7 Let Athtar the Strong be kingrdquo

8 Ten Athtar the Strong

9 ascended the summit of Sapan

10 He sat upon the throne of Mightiest Baal

11 His feet would not reach its footstool

12 His head would not reach its top 13 Athtar the Strong answered

14 ldquoI cannot rule on the summit of Sapanrdquo

15 Athtar the Strong descended

16 He descended from the throne of Mightiest Baal

17 And he ruled over the underworld god of all of it

18 drew in barrels

19 drew in jars (KU 1649ndash67 translation)

Te fact that Athtar the Strong experienced a type of ldquodeathrdquo in which

he ldquoruled over the underworldrdquo following his descent from Baalrsquos

throne does not suggest that Athtar was a ldquobeing species-uniquerdquo from

the other deities any more than Inanna or Ishtar the Mesopotamian

goddesses who experienced a type of death in the underworld were of

a different species than the gods Ea Enki Marduk and so forth48 Hugh R Page Jr Te Myth o Cosmic Rebellion A Study o Its Reflexes in Ugaritic

and Biblical Literature (Leiden Brill 1996) 92 Pagersquos views concerning the Athtar mythhave been criticized by Gregorio del Olmo Lete ldquoIn Search of the Canaanite Luciferrdquo Aula Orientalis 19 (2001) 125ndash32

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 287

Still in his efforts to present Yahweh as a being species-unique

Heiser correctly draws attention to the other gods of the council whoare commanded to worship Yahweh In his analysis he focuses uponthe call given to the gods in Psalm 291ndash2 ldquoAscribe to Yahweh O sons ofGod ascribe to Yahweh glory and strength Ascribe to Yahweh the gloryof his name worship Yahweh in the splendor of holinessrdquo (as quotedon p 256) While Heiserrsquos observations certainly illustrate that biblicalauthors viewed their deity as uniquemdashthat is exceptionalmdashthroughout

Near Eastern tradition lesser gods regularly appear in a position inwhich they offer praise service and devotion to the higher gods of thecouncil Richard J Clifford explains that in the Phoenician view of theassembly ldquoas elsewhere in the ancient Near East the assemblies are pic-tured as subordinate to individual gods although the assemblyrsquos con-sent seems necessary for important decisionsrdquo Simply because ancienttextsmdashincluding the Biblemdashdepict the members of the assemblies asldquosubordinate to individual godsrdquo this in no way implies that the higher

deities somehow belonged to a separate species Ancient Near Easterntexts such as Mursilirsquos Hymn and Prayer to the Sun-goddess o Arinna (CH 376A) establish the fact that Near Eastern peoples believed thatgods of the same species paid homage to higher deities in a way compa-rable to the biblical view

You O Sun-goddess of Arinna are honored goddess Your

name is honored among names and your divinity is honoredamong gods Furthermore among the gods you are the mosthonored and the greatest Tere is no other god more honoredor greater than you You are the lord of just judgment Youcontrol the kingship of heaven and earth1048624

Holding the position ldquomost honoredrdquo among the gods did not estab-lish Arinna as species-unique Arinna was simply the god before

whom from the authorrsquos perspective the other gods would regularly49 Richard J Clifford ldquoPhoenician Religionrdquo Bulletin o the American Schools o

Oriental Research 279 (1990) 57 50 As cited in Itamar Singer Hittite Prayers (Atlanta Society of Biblical Literature2002) 51

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2349

288 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquofall downrdquo1048580 For the ancients the Near Eastern view of the divine

court clearly reflected or were expressed in terms of earthly realityTerefore just as the high king before whom other humans paid hom-age was still a human being so the god to whom other deities paidhomage was still a god matching in species For biblical authors Yah-weh stood at the head of the hierarchy in Israelite thought Yahwehwas unique as the God of gods but he was not unique in his divinityFrom a biblical perspective Yahweh even shared this divinity withhumanity

Humans as Teomorphic Beings

In his discussion concerning the biblical view regarding theomor-phic humans Peterson draws attention to Paulrsquos New estament ser-mon presented in Acts 1728ndash29

For in him we live and move and have our being as

certain also of your own poets have said For we are also hisoffspring

Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God we oughtnot to think that the Godhead is like unto gold or silver orstone graven by art and manrsquos device

Peterson in part argues for a biblical connection between God andhumanity based on the fact that ldquothe word rendered lsquooffspringrsquo by the

King James translators is the Greek genos which is cognate with theLatin genus and means lsquofamilyrsquo or lsquoracersquo or lsquokindrsquo or even and mostespecially interesting lsquodescendants of a common ancestorrsquo rdquo983044 ForLatter-day Saints human beings are literally the offspring of God andtherefore intrinsically theomorphic Part of the strength of Petersonrsquosessay lies in his recognition that like Latter-day Saints biblical authorsregularly blur the distinction between humanity and divine beings

Not only does Peterson draw attention to the prophetic interactionwith the council as support for his thesis but he also places consider-

51 Singer Hittite Prayers 51 52 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 542ndash43 53 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 289

able emphasis upon the deified dead in the Hebrew Bible and the early

Christian teaching regarding deification Heiser notwithstandingPetersonrsquos evidence rejects the idea that a genus equation of God and

humankind appears in the Bible

For his criticisms of Petersonrsquos views Heiser places considerable

weight on the notion that ldquothe concept of the image of God does not

advance the idea that there is a genus equation of God and human-

kind or that God was once a manrdquo (p 224) On some levels Heiserrsquos

point concerning the word tzelem or ldquoimagerdquo in Genesis 126ndash27is correct Concerning this controversial term Marc Z Brettler has

recently explained

Te word tzelem (ldquoimagerdquo) elsewhere always refers to a

physical representation For example the Book of Ezekiel

uses tzelem when it refers to ldquomen sculptured upon the walls

figures of Chaldeans drawn in vermilionrdquo (2314) or when it

accuses Israel of fornicating with ldquophallic imagesrdquo (1617) Teword oen refers to idols (eg Num 3352 Ezek 720 Amos

526 2 Chron 2317) It always signifies a concrete entity

rather than an abstract one Tis is not surprising since the

Bible (in contrast to most medieval philosophical traditions

both Jewish and Christian) oen depicts God in corporeal

terms

Genesis 126ndash27 suggests that Godrsquos physical likeness is similar to

humanityrsquos but Heiser is correct that the statement does not indicate

that biblical authors viewed humans as gods or that God himself was

once a human However many other texts from the Bible do present a

theomorphic view of humanity Peterson therefore is precisely correct

in stating that ldquothe Latter-day Saint understanding that humans are of

the same genus or species as God is thus clearly biblicalrdquo54 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509ndash28

55 Marc Z Brettler How to Read the Bible (Philadelphia Jewish Publication Society2005) 43ndash44 Hebrew word deleted 56 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 547

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2549

290 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Adam as a Divine Council Member

In addition to associating humanity with the tzelem of God theBible describes the first man as a deified member of the divine council

In the Eden story the Lord took advantage of the wet claylike soil and

ldquoformed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils

the breath of life and man became a living soulrdquo (Genesis 27) In an

important study concerning this imagery Walter Brueggemann has

shown that a biblical connection exists between being raised from the

dust and enthronement ldquoo be taken lsquofrom the dustrsquo means to be

elevated from obscurity to royal office and to return to dust means to

be deprived of that office and returned to obscurityrdquo Imagery such

as that witnessed in 1 Kings 162 supports Brueggemannrsquos interpreta-

tion ldquoForasmuch as I [God] exalted thee [Jehu] out of the dust and

made thee prince over my people Israel rdquo (1 Kings 162) Hence the

notion of the God raising man ldquofrom the dust of the earthrdquo in Genesis

27 in part suggests that Yahweh begins his creative activity by form-

ing a divine king According to Genesis 215 this divine king through

a type of imitatio dei would continue to perform the work of Yahweh

who ldquoplantedrdquo the garden ldquoAnd the Lord God took the man and put

him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep itrdquo In a simi-

lar fashion Mesopotamian kings such as Hammurapi glorified their

efforts through the use of creation and agricultural imageryI encircled [the wall] with a swamp I dug the Euphrates

as far as Sippar (and) made it reach a prosperous quay

I Hammu-rāpi who builds up the land caused Sippar

and Babylon to dwell in peaceful abodes forever What

from [primordial days] no one among the kings had done I

did in a grand fashion for the god Šamaš my lord

57 Walter Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestament-liche Wissenschaf 841 (1972) 1ndash18 58 Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo 2 59 Douglas Frayne Old Babylonian Period (2003ndash1595 BC) (oronto University oforonto Press 1990) 348ndash49

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 291

Te view presented in the Babylonian inscription on the wall

of Sippar reflects the common Near Eastern assumption featured inGenesis 2 of a God king participating in the act of creation from ldquopri-

mordial daysrdquo through structure1048624 As a king Hammurapi assumed

the same role filled by deities who created the universe by giving order

to preexistent chaos In its depiction of Adam as the primordial gar-

dener the Bible relies upon similar imagery

Manrsquos status as the archetypal gardener king in Genesis 2ndash3 con-

tains important parallels with Mesopotamian kingship theory1048580 Sev-eral examples of Mesopotamian iconography feature a depiction of the

tree (or plant) of life over which the king and priests appear pouring

libations In assessing the connection between Mesopotamian kings

and gardeners Geo Widengren cites these statements from the am-

muz text R IV 27 No I

A tamarisk which in the garden has no water to drink

Whose foliage on the plant sends forth no twig

A plant which they water no more in its pot

Whose roots are torn away

A herb which is in the garden has no water to drink

Among the flowers of the garden he sleeps

Among the flowers of the garden he is thrown

According to Widengren ldquothe ree of Life is watered by the kingwho pours out over it the Water of Life which he has in his possession

Te ree of Life constantly needs the Water of Life near which it is

growing in the garden of paradiserdquo983044 Te connection between king

and gardener was widely attested throughout ancient Mesopotamia

60 In his translation Frayne renders the Akkadian word szligi-a-tim as ldquothe pastrdquo Teinscription however clearly relies on creation imagery and I have therefore interpreted

szligiatim as ldquoprimordial daysrdquo in accordance with the information provided in Jeremy BlackAndrew George and Nicholas Postgate A Concise Dictionary o Akkadian (WiesbadenHarrassowitz 2000) 337 61 See Geo Widengren Te King and the ree o Lie in Ancient Near Eastern Reli- gion (Uppsala Uppsala Universitets Aringrsskri 1951) 62 Widengren King and the ree o Lie 15

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2749

292 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Tis portrayal of kingship appears in the birth legend of Sargon

wherein the monarch declaresAkki the waterscooper placed me as his gardenerWhen I was a gardener Ishtar was in love with meTe kingship I exercised during x + 5 years

Tese lines from the tale of Sargon the gardener whom the goddess Ishtarloved seem to provide an especially significant parallel with the biblical view presented in the story of Eden In the words of Nicholas Wyatt ldquotheman in his garden is a symbolic allusion to the king in his sanctuaryrdquo

One of the important connections between humanityrsquos enthrone-ment in the garden and later biblical traditions includes the anointingof an Israelite king in 1 Kings 128ndash40 at the Gihon Spring a rivernamed Gihon was one of the four rivers that flowed out of Eden andround the land of Cush (Genesis 213) Significantly the only otherexplicit reference to the Garden of Eden in the Hebrew Bible appears

in a context that addresses the link between kingship and divinity (seeEzekiel 282ndash13)

Concerning the attestation of biblical rituals that may preserveactual religious rites wherein Israelite kings assumed divinity Wyattargues that

the rituals which transform the status of the earthly kingremoving him from ldquomerely humanrdquo status to that of a sacralfigure to be couched in the form of a narrative about a godcarries with it the hint that the king himself is to be seen astransformed into a god Te enthronement of the king isthus his apotheosis

63 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoInterpreting the Creation and Fall Story in Genesis 2ndash3rdquo Zeit-schrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 931 (1981) 15 64 John van Seters has argued according to the Documentary Hypothesis that the

story of divine kingship in J derives from Babylonian influences and is therefore latepostexilic If P is in part a reaction to the J account then it is difficult to accept vanSetersrsquos dating see John van Seters ldquoTe Creation of Man and the Creation of the KingrdquoZeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 1013 (1989) 333ndash41 65 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinity Some Mythical and Ritual Aspects of WestSemitic Kingshiprdquo Ugarit-Forschungen 31 (1999) 857

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 293

In his exploration of biblical deification Wyatt refers to Psalm 198ndash10

as a possible ritual text transforming the king into a divine beingTe teaching of Yahweh is perfectrestoring the breastTe testimony of Yahweh is certainmaking wise the headTe precepts of Yahweh are uprightrejoicing the heart

Te commandment of Yahweh is puremaking bright the eyesTe speech of Yahweh is ritually purestanding for everTe judgments of Yahweh are truthTey are righteous all togethermore desirable than goldthan much pure goldmore sweet than honeyor the refined combYour servant is indeed illumined by themand in their observance is there great gain

Concerning this possible reference to ritual anointing Wyatt argues

It is true that there is no narrative statement about unc-

tion here oil is not even mentioned But only thus can thesuccessive blessings on various parts of the kingrsquos body beexplained For comparison we should consider the unction ofpriests in Exod 294ndash9 19ndash21 4012ndash5 and Lev 810ndash2 22ndash4where various parts of the priestrsquos body are anointed with oiland blood undoubtedly with some liturgical commentary onthe action such is now narrated in these passages providing

a suitable performative utteranceIf correct Wyattrsquos assessment of Israelite deification proves importantfor an analysis of Adam as divine king in the book of Genesis

66 Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinityrdquo 874ndash75

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2949

294 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

In Genesis chapter 2 Godrsquos initial creative act must be the creation

of man for as a divine king raised ldquofrom the dustrdquo man was specifi-cally formed to assist deity in the creation process God appears as agardener who causes to grow ldquoevery tree that is pleasant to the sightand good for foodrdquo (Genesis 29) Te account declares that the Lordplaced the man in the garden to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo his newly createdoasis (Genesis 215) As a gardener the Lord plants Eden as a gardenerthe Lord mixes the soil to form both man and beast As a gardener the

Lord creates man in his image to perform the work of a God Follow-ing his creation man assumes the role of divine gardenerFrom an ancient Near Eastern perspective the view of Adam as

divine gardener suggests that biblical authors viewed humanity asan earthly extension of the divine council According to the Edenaccount man was immortal (Genesis 217) man had received fromdeity the sacred ldquobreath of liferdquo (Genesis 27) man had been com-missioned to perform the work of a godmdashthat is to till and tend the

divine garden Terefore as an immortal gardener man was alreadyldquolike the godsrdquo prior to partaking of the forbidden fruit

In Mesopotamian myths for example the work of gardening wasassigned to lesser members of the divine council Hence the story ofAtrahasis opens with the following portrayal

When gods were man

Tey did forced labor they bore drudgeryGreat indeed was the drudgery of the godsTe forced labor was heavy the misery too muchTe seven() great Anunna-gods were burdeningTe Igigi-gods with forced labor

Like the account in Genesis the lesser gods of the divine council inAtrahasis were gardeners who did the laborious task of caring for the

canals trees and waterways that sustained the higher gods of the67 For additional examples of Yahweh portrayed in the role of gardener see Num-

bers 246 Psalm 10416 Isaiah 4414 68 Altrahasis II39 1ndash6 translation in Benjamin R Foster Beore the Muses An Anthol-ogy o Akkadian Literature (Bethesda MD CDL 1993) 1159

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 295

assembly Hence Adam as an immortal being clearly reflects the

position of the Igigi in Mesopotamian thought Te questions pre-sented to Job by Eliphaz regarding the primal human seem to share

this notion

Are you the firstborn of the human race

Were you brought forth before the hills

Have you listened in the council of God (Job 157ndash8 NRSV)

As Dexter Callender has observed concerning these questionsldquoTe allusion to the primal human in Job does not give us explicit

details concerning his incorporation into the sacred world It is clear

however that the idea is present in the reference that the primal human

lsquolistenedrsquo in the council of Godrdquo As a member of Godrsquos council man

held a stewardship to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo the deityrsquos garden (Genesis

215) According to the Genesis account when the man and woman

eat from the tree of knowledge God expels the humans from Edenand assigns the cherubim other traditional members of the divine

council to ldquokeeprdquo the garden (Genesis 324) Tis move may suggest

that in biblical thought ldquokeepingrdquo the garden is a task reserved for

members of the divine host As an immortal subordinate assigned an

important council task man however eventually appears in the Gen-

esis account as a being very much like the council deities mentioned

in Psalm 82 who receive the decree of death

I have said Ye are gods and all of you are children of the

most High

But ye shall die like men and fall like one of the princes

(Psalm 826ndash7)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou

shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thoushalt surely die (Genesis 217)

69 Dexter E Callender Jr Adam in Myth and History Ancient Israelite Perspectiveson the Primal Human (Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 2000) 212 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 279

ena it is significant that in the entire ancient near eastern lit-

erary record El is never identified with a heavenly body Tusldquothe stars of Elrdquo points to created beings with divine status1048580

For Latter-day Saints recent archaeological and textual discoverieslike those referred to by Heiser are especially intriguing However asPeterson argues in the quotation provided above (p 273) Latter-daySaints do not need the Bible to express a precise parallel with modernrevelation in order to find support for LDS theology

Te fact that texts such as Psalm 82 somewhat parallel Latter-daySaint teachings is sufficient to argue that a more exact version of thegrand council story such as is witnessed in modern revelation mayhave existed in antiquity However notwithstanding his basic agree-ment with Peterson concerning the fundamental role assumed by thecouncil of deities in the Hebrew Bible Heiser ultimately departs fromPetersonrsquos analysis of Psalm 82 suggesting that the biblical view of

the council contains eight fundamental points that conflict with LDStheology

Heiserrsquos Sixteen Points

Heiser provides a list of sixteen arguments outlining his positionregarding Psalm 82 and the divine council He divides these into eightpoints ldquowith which many evangelicals would probably disagree and

with which many Latter-day Saints would likely agreerdquo followed byeight points ldquowith which many Latter-day Saints would probably dis-agree and with which many evangelicals would likely agreerdquo (pp 222ndash24) Heiserrsquos perspectives regarding Psalm 82 are clearly sound Teyinclude such issues as the inadequacy of the term monotheism as areference to Israelite theology and the biblical use of the word elohim as a literal reference to gods rather than human judges While Heiseris certainly correct in suggesting that his first eight views would proveproblematic for many evangelicals but not for most Mormons Heiserrsquoslist of eight statements on Psalm 82 that he assumes many Latter-day

31 Michael S Heiser ldquoDeuteronomy 328 and the Sons of Godrdquo 15 for an electronic version see thedivinecouncilcomD32BibSacpdf (accessed 8 February 2007)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1549

280 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Saints would disagree with indicates a basic lack of exposure to Latter-

day Saint thoughtHeiser is well versed in biblical studies His work has contrib-uted important insights toward a scholarly view of the essential roleassumed by the divine council in Old estament theology but he isnot a Latter-day Saint However Heiser does not consider in his cri-tique the possibility that most Latter-day Saints including Petersondo not believe that the biblical view of the council mirrors preciselywhat Latter-day Saints accept through modern revelation JosephSmithrsquos revelations proclaim our day as the dispensation of the ful-ness of times ldquoaccording to that which was ordained in the midst ofthe Council of the Eternal God of all other gods before this world wasrdquo(DampC 12132) For Latter-day Saints this final dispensation representsthe time decreed by God and his council in which ldquothose things whichnever have been revealed from the foundation of the world but havebeen kept hid from the wise and prudent shall be revealed unto babes

and sucklings in this the dispensation of the fulness of timesrdquo (DampC12818) Terefore Latter-day Saint scholars acknowledge that an LDSunderstanding of the council does not precisely mirror the perspec-tives manifested in the Bible Tat having been said most Latter-daySaints certainly accept the view advocated by Peterson that the bib-lical perspective of the heavenly council of deities is in greater har-mony with LDS belief than with any other contemporary Christian

tradition A recognition that the Bible though not flawless is inspiredof God allows Latter-day Saints to comfortably engage the views putforth by biblical scholars such as Heiser even when those observa-tions prove threatening to our evangelical counterparts

If certain biblical authors for example did in fact believe asHeiser seems to correctly suggest that Yahweh was ldquonot lsquobirthedrsquointo existence by the lsquoolden godsrsquo described in Ugaritic textsrdquo (p 223)Latter-day Saints would have no problem simply accepting the obser- vation as a biblical view Similarly even though Heiser assumes thatmany Mormons would disagree with his opinion that the Bible pre-sents Yahweh the God of Israel as ldquoontologically uniquerdquo (p 223) inreality many Latter-day Saints recognize that this is precisely the case

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 281

Even within LDS theology God the Father stands out as ontologically

unique inasmuch as he created the spirits of all humanity Modernrevelation describes God with the words ldquofrom eternity to eternity Heis the same and His years never failrdquo (DampC 764)

Yahwehrsquos Ontological Uniqueness

In addition to the evidence Heiser presents for what he calls Yah-wehrsquos ontological uniqueness the name Yahweh itself appears vocal-

ized in the Hebrew Bible as a finite Hiphil verb form Te vocalizationof YHWH as ldquoYahwehrdquo carries a specific nuance since ldquoHebrew gram-mars traditionally represent the Hiphil stem as the causative of the Qal

stemrdquo983044 Frank Moore Cross explains that ldquothe accumulated evidence strongly supports the view that the name Yahweh is a causativeimperfect of the Canaanite-Proto-Hebrew verb hwy lsquoto bersquo rdquo Tere-fore the divine name Yahweh according to this view literally means

ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procreatesrdquo One of the inter-esting points to consider concerning the biblical title Yahweh Sabaoth or ldquoLord of Hostsrdquo is that typically in Hebrew proper names do notappear bound to a genitive nounmdashthat is ldquoJohn of Hostsrdquo or ldquoMary ofEarthrdquo etc Since a proper name cannot traditionally function as abound form in a construct chain Cross interprets the King James titleldquoLord of Hostsrdquo as ldquo lsquohe creates the (divine) hostsrsquo rdquo If correct this

view would lend support to Heiserrsquos argument that ldquoYahweh is said32 Bruce K Waltke and M OrsquoConnor An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax

(Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 1990) 433 33 Frank Moore Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge Harvard Uni- versity Press 1973) 65 34 ldquoA proper noun cannot as a rule be followed by a genitiverdquo Paul Jouumlon A Gram-mar o Biblical Hebrew trans and rev Muraoka (Rome Editrice Pontificio IstitutoBiblico 2000) 2481 Admittedly however textual evidence shows that the rule need notapply to divine names see J A Emerton ldquoNew Light on Israelite Religion Te Implica-

tions of the Inscriptions from Kunti llet lsquoAjrudrdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wis-senschaf 94 (1982) 12ndash13 and especially John H Choi ldquoResheph and YHWH IacuteĔBĀlt Ocirc rdquoVetus estamentum 54 (2004) 17ndash28 I offer this assessment of the title Yahweh Sabaothwhich reflects the views of scholars such as David Noel Freedman and Frank MooreCross as merely an intriguing possibility 35 Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic 65 emphasis added

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1749

282 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo (p 250)

Heiser incorrectly assumes that this apparent biblical teaching con-cerning Yahwehrsquos uniqueness among the gods is not inconsistent withLDS theology

Tough Latter-day Saints view God the Father and Jesus Christas two separate divine beings for the Saints the biblical titles associ-ated with these deities are clearly interchangeable Latter-day Saintshave no problem therefore in associating God the Father with thetitle Yahwehmdashthat is ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procre-atesrdquo Te 1916 official declaration presented by the First Presidency ofthe church states ldquoGod the Eternal Father whom we designate by theexalted name-title Elohim is the literal Parent of our Lord and SaviorJesus Christ and of the spirits of the human racerdquo Clearly howeverthe First Presidencyrsquos move toward designating God the Father as Elo-him and Jesus the Son as Jehovah was primarily a move by churchleaders to create uniformity in Latter-day Saint expression In a recent

Ensign article Keith Meservy observed that ldquoin at least three Old es-tament passages it appears that L983151983154983140 [ie Jehovah] applies to Heav-enly Father not Jesus Christ Ps 1101 Ps 27 Isa 5310rdquo No doubtfor many Latter-day Saints this estimate offered by Meservy couldbe greatly augmented LDS teachings therefore do not preclude theontological uniqueness of God the Father that Heiser witnesses in theHebrew Bible

Yahweh as a Being ldquoSpecies-Uniquerdquo

Certainly Heiser is justified in suggesting that the gods of thedivine council appear inferior to Israelrsquos deity He uses this correctobservation however to build an argument that Israelrsquos God wastherefore somehow ldquospecies-uniquerdquo (p 250) In his discussion con-cerning the biblical evidence for Yahweh being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo

Heiser bases his interpretation on five points of evidence (1) ldquoYahweh36 ldquoTe Father and the Son A Doctrinal Exposition by the First Presidency and the

welverdquo as cited in Messages o the First Presidency o the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints ed James R Clark (Salt Lake City Bookcra 1971) 526 emphasis added 37 Keith H Meservy ldquoLORD = Jehovahrdquo Ensign June 2002 29 n 3

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 283

is said to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo

(2) ldquoYahweh was considered pre-existent to all godsrdquo (3) Yahweh hasthe power to strip the other elohim of their immortality (4) Yahwehalone is referred to in the Bible as ha-elohim and (5) ldquothe other godsare commanded to worship Yahwehrdquo (see pp 250ndash57) Tough eachof Heiserrsquos five points of evidence do in fact appear in the Bible con-trary to Heiserrsquos suggestion none of these observations establishesYahweh as being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo In the Bible Yahweh is the God ofgods but the biblical gods were still biblical gods As Paul Sanders hasexplained according to the Deuteronomic vision ldquothe [Sons of Goddescribed in Deuteronomy 328] are relatively independent they havetheir own dominions like YHWHrdquo

Notwithstanding his acceptance of the importance of the divinecouncil of deities in biblical theology Heiserrsquos critique suffers in partthrough his effort to define Israelrsquos deity as a being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo(p 250) He is correct in drawing attention to the fact that biblical

authors viewed their deity as exceptionally powerful in the councilldquoFor the Lord your God is God of godsrdquo proclaims Deuteronomy 1017ldquoand Lord of lordsrdquo Unfortunately however in identifying Yahweh asa being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo Heiser forces the biblical view of deities intoan image somewhat consistent with radical monotheism Contraryto Heiserrsquos suggestion the creative act in and of itself does not set thecreator apart as an exclusive species Te same point also applies tothe issue Heiser raises concerning primogeniture In other words aman for instance may exist before both his children and his siblingsand though preeminence may render the person ldquouniquerdquo on somelevels prior existence would not in this or in any other case rendera being as ldquospecies-uniquerdquo rue the Bible speaks of gods separatefrom Israelrsquos primary deity as elohim a˙erimmdashthat is ldquoother godsrdquo(see Exodus 203 2313 Deuteronomy 57 614 etc) However as YairHoffman has observed ldquoA survey of the use of a˙erim [ldquootherrdquo] shows

38 Paul Sanders Te Provenance o Deuteronomy 32 (Leiden Brill 1996) 37039 Te term radical monotheism refers to the theological position that only one

divine being exists in the universe Te expression was popularized by ikva Frymer-Kensky In the Wake o the Goddesses Women Culture and the Biblical ransormationo Pagan Myth (New York Free Press 1992) 154

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1949

284 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

that when used attributively with regard to garments days messen-

gers and objects it clearly has a relative meaning something differ-ent yet o the same kind rdquo1048624 Terefore ldquothere is no reason to assumethat in the phrase elohim a˙erim the attribute has a more distinctivemeaningrdquo1048580 When all is said and done the biblical deities like Yah-weh himself were still gods

In addition contrary to Heiserrsquos assertion the simple fact that Elo-him possesses the power to strip the other deities of their immortalityin Psalm 82 does not indicate that these gods are of a different spe-cies than Elohim According to the Psalmistrsquos view Elohim is simplymore powerful than the other gods Analogies from the ancient NearEast illustrate the problematic nature of Heiserrsquos claim In the Babylo-nian story Enuma Elish for instance the primordial mother goddessiamat created the god Qingu as chief deity over iamatrsquos militaryforces As a result of his actions taken against the divine council thedeities of the assembly ldquobound [Qingu] and held him in front of Ea

[and they] imposed the penalty on him and cut off his bloodrdquo983044 Tefact that in Enuma Elish the council could strip Qingu of his immor-tality did not mean that the god Qingu was somehow of a different orlesser divine species In the Sumerian myth of Enlil and Ninlil Enlil(one of the ldquogreat godsrdquo of Mesopotamia) is brought to trial for havingraped the goddess Ninlil As Enlil returned to the city of Nippur hewas arrested by the assembly while walking through the temple court

Te trial commenced immediately In the myth the council pre-sented the verdict that ldquothe sex offender Enlil will leave the townrdquoAccordingly the myth reports that Enlil le Nippur headed towardthe netherworld In his assessment of the story Jacobsen points out

40 Yair Hoffman ldquoTe Conception of lsquoOther Godsrsquo in Deuteronomistic Literaturerdquoin Concepts o the Other in Near Eastern Religions ed Ilai Alon Ithamar Gruenwald andItamar Singer (Leiden Brill 1994) 107 emphasis added 41 Hoffman ldquoConception of Other Godsrdquo 107

42 As cited in Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia 261 43 For a summary of the myth see Gwendolyn Leick A Dictionary o Ancient NearEastern Mythology (London Routledge 1998) 47ndash48 for a translation see TorkildJacobsen Te Harps Tat Once Sumerian Poetry in ranslation (New Haven YaleUniversity Press 1987) 167ndash80 44 Jacobsen Harps 174

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 285

that Enlilrsquos descent to Hades may indicate that the high god in Meso-

potamian mythology was originally sentenced to death As notedby James Ackerman in his dissertation concerning Psalm 82 thesetypes of judgment scenes in which the council determines that godswill die like mortals carry important implications for interpreting thecultural background for the biblical text Contrary to Heiserrsquos inter-pretation none of these stories indicate that the dying gods were of adifferent species or order than the gods who issued the sentence

Near Eastern traditions oen place considerable emphasis on thedying-god motif In no sense however are these dying godsmdashevenwhen resurrectedmdashsomehow depicted as a lesser species Heiserrsquos con-fusion concerning the implications of a biblical statement that Godissued a judgment of death to the deities of the divine council illus-trates the fundamental need for biblical scholars to pursue Assyriol-ogy in connection with their efforts to interpret the Hebrew Bible

Also contrary to Heiserrsquos suggestion the punishment meted out

to usurpers in Near Eastern council stories never indicates that thecriminals derived from some sort of exceptional species Te storyof Athtar from ancient Canaan for instance presents the traditionof Athtarrsquos descent to the underworld following the deityrsquos ascensionto the throne of Baal Te details involved in Athtarrsquos story containimportant thematic elements depicted in ancient Near Eastern storiesof cosmic revolt Athtar seems to share some semblance with Baalrsquos

mortal enemy Mot or ldquoDeathrdquo into whom Baal himself descendsHence Hugh Page notes that Athtarrsquos ldquodescent to the underworld implies that on some level Athtar has placed himself in proxim-ity to or relationship with the only god that Baal proves incapable

45 Torkild Jacobsen ldquoAn Ancient Mesopotamian rial for Homiciderdquo in owardthe Image o ammuz and Other Essays on Mesopotamian History and Culture ed Wil-liam L Moran (Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1970) 207 first published inStudia Biblica et Orientalia vol 3 of Analecta Biblica et Orientalia XII (Rome Pontificio

Istituto Biblico 1959) 130ndash50 46 See James S Ackerman ldquoAn Exegetical Study of Psalm 82rdquo (PhD diss HarvardUniversity 1966) 186ndash93 47 For a recent survey of the issue which includes a survey of previous assessmentssee ryggve N D Mettinger Te Riddle o Resurrection ldquoDying and Rising Godsrdquo in the Ancient Near East (Stockholm Almqvist amp Wiksell 2001)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2149

286 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of defeatingrdquo Athtarrsquos assumption of the throne of Baal followed

by his descent to the underworld indicates that this portion of theBaal cycle from ancient Canaan fits the general category of the cosmic

revolt genre witnessed in texts such as Abraham 3 and Psalm 82

1 Kindly El the Compassionate answers

2 ldquoOne so small cannot race

3 with Baal cannot handle the lance

4 with Daganrsquos son when they test one anotherrdquo

5 Lady Athirat of the Sea answers 6 ldquoLet us enthrone Athtar the Strong

7 Let Athtar the Strong be kingrdquo

8 Ten Athtar the Strong

9 ascended the summit of Sapan

10 He sat upon the throne of Mightiest Baal

11 His feet would not reach its footstool

12 His head would not reach its top 13 Athtar the Strong answered

14 ldquoI cannot rule on the summit of Sapanrdquo

15 Athtar the Strong descended

16 He descended from the throne of Mightiest Baal

17 And he ruled over the underworld god of all of it

18 drew in barrels

19 drew in jars (KU 1649ndash67 translation)

Te fact that Athtar the Strong experienced a type of ldquodeathrdquo in which

he ldquoruled over the underworldrdquo following his descent from Baalrsquos

throne does not suggest that Athtar was a ldquobeing species-uniquerdquo from

the other deities any more than Inanna or Ishtar the Mesopotamian

goddesses who experienced a type of death in the underworld were of

a different species than the gods Ea Enki Marduk and so forth48 Hugh R Page Jr Te Myth o Cosmic Rebellion A Study o Its Reflexes in Ugaritic

and Biblical Literature (Leiden Brill 1996) 92 Pagersquos views concerning the Athtar mythhave been criticized by Gregorio del Olmo Lete ldquoIn Search of the Canaanite Luciferrdquo Aula Orientalis 19 (2001) 125ndash32

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 287

Still in his efforts to present Yahweh as a being species-unique

Heiser correctly draws attention to the other gods of the council whoare commanded to worship Yahweh In his analysis he focuses uponthe call given to the gods in Psalm 291ndash2 ldquoAscribe to Yahweh O sons ofGod ascribe to Yahweh glory and strength Ascribe to Yahweh the gloryof his name worship Yahweh in the splendor of holinessrdquo (as quotedon p 256) While Heiserrsquos observations certainly illustrate that biblicalauthors viewed their deity as uniquemdashthat is exceptionalmdashthroughout

Near Eastern tradition lesser gods regularly appear in a position inwhich they offer praise service and devotion to the higher gods of thecouncil Richard J Clifford explains that in the Phoenician view of theassembly ldquoas elsewhere in the ancient Near East the assemblies are pic-tured as subordinate to individual gods although the assemblyrsquos con-sent seems necessary for important decisionsrdquo Simply because ancienttextsmdashincluding the Biblemdashdepict the members of the assemblies asldquosubordinate to individual godsrdquo this in no way implies that the higher

deities somehow belonged to a separate species Ancient Near Easterntexts such as Mursilirsquos Hymn and Prayer to the Sun-goddess o Arinna (CH 376A) establish the fact that Near Eastern peoples believed thatgods of the same species paid homage to higher deities in a way compa-rable to the biblical view

You O Sun-goddess of Arinna are honored goddess Your

name is honored among names and your divinity is honoredamong gods Furthermore among the gods you are the mosthonored and the greatest Tere is no other god more honoredor greater than you You are the lord of just judgment Youcontrol the kingship of heaven and earth1048624

Holding the position ldquomost honoredrdquo among the gods did not estab-lish Arinna as species-unique Arinna was simply the god before

whom from the authorrsquos perspective the other gods would regularly49 Richard J Clifford ldquoPhoenician Religionrdquo Bulletin o the American Schools o

Oriental Research 279 (1990) 57 50 As cited in Itamar Singer Hittite Prayers (Atlanta Society of Biblical Literature2002) 51

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2349

288 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquofall downrdquo1048580 For the ancients the Near Eastern view of the divine

court clearly reflected or were expressed in terms of earthly realityTerefore just as the high king before whom other humans paid hom-age was still a human being so the god to whom other deities paidhomage was still a god matching in species For biblical authors Yah-weh stood at the head of the hierarchy in Israelite thought Yahwehwas unique as the God of gods but he was not unique in his divinityFrom a biblical perspective Yahweh even shared this divinity withhumanity

Humans as Teomorphic Beings

In his discussion concerning the biblical view regarding theomor-phic humans Peterson draws attention to Paulrsquos New estament ser-mon presented in Acts 1728ndash29

For in him we live and move and have our being as

certain also of your own poets have said For we are also hisoffspring

Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God we oughtnot to think that the Godhead is like unto gold or silver orstone graven by art and manrsquos device

Peterson in part argues for a biblical connection between God andhumanity based on the fact that ldquothe word rendered lsquooffspringrsquo by the

King James translators is the Greek genos which is cognate with theLatin genus and means lsquofamilyrsquo or lsquoracersquo or lsquokindrsquo or even and mostespecially interesting lsquodescendants of a common ancestorrsquo rdquo983044 ForLatter-day Saints human beings are literally the offspring of God andtherefore intrinsically theomorphic Part of the strength of Petersonrsquosessay lies in his recognition that like Latter-day Saints biblical authorsregularly blur the distinction between humanity and divine beings

Not only does Peterson draw attention to the prophetic interactionwith the council as support for his thesis but he also places consider-

51 Singer Hittite Prayers 51 52 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 542ndash43 53 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 289

able emphasis upon the deified dead in the Hebrew Bible and the early

Christian teaching regarding deification Heiser notwithstandingPetersonrsquos evidence rejects the idea that a genus equation of God and

humankind appears in the Bible

For his criticisms of Petersonrsquos views Heiser places considerable

weight on the notion that ldquothe concept of the image of God does not

advance the idea that there is a genus equation of God and human-

kind or that God was once a manrdquo (p 224) On some levels Heiserrsquos

point concerning the word tzelem or ldquoimagerdquo in Genesis 126ndash27is correct Concerning this controversial term Marc Z Brettler has

recently explained

Te word tzelem (ldquoimagerdquo) elsewhere always refers to a

physical representation For example the Book of Ezekiel

uses tzelem when it refers to ldquomen sculptured upon the walls

figures of Chaldeans drawn in vermilionrdquo (2314) or when it

accuses Israel of fornicating with ldquophallic imagesrdquo (1617) Teword oen refers to idols (eg Num 3352 Ezek 720 Amos

526 2 Chron 2317) It always signifies a concrete entity

rather than an abstract one Tis is not surprising since the

Bible (in contrast to most medieval philosophical traditions

both Jewish and Christian) oen depicts God in corporeal

terms

Genesis 126ndash27 suggests that Godrsquos physical likeness is similar to

humanityrsquos but Heiser is correct that the statement does not indicate

that biblical authors viewed humans as gods or that God himself was

once a human However many other texts from the Bible do present a

theomorphic view of humanity Peterson therefore is precisely correct

in stating that ldquothe Latter-day Saint understanding that humans are of

the same genus or species as God is thus clearly biblicalrdquo54 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509ndash28

55 Marc Z Brettler How to Read the Bible (Philadelphia Jewish Publication Society2005) 43ndash44 Hebrew word deleted 56 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 547

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2549

290 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Adam as a Divine Council Member

In addition to associating humanity with the tzelem of God theBible describes the first man as a deified member of the divine council

In the Eden story the Lord took advantage of the wet claylike soil and

ldquoformed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils

the breath of life and man became a living soulrdquo (Genesis 27) In an

important study concerning this imagery Walter Brueggemann has

shown that a biblical connection exists between being raised from the

dust and enthronement ldquoo be taken lsquofrom the dustrsquo means to be

elevated from obscurity to royal office and to return to dust means to

be deprived of that office and returned to obscurityrdquo Imagery such

as that witnessed in 1 Kings 162 supports Brueggemannrsquos interpreta-

tion ldquoForasmuch as I [God] exalted thee [Jehu] out of the dust and

made thee prince over my people Israel rdquo (1 Kings 162) Hence the

notion of the God raising man ldquofrom the dust of the earthrdquo in Genesis

27 in part suggests that Yahweh begins his creative activity by form-

ing a divine king According to Genesis 215 this divine king through

a type of imitatio dei would continue to perform the work of Yahweh

who ldquoplantedrdquo the garden ldquoAnd the Lord God took the man and put

him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep itrdquo In a simi-

lar fashion Mesopotamian kings such as Hammurapi glorified their

efforts through the use of creation and agricultural imageryI encircled [the wall] with a swamp I dug the Euphrates

as far as Sippar (and) made it reach a prosperous quay

I Hammu-rāpi who builds up the land caused Sippar

and Babylon to dwell in peaceful abodes forever What

from [primordial days] no one among the kings had done I

did in a grand fashion for the god Šamaš my lord

57 Walter Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestament-liche Wissenschaf 841 (1972) 1ndash18 58 Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo 2 59 Douglas Frayne Old Babylonian Period (2003ndash1595 BC) (oronto University oforonto Press 1990) 348ndash49

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 291

Te view presented in the Babylonian inscription on the wall

of Sippar reflects the common Near Eastern assumption featured inGenesis 2 of a God king participating in the act of creation from ldquopri-

mordial daysrdquo through structure1048624 As a king Hammurapi assumed

the same role filled by deities who created the universe by giving order

to preexistent chaos In its depiction of Adam as the primordial gar-

dener the Bible relies upon similar imagery

Manrsquos status as the archetypal gardener king in Genesis 2ndash3 con-

tains important parallels with Mesopotamian kingship theory1048580 Sev-eral examples of Mesopotamian iconography feature a depiction of the

tree (or plant) of life over which the king and priests appear pouring

libations In assessing the connection between Mesopotamian kings

and gardeners Geo Widengren cites these statements from the am-

muz text R IV 27 No I

A tamarisk which in the garden has no water to drink

Whose foliage on the plant sends forth no twig

A plant which they water no more in its pot

Whose roots are torn away

A herb which is in the garden has no water to drink

Among the flowers of the garden he sleeps

Among the flowers of the garden he is thrown

According to Widengren ldquothe ree of Life is watered by the kingwho pours out over it the Water of Life which he has in his possession

Te ree of Life constantly needs the Water of Life near which it is

growing in the garden of paradiserdquo983044 Te connection between king

and gardener was widely attested throughout ancient Mesopotamia

60 In his translation Frayne renders the Akkadian word szligi-a-tim as ldquothe pastrdquo Teinscription however clearly relies on creation imagery and I have therefore interpreted

szligiatim as ldquoprimordial daysrdquo in accordance with the information provided in Jeremy BlackAndrew George and Nicholas Postgate A Concise Dictionary o Akkadian (WiesbadenHarrassowitz 2000) 337 61 See Geo Widengren Te King and the ree o Lie in Ancient Near Eastern Reli- gion (Uppsala Uppsala Universitets Aringrsskri 1951) 62 Widengren King and the ree o Lie 15

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2749

292 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Tis portrayal of kingship appears in the birth legend of Sargon

wherein the monarch declaresAkki the waterscooper placed me as his gardenerWhen I was a gardener Ishtar was in love with meTe kingship I exercised during x + 5 years

Tese lines from the tale of Sargon the gardener whom the goddess Ishtarloved seem to provide an especially significant parallel with the biblical view presented in the story of Eden In the words of Nicholas Wyatt ldquotheman in his garden is a symbolic allusion to the king in his sanctuaryrdquo

One of the important connections between humanityrsquos enthrone-ment in the garden and later biblical traditions includes the anointingof an Israelite king in 1 Kings 128ndash40 at the Gihon Spring a rivernamed Gihon was one of the four rivers that flowed out of Eden andround the land of Cush (Genesis 213) Significantly the only otherexplicit reference to the Garden of Eden in the Hebrew Bible appears

in a context that addresses the link between kingship and divinity (seeEzekiel 282ndash13)

Concerning the attestation of biblical rituals that may preserveactual religious rites wherein Israelite kings assumed divinity Wyattargues that

the rituals which transform the status of the earthly kingremoving him from ldquomerely humanrdquo status to that of a sacralfigure to be couched in the form of a narrative about a godcarries with it the hint that the king himself is to be seen astransformed into a god Te enthronement of the king isthus his apotheosis

63 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoInterpreting the Creation and Fall Story in Genesis 2ndash3rdquo Zeit-schrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 931 (1981) 15 64 John van Seters has argued according to the Documentary Hypothesis that the

story of divine kingship in J derives from Babylonian influences and is therefore latepostexilic If P is in part a reaction to the J account then it is difficult to accept vanSetersrsquos dating see John van Seters ldquoTe Creation of Man and the Creation of the KingrdquoZeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 1013 (1989) 333ndash41 65 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinity Some Mythical and Ritual Aspects of WestSemitic Kingshiprdquo Ugarit-Forschungen 31 (1999) 857

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 293

In his exploration of biblical deification Wyatt refers to Psalm 198ndash10

as a possible ritual text transforming the king into a divine beingTe teaching of Yahweh is perfectrestoring the breastTe testimony of Yahweh is certainmaking wise the headTe precepts of Yahweh are uprightrejoicing the heart

Te commandment of Yahweh is puremaking bright the eyesTe speech of Yahweh is ritually purestanding for everTe judgments of Yahweh are truthTey are righteous all togethermore desirable than goldthan much pure goldmore sweet than honeyor the refined combYour servant is indeed illumined by themand in their observance is there great gain

Concerning this possible reference to ritual anointing Wyatt argues

It is true that there is no narrative statement about unc-

tion here oil is not even mentioned But only thus can thesuccessive blessings on various parts of the kingrsquos body beexplained For comparison we should consider the unction ofpriests in Exod 294ndash9 19ndash21 4012ndash5 and Lev 810ndash2 22ndash4where various parts of the priestrsquos body are anointed with oiland blood undoubtedly with some liturgical commentary onthe action such is now narrated in these passages providing

a suitable performative utteranceIf correct Wyattrsquos assessment of Israelite deification proves importantfor an analysis of Adam as divine king in the book of Genesis

66 Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinityrdquo 874ndash75

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2949

294 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

In Genesis chapter 2 Godrsquos initial creative act must be the creation

of man for as a divine king raised ldquofrom the dustrdquo man was specifi-cally formed to assist deity in the creation process God appears as agardener who causes to grow ldquoevery tree that is pleasant to the sightand good for foodrdquo (Genesis 29) Te account declares that the Lordplaced the man in the garden to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo his newly createdoasis (Genesis 215) As a gardener the Lord plants Eden as a gardenerthe Lord mixes the soil to form both man and beast As a gardener the

Lord creates man in his image to perform the work of a God Follow-ing his creation man assumes the role of divine gardenerFrom an ancient Near Eastern perspective the view of Adam as

divine gardener suggests that biblical authors viewed humanity asan earthly extension of the divine council According to the Edenaccount man was immortal (Genesis 217) man had received fromdeity the sacred ldquobreath of liferdquo (Genesis 27) man had been com-missioned to perform the work of a godmdashthat is to till and tend the

divine garden Terefore as an immortal gardener man was alreadyldquolike the godsrdquo prior to partaking of the forbidden fruit

In Mesopotamian myths for example the work of gardening wasassigned to lesser members of the divine council Hence the story ofAtrahasis opens with the following portrayal

When gods were man

Tey did forced labor they bore drudgeryGreat indeed was the drudgery of the godsTe forced labor was heavy the misery too muchTe seven() great Anunna-gods were burdeningTe Igigi-gods with forced labor

Like the account in Genesis the lesser gods of the divine council inAtrahasis were gardeners who did the laborious task of caring for the

canals trees and waterways that sustained the higher gods of the67 For additional examples of Yahweh portrayed in the role of gardener see Num-

bers 246 Psalm 10416 Isaiah 4414 68 Altrahasis II39 1ndash6 translation in Benjamin R Foster Beore the Muses An Anthol-ogy o Akkadian Literature (Bethesda MD CDL 1993) 1159

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 295

assembly Hence Adam as an immortal being clearly reflects the

position of the Igigi in Mesopotamian thought Te questions pre-sented to Job by Eliphaz regarding the primal human seem to share

this notion

Are you the firstborn of the human race

Were you brought forth before the hills

Have you listened in the council of God (Job 157ndash8 NRSV)

As Dexter Callender has observed concerning these questionsldquoTe allusion to the primal human in Job does not give us explicit

details concerning his incorporation into the sacred world It is clear

however that the idea is present in the reference that the primal human

lsquolistenedrsquo in the council of Godrdquo As a member of Godrsquos council man

held a stewardship to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo the deityrsquos garden (Genesis

215) According to the Genesis account when the man and woman

eat from the tree of knowledge God expels the humans from Edenand assigns the cherubim other traditional members of the divine

council to ldquokeeprdquo the garden (Genesis 324) Tis move may suggest

that in biblical thought ldquokeepingrdquo the garden is a task reserved for

members of the divine host As an immortal subordinate assigned an

important council task man however eventually appears in the Gen-

esis account as a being very much like the council deities mentioned

in Psalm 82 who receive the decree of death

I have said Ye are gods and all of you are children of the

most High

But ye shall die like men and fall like one of the princes

(Psalm 826ndash7)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou

shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thoushalt surely die (Genesis 217)

69 Dexter E Callender Jr Adam in Myth and History Ancient Israelite Perspectiveson the Primal Human (Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 2000) 212 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1549

280 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Saints would disagree with indicates a basic lack of exposure to Latter-

day Saint thoughtHeiser is well versed in biblical studies His work has contrib-uted important insights toward a scholarly view of the essential roleassumed by the divine council in Old estament theology but he isnot a Latter-day Saint However Heiser does not consider in his cri-tique the possibility that most Latter-day Saints including Petersondo not believe that the biblical view of the council mirrors preciselywhat Latter-day Saints accept through modern revelation JosephSmithrsquos revelations proclaim our day as the dispensation of the ful-ness of times ldquoaccording to that which was ordained in the midst ofthe Council of the Eternal God of all other gods before this world wasrdquo(DampC 12132) For Latter-day Saints this final dispensation representsthe time decreed by God and his council in which ldquothose things whichnever have been revealed from the foundation of the world but havebeen kept hid from the wise and prudent shall be revealed unto babes

and sucklings in this the dispensation of the fulness of timesrdquo (DampC12818) Terefore Latter-day Saint scholars acknowledge that an LDSunderstanding of the council does not precisely mirror the perspec-tives manifested in the Bible Tat having been said most Latter-daySaints certainly accept the view advocated by Peterson that the bib-lical perspective of the heavenly council of deities is in greater har-mony with LDS belief than with any other contemporary Christian

tradition A recognition that the Bible though not flawless is inspiredof God allows Latter-day Saints to comfortably engage the views putforth by biblical scholars such as Heiser even when those observa-tions prove threatening to our evangelical counterparts

If certain biblical authors for example did in fact believe asHeiser seems to correctly suggest that Yahweh was ldquonot lsquobirthedrsquointo existence by the lsquoolden godsrsquo described in Ugaritic textsrdquo (p 223)Latter-day Saints would have no problem simply accepting the obser- vation as a biblical view Similarly even though Heiser assumes thatmany Mormons would disagree with his opinion that the Bible pre-sents Yahweh the God of Israel as ldquoontologically uniquerdquo (p 223) inreality many Latter-day Saints recognize that this is precisely the case

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 281

Even within LDS theology God the Father stands out as ontologically

unique inasmuch as he created the spirits of all humanity Modernrevelation describes God with the words ldquofrom eternity to eternity Heis the same and His years never failrdquo (DampC 764)

Yahwehrsquos Ontological Uniqueness

In addition to the evidence Heiser presents for what he calls Yah-wehrsquos ontological uniqueness the name Yahweh itself appears vocal-

ized in the Hebrew Bible as a finite Hiphil verb form Te vocalizationof YHWH as ldquoYahwehrdquo carries a specific nuance since ldquoHebrew gram-mars traditionally represent the Hiphil stem as the causative of the Qal

stemrdquo983044 Frank Moore Cross explains that ldquothe accumulated evidence strongly supports the view that the name Yahweh is a causativeimperfect of the Canaanite-Proto-Hebrew verb hwy lsquoto bersquo rdquo Tere-fore the divine name Yahweh according to this view literally means

ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procreatesrdquo One of the inter-esting points to consider concerning the biblical title Yahweh Sabaoth or ldquoLord of Hostsrdquo is that typically in Hebrew proper names do notappear bound to a genitive nounmdashthat is ldquoJohn of Hostsrdquo or ldquoMary ofEarthrdquo etc Since a proper name cannot traditionally function as abound form in a construct chain Cross interprets the King James titleldquoLord of Hostsrdquo as ldquo lsquohe creates the (divine) hostsrsquo rdquo If correct this

view would lend support to Heiserrsquos argument that ldquoYahweh is said32 Bruce K Waltke and M OrsquoConnor An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax

(Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 1990) 433 33 Frank Moore Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge Harvard Uni- versity Press 1973) 65 34 ldquoA proper noun cannot as a rule be followed by a genitiverdquo Paul Jouumlon A Gram-mar o Biblical Hebrew trans and rev Muraoka (Rome Editrice Pontificio IstitutoBiblico 2000) 2481 Admittedly however textual evidence shows that the rule need notapply to divine names see J A Emerton ldquoNew Light on Israelite Religion Te Implica-

tions of the Inscriptions from Kunti llet lsquoAjrudrdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wis-senschaf 94 (1982) 12ndash13 and especially John H Choi ldquoResheph and YHWH IacuteĔBĀlt Ocirc rdquoVetus estamentum 54 (2004) 17ndash28 I offer this assessment of the title Yahweh Sabaothwhich reflects the views of scholars such as David Noel Freedman and Frank MooreCross as merely an intriguing possibility 35 Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic 65 emphasis added

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1749

282 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo (p 250)

Heiser incorrectly assumes that this apparent biblical teaching con-cerning Yahwehrsquos uniqueness among the gods is not inconsistent withLDS theology

Tough Latter-day Saints view God the Father and Jesus Christas two separate divine beings for the Saints the biblical titles associ-ated with these deities are clearly interchangeable Latter-day Saintshave no problem therefore in associating God the Father with thetitle Yahwehmdashthat is ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procre-atesrdquo Te 1916 official declaration presented by the First Presidency ofthe church states ldquoGod the Eternal Father whom we designate by theexalted name-title Elohim is the literal Parent of our Lord and SaviorJesus Christ and of the spirits of the human racerdquo Clearly howeverthe First Presidencyrsquos move toward designating God the Father as Elo-him and Jesus the Son as Jehovah was primarily a move by churchleaders to create uniformity in Latter-day Saint expression In a recent

Ensign article Keith Meservy observed that ldquoin at least three Old es-tament passages it appears that L983151983154983140 [ie Jehovah] applies to Heav-enly Father not Jesus Christ Ps 1101 Ps 27 Isa 5310rdquo No doubtfor many Latter-day Saints this estimate offered by Meservy couldbe greatly augmented LDS teachings therefore do not preclude theontological uniqueness of God the Father that Heiser witnesses in theHebrew Bible

Yahweh as a Being ldquoSpecies-Uniquerdquo

Certainly Heiser is justified in suggesting that the gods of thedivine council appear inferior to Israelrsquos deity He uses this correctobservation however to build an argument that Israelrsquos God wastherefore somehow ldquospecies-uniquerdquo (p 250) In his discussion con-cerning the biblical evidence for Yahweh being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo

Heiser bases his interpretation on five points of evidence (1) ldquoYahweh36 ldquoTe Father and the Son A Doctrinal Exposition by the First Presidency and the

welverdquo as cited in Messages o the First Presidency o the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints ed James R Clark (Salt Lake City Bookcra 1971) 526 emphasis added 37 Keith H Meservy ldquoLORD = Jehovahrdquo Ensign June 2002 29 n 3

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 283

is said to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo

(2) ldquoYahweh was considered pre-existent to all godsrdquo (3) Yahweh hasthe power to strip the other elohim of their immortality (4) Yahwehalone is referred to in the Bible as ha-elohim and (5) ldquothe other godsare commanded to worship Yahwehrdquo (see pp 250ndash57) Tough eachof Heiserrsquos five points of evidence do in fact appear in the Bible con-trary to Heiserrsquos suggestion none of these observations establishesYahweh as being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo In the Bible Yahweh is the God ofgods but the biblical gods were still biblical gods As Paul Sanders hasexplained according to the Deuteronomic vision ldquothe [Sons of Goddescribed in Deuteronomy 328] are relatively independent they havetheir own dominions like YHWHrdquo

Notwithstanding his acceptance of the importance of the divinecouncil of deities in biblical theology Heiserrsquos critique suffers in partthrough his effort to define Israelrsquos deity as a being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo(p 250) He is correct in drawing attention to the fact that biblical

authors viewed their deity as exceptionally powerful in the councilldquoFor the Lord your God is God of godsrdquo proclaims Deuteronomy 1017ldquoand Lord of lordsrdquo Unfortunately however in identifying Yahweh asa being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo Heiser forces the biblical view of deities intoan image somewhat consistent with radical monotheism Contraryto Heiserrsquos suggestion the creative act in and of itself does not set thecreator apart as an exclusive species Te same point also applies tothe issue Heiser raises concerning primogeniture In other words aman for instance may exist before both his children and his siblingsand though preeminence may render the person ldquouniquerdquo on somelevels prior existence would not in this or in any other case rendera being as ldquospecies-uniquerdquo rue the Bible speaks of gods separatefrom Israelrsquos primary deity as elohim a˙erimmdashthat is ldquoother godsrdquo(see Exodus 203 2313 Deuteronomy 57 614 etc) However as YairHoffman has observed ldquoA survey of the use of a˙erim [ldquootherrdquo] shows

38 Paul Sanders Te Provenance o Deuteronomy 32 (Leiden Brill 1996) 37039 Te term radical monotheism refers to the theological position that only one

divine being exists in the universe Te expression was popularized by ikva Frymer-Kensky In the Wake o the Goddesses Women Culture and the Biblical ransormationo Pagan Myth (New York Free Press 1992) 154

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1949

284 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

that when used attributively with regard to garments days messen-

gers and objects it clearly has a relative meaning something differ-ent yet o the same kind rdquo1048624 Terefore ldquothere is no reason to assumethat in the phrase elohim a˙erim the attribute has a more distinctivemeaningrdquo1048580 When all is said and done the biblical deities like Yah-weh himself were still gods

In addition contrary to Heiserrsquos assertion the simple fact that Elo-him possesses the power to strip the other deities of their immortalityin Psalm 82 does not indicate that these gods are of a different spe-cies than Elohim According to the Psalmistrsquos view Elohim is simplymore powerful than the other gods Analogies from the ancient NearEast illustrate the problematic nature of Heiserrsquos claim In the Babylo-nian story Enuma Elish for instance the primordial mother goddessiamat created the god Qingu as chief deity over iamatrsquos militaryforces As a result of his actions taken against the divine council thedeities of the assembly ldquobound [Qingu] and held him in front of Ea

[and they] imposed the penalty on him and cut off his bloodrdquo983044 Tefact that in Enuma Elish the council could strip Qingu of his immor-tality did not mean that the god Qingu was somehow of a different orlesser divine species In the Sumerian myth of Enlil and Ninlil Enlil(one of the ldquogreat godsrdquo of Mesopotamia) is brought to trial for havingraped the goddess Ninlil As Enlil returned to the city of Nippur hewas arrested by the assembly while walking through the temple court

Te trial commenced immediately In the myth the council pre-sented the verdict that ldquothe sex offender Enlil will leave the townrdquoAccordingly the myth reports that Enlil le Nippur headed towardthe netherworld In his assessment of the story Jacobsen points out

40 Yair Hoffman ldquoTe Conception of lsquoOther Godsrsquo in Deuteronomistic Literaturerdquoin Concepts o the Other in Near Eastern Religions ed Ilai Alon Ithamar Gruenwald andItamar Singer (Leiden Brill 1994) 107 emphasis added 41 Hoffman ldquoConception of Other Godsrdquo 107

42 As cited in Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia 261 43 For a summary of the myth see Gwendolyn Leick A Dictionary o Ancient NearEastern Mythology (London Routledge 1998) 47ndash48 for a translation see TorkildJacobsen Te Harps Tat Once Sumerian Poetry in ranslation (New Haven YaleUniversity Press 1987) 167ndash80 44 Jacobsen Harps 174

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 285

that Enlilrsquos descent to Hades may indicate that the high god in Meso-

potamian mythology was originally sentenced to death As notedby James Ackerman in his dissertation concerning Psalm 82 thesetypes of judgment scenes in which the council determines that godswill die like mortals carry important implications for interpreting thecultural background for the biblical text Contrary to Heiserrsquos inter-pretation none of these stories indicate that the dying gods were of adifferent species or order than the gods who issued the sentence

Near Eastern traditions oen place considerable emphasis on thedying-god motif In no sense however are these dying godsmdashevenwhen resurrectedmdashsomehow depicted as a lesser species Heiserrsquos con-fusion concerning the implications of a biblical statement that Godissued a judgment of death to the deities of the divine council illus-trates the fundamental need for biblical scholars to pursue Assyriol-ogy in connection with their efforts to interpret the Hebrew Bible

Also contrary to Heiserrsquos suggestion the punishment meted out

to usurpers in Near Eastern council stories never indicates that thecriminals derived from some sort of exceptional species Te storyof Athtar from ancient Canaan for instance presents the traditionof Athtarrsquos descent to the underworld following the deityrsquos ascensionto the throne of Baal Te details involved in Athtarrsquos story containimportant thematic elements depicted in ancient Near Eastern storiesof cosmic revolt Athtar seems to share some semblance with Baalrsquos

mortal enemy Mot or ldquoDeathrdquo into whom Baal himself descendsHence Hugh Page notes that Athtarrsquos ldquodescent to the underworld implies that on some level Athtar has placed himself in proxim-ity to or relationship with the only god that Baal proves incapable

45 Torkild Jacobsen ldquoAn Ancient Mesopotamian rial for Homiciderdquo in owardthe Image o ammuz and Other Essays on Mesopotamian History and Culture ed Wil-liam L Moran (Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1970) 207 first published inStudia Biblica et Orientalia vol 3 of Analecta Biblica et Orientalia XII (Rome Pontificio

Istituto Biblico 1959) 130ndash50 46 See James S Ackerman ldquoAn Exegetical Study of Psalm 82rdquo (PhD diss HarvardUniversity 1966) 186ndash93 47 For a recent survey of the issue which includes a survey of previous assessmentssee ryggve N D Mettinger Te Riddle o Resurrection ldquoDying and Rising Godsrdquo in the Ancient Near East (Stockholm Almqvist amp Wiksell 2001)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2149

286 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of defeatingrdquo Athtarrsquos assumption of the throne of Baal followed

by his descent to the underworld indicates that this portion of theBaal cycle from ancient Canaan fits the general category of the cosmic

revolt genre witnessed in texts such as Abraham 3 and Psalm 82

1 Kindly El the Compassionate answers

2 ldquoOne so small cannot race

3 with Baal cannot handle the lance

4 with Daganrsquos son when they test one anotherrdquo

5 Lady Athirat of the Sea answers 6 ldquoLet us enthrone Athtar the Strong

7 Let Athtar the Strong be kingrdquo

8 Ten Athtar the Strong

9 ascended the summit of Sapan

10 He sat upon the throne of Mightiest Baal

11 His feet would not reach its footstool

12 His head would not reach its top 13 Athtar the Strong answered

14 ldquoI cannot rule on the summit of Sapanrdquo

15 Athtar the Strong descended

16 He descended from the throne of Mightiest Baal

17 And he ruled over the underworld god of all of it

18 drew in barrels

19 drew in jars (KU 1649ndash67 translation)

Te fact that Athtar the Strong experienced a type of ldquodeathrdquo in which

he ldquoruled over the underworldrdquo following his descent from Baalrsquos

throne does not suggest that Athtar was a ldquobeing species-uniquerdquo from

the other deities any more than Inanna or Ishtar the Mesopotamian

goddesses who experienced a type of death in the underworld were of

a different species than the gods Ea Enki Marduk and so forth48 Hugh R Page Jr Te Myth o Cosmic Rebellion A Study o Its Reflexes in Ugaritic

and Biblical Literature (Leiden Brill 1996) 92 Pagersquos views concerning the Athtar mythhave been criticized by Gregorio del Olmo Lete ldquoIn Search of the Canaanite Luciferrdquo Aula Orientalis 19 (2001) 125ndash32

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 287

Still in his efforts to present Yahweh as a being species-unique

Heiser correctly draws attention to the other gods of the council whoare commanded to worship Yahweh In his analysis he focuses uponthe call given to the gods in Psalm 291ndash2 ldquoAscribe to Yahweh O sons ofGod ascribe to Yahweh glory and strength Ascribe to Yahweh the gloryof his name worship Yahweh in the splendor of holinessrdquo (as quotedon p 256) While Heiserrsquos observations certainly illustrate that biblicalauthors viewed their deity as uniquemdashthat is exceptionalmdashthroughout

Near Eastern tradition lesser gods regularly appear in a position inwhich they offer praise service and devotion to the higher gods of thecouncil Richard J Clifford explains that in the Phoenician view of theassembly ldquoas elsewhere in the ancient Near East the assemblies are pic-tured as subordinate to individual gods although the assemblyrsquos con-sent seems necessary for important decisionsrdquo Simply because ancienttextsmdashincluding the Biblemdashdepict the members of the assemblies asldquosubordinate to individual godsrdquo this in no way implies that the higher

deities somehow belonged to a separate species Ancient Near Easterntexts such as Mursilirsquos Hymn and Prayer to the Sun-goddess o Arinna (CH 376A) establish the fact that Near Eastern peoples believed thatgods of the same species paid homage to higher deities in a way compa-rable to the biblical view

You O Sun-goddess of Arinna are honored goddess Your

name is honored among names and your divinity is honoredamong gods Furthermore among the gods you are the mosthonored and the greatest Tere is no other god more honoredor greater than you You are the lord of just judgment Youcontrol the kingship of heaven and earth1048624

Holding the position ldquomost honoredrdquo among the gods did not estab-lish Arinna as species-unique Arinna was simply the god before

whom from the authorrsquos perspective the other gods would regularly49 Richard J Clifford ldquoPhoenician Religionrdquo Bulletin o the American Schools o

Oriental Research 279 (1990) 57 50 As cited in Itamar Singer Hittite Prayers (Atlanta Society of Biblical Literature2002) 51

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2349

288 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquofall downrdquo1048580 For the ancients the Near Eastern view of the divine

court clearly reflected or were expressed in terms of earthly realityTerefore just as the high king before whom other humans paid hom-age was still a human being so the god to whom other deities paidhomage was still a god matching in species For biblical authors Yah-weh stood at the head of the hierarchy in Israelite thought Yahwehwas unique as the God of gods but he was not unique in his divinityFrom a biblical perspective Yahweh even shared this divinity withhumanity

Humans as Teomorphic Beings

In his discussion concerning the biblical view regarding theomor-phic humans Peterson draws attention to Paulrsquos New estament ser-mon presented in Acts 1728ndash29

For in him we live and move and have our being as

certain also of your own poets have said For we are also hisoffspring

Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God we oughtnot to think that the Godhead is like unto gold or silver orstone graven by art and manrsquos device

Peterson in part argues for a biblical connection between God andhumanity based on the fact that ldquothe word rendered lsquooffspringrsquo by the

King James translators is the Greek genos which is cognate with theLatin genus and means lsquofamilyrsquo or lsquoracersquo or lsquokindrsquo or even and mostespecially interesting lsquodescendants of a common ancestorrsquo rdquo983044 ForLatter-day Saints human beings are literally the offspring of God andtherefore intrinsically theomorphic Part of the strength of Petersonrsquosessay lies in his recognition that like Latter-day Saints biblical authorsregularly blur the distinction between humanity and divine beings

Not only does Peterson draw attention to the prophetic interactionwith the council as support for his thesis but he also places consider-

51 Singer Hittite Prayers 51 52 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 542ndash43 53 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 289

able emphasis upon the deified dead in the Hebrew Bible and the early

Christian teaching regarding deification Heiser notwithstandingPetersonrsquos evidence rejects the idea that a genus equation of God and

humankind appears in the Bible

For his criticisms of Petersonrsquos views Heiser places considerable

weight on the notion that ldquothe concept of the image of God does not

advance the idea that there is a genus equation of God and human-

kind or that God was once a manrdquo (p 224) On some levels Heiserrsquos

point concerning the word tzelem or ldquoimagerdquo in Genesis 126ndash27is correct Concerning this controversial term Marc Z Brettler has

recently explained

Te word tzelem (ldquoimagerdquo) elsewhere always refers to a

physical representation For example the Book of Ezekiel

uses tzelem when it refers to ldquomen sculptured upon the walls

figures of Chaldeans drawn in vermilionrdquo (2314) or when it

accuses Israel of fornicating with ldquophallic imagesrdquo (1617) Teword oen refers to idols (eg Num 3352 Ezek 720 Amos

526 2 Chron 2317) It always signifies a concrete entity

rather than an abstract one Tis is not surprising since the

Bible (in contrast to most medieval philosophical traditions

both Jewish and Christian) oen depicts God in corporeal

terms

Genesis 126ndash27 suggests that Godrsquos physical likeness is similar to

humanityrsquos but Heiser is correct that the statement does not indicate

that biblical authors viewed humans as gods or that God himself was

once a human However many other texts from the Bible do present a

theomorphic view of humanity Peterson therefore is precisely correct

in stating that ldquothe Latter-day Saint understanding that humans are of

the same genus or species as God is thus clearly biblicalrdquo54 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509ndash28

55 Marc Z Brettler How to Read the Bible (Philadelphia Jewish Publication Society2005) 43ndash44 Hebrew word deleted 56 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 547

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2549

290 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Adam as a Divine Council Member

In addition to associating humanity with the tzelem of God theBible describes the first man as a deified member of the divine council

In the Eden story the Lord took advantage of the wet claylike soil and

ldquoformed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils

the breath of life and man became a living soulrdquo (Genesis 27) In an

important study concerning this imagery Walter Brueggemann has

shown that a biblical connection exists between being raised from the

dust and enthronement ldquoo be taken lsquofrom the dustrsquo means to be

elevated from obscurity to royal office and to return to dust means to

be deprived of that office and returned to obscurityrdquo Imagery such

as that witnessed in 1 Kings 162 supports Brueggemannrsquos interpreta-

tion ldquoForasmuch as I [God] exalted thee [Jehu] out of the dust and

made thee prince over my people Israel rdquo (1 Kings 162) Hence the

notion of the God raising man ldquofrom the dust of the earthrdquo in Genesis

27 in part suggests that Yahweh begins his creative activity by form-

ing a divine king According to Genesis 215 this divine king through

a type of imitatio dei would continue to perform the work of Yahweh

who ldquoplantedrdquo the garden ldquoAnd the Lord God took the man and put

him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep itrdquo In a simi-

lar fashion Mesopotamian kings such as Hammurapi glorified their

efforts through the use of creation and agricultural imageryI encircled [the wall] with a swamp I dug the Euphrates

as far as Sippar (and) made it reach a prosperous quay

I Hammu-rāpi who builds up the land caused Sippar

and Babylon to dwell in peaceful abodes forever What

from [primordial days] no one among the kings had done I

did in a grand fashion for the god Šamaš my lord

57 Walter Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestament-liche Wissenschaf 841 (1972) 1ndash18 58 Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo 2 59 Douglas Frayne Old Babylonian Period (2003ndash1595 BC) (oronto University oforonto Press 1990) 348ndash49

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 291

Te view presented in the Babylonian inscription on the wall

of Sippar reflects the common Near Eastern assumption featured inGenesis 2 of a God king participating in the act of creation from ldquopri-

mordial daysrdquo through structure1048624 As a king Hammurapi assumed

the same role filled by deities who created the universe by giving order

to preexistent chaos In its depiction of Adam as the primordial gar-

dener the Bible relies upon similar imagery

Manrsquos status as the archetypal gardener king in Genesis 2ndash3 con-

tains important parallels with Mesopotamian kingship theory1048580 Sev-eral examples of Mesopotamian iconography feature a depiction of the

tree (or plant) of life over which the king and priests appear pouring

libations In assessing the connection between Mesopotamian kings

and gardeners Geo Widengren cites these statements from the am-

muz text R IV 27 No I

A tamarisk which in the garden has no water to drink

Whose foliage on the plant sends forth no twig

A plant which they water no more in its pot

Whose roots are torn away

A herb which is in the garden has no water to drink

Among the flowers of the garden he sleeps

Among the flowers of the garden he is thrown

According to Widengren ldquothe ree of Life is watered by the kingwho pours out over it the Water of Life which he has in his possession

Te ree of Life constantly needs the Water of Life near which it is

growing in the garden of paradiserdquo983044 Te connection between king

and gardener was widely attested throughout ancient Mesopotamia

60 In his translation Frayne renders the Akkadian word szligi-a-tim as ldquothe pastrdquo Teinscription however clearly relies on creation imagery and I have therefore interpreted

szligiatim as ldquoprimordial daysrdquo in accordance with the information provided in Jeremy BlackAndrew George and Nicholas Postgate A Concise Dictionary o Akkadian (WiesbadenHarrassowitz 2000) 337 61 See Geo Widengren Te King and the ree o Lie in Ancient Near Eastern Reli- gion (Uppsala Uppsala Universitets Aringrsskri 1951) 62 Widengren King and the ree o Lie 15

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2749

292 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Tis portrayal of kingship appears in the birth legend of Sargon

wherein the monarch declaresAkki the waterscooper placed me as his gardenerWhen I was a gardener Ishtar was in love with meTe kingship I exercised during x + 5 years

Tese lines from the tale of Sargon the gardener whom the goddess Ishtarloved seem to provide an especially significant parallel with the biblical view presented in the story of Eden In the words of Nicholas Wyatt ldquotheman in his garden is a symbolic allusion to the king in his sanctuaryrdquo

One of the important connections between humanityrsquos enthrone-ment in the garden and later biblical traditions includes the anointingof an Israelite king in 1 Kings 128ndash40 at the Gihon Spring a rivernamed Gihon was one of the four rivers that flowed out of Eden andround the land of Cush (Genesis 213) Significantly the only otherexplicit reference to the Garden of Eden in the Hebrew Bible appears

in a context that addresses the link between kingship and divinity (seeEzekiel 282ndash13)

Concerning the attestation of biblical rituals that may preserveactual religious rites wherein Israelite kings assumed divinity Wyattargues that

the rituals which transform the status of the earthly kingremoving him from ldquomerely humanrdquo status to that of a sacralfigure to be couched in the form of a narrative about a godcarries with it the hint that the king himself is to be seen astransformed into a god Te enthronement of the king isthus his apotheosis

63 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoInterpreting the Creation and Fall Story in Genesis 2ndash3rdquo Zeit-schrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 931 (1981) 15 64 John van Seters has argued according to the Documentary Hypothesis that the

story of divine kingship in J derives from Babylonian influences and is therefore latepostexilic If P is in part a reaction to the J account then it is difficult to accept vanSetersrsquos dating see John van Seters ldquoTe Creation of Man and the Creation of the KingrdquoZeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 1013 (1989) 333ndash41 65 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinity Some Mythical and Ritual Aspects of WestSemitic Kingshiprdquo Ugarit-Forschungen 31 (1999) 857

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 293

In his exploration of biblical deification Wyatt refers to Psalm 198ndash10

as a possible ritual text transforming the king into a divine beingTe teaching of Yahweh is perfectrestoring the breastTe testimony of Yahweh is certainmaking wise the headTe precepts of Yahweh are uprightrejoicing the heart

Te commandment of Yahweh is puremaking bright the eyesTe speech of Yahweh is ritually purestanding for everTe judgments of Yahweh are truthTey are righteous all togethermore desirable than goldthan much pure goldmore sweet than honeyor the refined combYour servant is indeed illumined by themand in their observance is there great gain

Concerning this possible reference to ritual anointing Wyatt argues

It is true that there is no narrative statement about unc-

tion here oil is not even mentioned But only thus can thesuccessive blessings on various parts of the kingrsquos body beexplained For comparison we should consider the unction ofpriests in Exod 294ndash9 19ndash21 4012ndash5 and Lev 810ndash2 22ndash4where various parts of the priestrsquos body are anointed with oiland blood undoubtedly with some liturgical commentary onthe action such is now narrated in these passages providing

a suitable performative utteranceIf correct Wyattrsquos assessment of Israelite deification proves importantfor an analysis of Adam as divine king in the book of Genesis

66 Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinityrdquo 874ndash75

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2949

294 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

In Genesis chapter 2 Godrsquos initial creative act must be the creation

of man for as a divine king raised ldquofrom the dustrdquo man was specifi-cally formed to assist deity in the creation process God appears as agardener who causes to grow ldquoevery tree that is pleasant to the sightand good for foodrdquo (Genesis 29) Te account declares that the Lordplaced the man in the garden to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo his newly createdoasis (Genesis 215) As a gardener the Lord plants Eden as a gardenerthe Lord mixes the soil to form both man and beast As a gardener the

Lord creates man in his image to perform the work of a God Follow-ing his creation man assumes the role of divine gardenerFrom an ancient Near Eastern perspective the view of Adam as

divine gardener suggests that biblical authors viewed humanity asan earthly extension of the divine council According to the Edenaccount man was immortal (Genesis 217) man had received fromdeity the sacred ldquobreath of liferdquo (Genesis 27) man had been com-missioned to perform the work of a godmdashthat is to till and tend the

divine garden Terefore as an immortal gardener man was alreadyldquolike the godsrdquo prior to partaking of the forbidden fruit

In Mesopotamian myths for example the work of gardening wasassigned to lesser members of the divine council Hence the story ofAtrahasis opens with the following portrayal

When gods were man

Tey did forced labor they bore drudgeryGreat indeed was the drudgery of the godsTe forced labor was heavy the misery too muchTe seven() great Anunna-gods were burdeningTe Igigi-gods with forced labor

Like the account in Genesis the lesser gods of the divine council inAtrahasis were gardeners who did the laborious task of caring for the

canals trees and waterways that sustained the higher gods of the67 For additional examples of Yahweh portrayed in the role of gardener see Num-

bers 246 Psalm 10416 Isaiah 4414 68 Altrahasis II39 1ndash6 translation in Benjamin R Foster Beore the Muses An Anthol-ogy o Akkadian Literature (Bethesda MD CDL 1993) 1159

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 295

assembly Hence Adam as an immortal being clearly reflects the

position of the Igigi in Mesopotamian thought Te questions pre-sented to Job by Eliphaz regarding the primal human seem to share

this notion

Are you the firstborn of the human race

Were you brought forth before the hills

Have you listened in the council of God (Job 157ndash8 NRSV)

As Dexter Callender has observed concerning these questionsldquoTe allusion to the primal human in Job does not give us explicit

details concerning his incorporation into the sacred world It is clear

however that the idea is present in the reference that the primal human

lsquolistenedrsquo in the council of Godrdquo As a member of Godrsquos council man

held a stewardship to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo the deityrsquos garden (Genesis

215) According to the Genesis account when the man and woman

eat from the tree of knowledge God expels the humans from Edenand assigns the cherubim other traditional members of the divine

council to ldquokeeprdquo the garden (Genesis 324) Tis move may suggest

that in biblical thought ldquokeepingrdquo the garden is a task reserved for

members of the divine host As an immortal subordinate assigned an

important council task man however eventually appears in the Gen-

esis account as a being very much like the council deities mentioned

in Psalm 82 who receive the decree of death

I have said Ye are gods and all of you are children of the

most High

But ye shall die like men and fall like one of the princes

(Psalm 826ndash7)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou

shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thoushalt surely die (Genesis 217)

69 Dexter E Callender Jr Adam in Myth and History Ancient Israelite Perspectiveson the Primal Human (Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 2000) 212 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 281

Even within LDS theology God the Father stands out as ontologically

unique inasmuch as he created the spirits of all humanity Modernrevelation describes God with the words ldquofrom eternity to eternity Heis the same and His years never failrdquo (DampC 764)

Yahwehrsquos Ontological Uniqueness

In addition to the evidence Heiser presents for what he calls Yah-wehrsquos ontological uniqueness the name Yahweh itself appears vocal-

ized in the Hebrew Bible as a finite Hiphil verb form Te vocalizationof YHWH as ldquoYahwehrdquo carries a specific nuance since ldquoHebrew gram-mars traditionally represent the Hiphil stem as the causative of the Qal

stemrdquo983044 Frank Moore Cross explains that ldquothe accumulated evidence strongly supports the view that the name Yahweh is a causativeimperfect of the Canaanite-Proto-Hebrew verb hwy lsquoto bersquo rdquo Tere-fore the divine name Yahweh according to this view literally means

ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procreatesrdquo One of the inter-esting points to consider concerning the biblical title Yahweh Sabaoth or ldquoLord of Hostsrdquo is that typically in Hebrew proper names do notappear bound to a genitive nounmdashthat is ldquoJohn of Hostsrdquo or ldquoMary ofEarthrdquo etc Since a proper name cannot traditionally function as abound form in a construct chain Cross interprets the King James titleldquoLord of Hostsrdquo as ldquo lsquohe creates the (divine) hostsrsquo rdquo If correct this

view would lend support to Heiserrsquos argument that ldquoYahweh is said32 Bruce K Waltke and M OrsquoConnor An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax

(Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 1990) 433 33 Frank Moore Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge Harvard Uni- versity Press 1973) 65 34 ldquoA proper noun cannot as a rule be followed by a genitiverdquo Paul Jouumlon A Gram-mar o Biblical Hebrew trans and rev Muraoka (Rome Editrice Pontificio IstitutoBiblico 2000) 2481 Admittedly however textual evidence shows that the rule need notapply to divine names see J A Emerton ldquoNew Light on Israelite Religion Te Implica-

tions of the Inscriptions from Kunti llet lsquoAjrudrdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wis-senschaf 94 (1982) 12ndash13 and especially John H Choi ldquoResheph and YHWH IacuteĔBĀlt Ocirc rdquoVetus estamentum 54 (2004) 17ndash28 I offer this assessment of the title Yahweh Sabaothwhich reflects the views of scholars such as David Noel Freedman and Frank MooreCross as merely an intriguing possibility 35 Cross Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic 65 emphasis added

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1749

282 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo (p 250)

Heiser incorrectly assumes that this apparent biblical teaching con-cerning Yahwehrsquos uniqueness among the gods is not inconsistent withLDS theology

Tough Latter-day Saints view God the Father and Jesus Christas two separate divine beings for the Saints the biblical titles associ-ated with these deities are clearly interchangeable Latter-day Saintshave no problem therefore in associating God the Father with thetitle Yahwehmdashthat is ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procre-atesrdquo Te 1916 official declaration presented by the First Presidency ofthe church states ldquoGod the Eternal Father whom we designate by theexalted name-title Elohim is the literal Parent of our Lord and SaviorJesus Christ and of the spirits of the human racerdquo Clearly howeverthe First Presidencyrsquos move toward designating God the Father as Elo-him and Jesus the Son as Jehovah was primarily a move by churchleaders to create uniformity in Latter-day Saint expression In a recent

Ensign article Keith Meservy observed that ldquoin at least three Old es-tament passages it appears that L983151983154983140 [ie Jehovah] applies to Heav-enly Father not Jesus Christ Ps 1101 Ps 27 Isa 5310rdquo No doubtfor many Latter-day Saints this estimate offered by Meservy couldbe greatly augmented LDS teachings therefore do not preclude theontological uniqueness of God the Father that Heiser witnesses in theHebrew Bible

Yahweh as a Being ldquoSpecies-Uniquerdquo

Certainly Heiser is justified in suggesting that the gods of thedivine council appear inferior to Israelrsquos deity He uses this correctobservation however to build an argument that Israelrsquos God wastherefore somehow ldquospecies-uniquerdquo (p 250) In his discussion con-cerning the biblical evidence for Yahweh being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo

Heiser bases his interpretation on five points of evidence (1) ldquoYahweh36 ldquoTe Father and the Son A Doctrinal Exposition by the First Presidency and the

welverdquo as cited in Messages o the First Presidency o the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints ed James R Clark (Salt Lake City Bookcra 1971) 526 emphasis added 37 Keith H Meservy ldquoLORD = Jehovahrdquo Ensign June 2002 29 n 3

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 283

is said to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo

(2) ldquoYahweh was considered pre-existent to all godsrdquo (3) Yahweh hasthe power to strip the other elohim of their immortality (4) Yahwehalone is referred to in the Bible as ha-elohim and (5) ldquothe other godsare commanded to worship Yahwehrdquo (see pp 250ndash57) Tough eachof Heiserrsquos five points of evidence do in fact appear in the Bible con-trary to Heiserrsquos suggestion none of these observations establishesYahweh as being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo In the Bible Yahweh is the God ofgods but the biblical gods were still biblical gods As Paul Sanders hasexplained according to the Deuteronomic vision ldquothe [Sons of Goddescribed in Deuteronomy 328] are relatively independent they havetheir own dominions like YHWHrdquo

Notwithstanding his acceptance of the importance of the divinecouncil of deities in biblical theology Heiserrsquos critique suffers in partthrough his effort to define Israelrsquos deity as a being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo(p 250) He is correct in drawing attention to the fact that biblical

authors viewed their deity as exceptionally powerful in the councilldquoFor the Lord your God is God of godsrdquo proclaims Deuteronomy 1017ldquoand Lord of lordsrdquo Unfortunately however in identifying Yahweh asa being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo Heiser forces the biblical view of deities intoan image somewhat consistent with radical monotheism Contraryto Heiserrsquos suggestion the creative act in and of itself does not set thecreator apart as an exclusive species Te same point also applies tothe issue Heiser raises concerning primogeniture In other words aman for instance may exist before both his children and his siblingsand though preeminence may render the person ldquouniquerdquo on somelevels prior existence would not in this or in any other case rendera being as ldquospecies-uniquerdquo rue the Bible speaks of gods separatefrom Israelrsquos primary deity as elohim a˙erimmdashthat is ldquoother godsrdquo(see Exodus 203 2313 Deuteronomy 57 614 etc) However as YairHoffman has observed ldquoA survey of the use of a˙erim [ldquootherrdquo] shows

38 Paul Sanders Te Provenance o Deuteronomy 32 (Leiden Brill 1996) 37039 Te term radical monotheism refers to the theological position that only one

divine being exists in the universe Te expression was popularized by ikva Frymer-Kensky In the Wake o the Goddesses Women Culture and the Biblical ransormationo Pagan Myth (New York Free Press 1992) 154

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1949

284 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

that when used attributively with regard to garments days messen-

gers and objects it clearly has a relative meaning something differ-ent yet o the same kind rdquo1048624 Terefore ldquothere is no reason to assumethat in the phrase elohim a˙erim the attribute has a more distinctivemeaningrdquo1048580 When all is said and done the biblical deities like Yah-weh himself were still gods

In addition contrary to Heiserrsquos assertion the simple fact that Elo-him possesses the power to strip the other deities of their immortalityin Psalm 82 does not indicate that these gods are of a different spe-cies than Elohim According to the Psalmistrsquos view Elohim is simplymore powerful than the other gods Analogies from the ancient NearEast illustrate the problematic nature of Heiserrsquos claim In the Babylo-nian story Enuma Elish for instance the primordial mother goddessiamat created the god Qingu as chief deity over iamatrsquos militaryforces As a result of his actions taken against the divine council thedeities of the assembly ldquobound [Qingu] and held him in front of Ea

[and they] imposed the penalty on him and cut off his bloodrdquo983044 Tefact that in Enuma Elish the council could strip Qingu of his immor-tality did not mean that the god Qingu was somehow of a different orlesser divine species In the Sumerian myth of Enlil and Ninlil Enlil(one of the ldquogreat godsrdquo of Mesopotamia) is brought to trial for havingraped the goddess Ninlil As Enlil returned to the city of Nippur hewas arrested by the assembly while walking through the temple court

Te trial commenced immediately In the myth the council pre-sented the verdict that ldquothe sex offender Enlil will leave the townrdquoAccordingly the myth reports that Enlil le Nippur headed towardthe netherworld In his assessment of the story Jacobsen points out

40 Yair Hoffman ldquoTe Conception of lsquoOther Godsrsquo in Deuteronomistic Literaturerdquoin Concepts o the Other in Near Eastern Religions ed Ilai Alon Ithamar Gruenwald andItamar Singer (Leiden Brill 1994) 107 emphasis added 41 Hoffman ldquoConception of Other Godsrdquo 107

42 As cited in Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia 261 43 For a summary of the myth see Gwendolyn Leick A Dictionary o Ancient NearEastern Mythology (London Routledge 1998) 47ndash48 for a translation see TorkildJacobsen Te Harps Tat Once Sumerian Poetry in ranslation (New Haven YaleUniversity Press 1987) 167ndash80 44 Jacobsen Harps 174

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 285

that Enlilrsquos descent to Hades may indicate that the high god in Meso-

potamian mythology was originally sentenced to death As notedby James Ackerman in his dissertation concerning Psalm 82 thesetypes of judgment scenes in which the council determines that godswill die like mortals carry important implications for interpreting thecultural background for the biblical text Contrary to Heiserrsquos inter-pretation none of these stories indicate that the dying gods were of adifferent species or order than the gods who issued the sentence

Near Eastern traditions oen place considerable emphasis on thedying-god motif In no sense however are these dying godsmdashevenwhen resurrectedmdashsomehow depicted as a lesser species Heiserrsquos con-fusion concerning the implications of a biblical statement that Godissued a judgment of death to the deities of the divine council illus-trates the fundamental need for biblical scholars to pursue Assyriol-ogy in connection with their efforts to interpret the Hebrew Bible

Also contrary to Heiserrsquos suggestion the punishment meted out

to usurpers in Near Eastern council stories never indicates that thecriminals derived from some sort of exceptional species Te storyof Athtar from ancient Canaan for instance presents the traditionof Athtarrsquos descent to the underworld following the deityrsquos ascensionto the throne of Baal Te details involved in Athtarrsquos story containimportant thematic elements depicted in ancient Near Eastern storiesof cosmic revolt Athtar seems to share some semblance with Baalrsquos

mortal enemy Mot or ldquoDeathrdquo into whom Baal himself descendsHence Hugh Page notes that Athtarrsquos ldquodescent to the underworld implies that on some level Athtar has placed himself in proxim-ity to or relationship with the only god that Baal proves incapable

45 Torkild Jacobsen ldquoAn Ancient Mesopotamian rial for Homiciderdquo in owardthe Image o ammuz and Other Essays on Mesopotamian History and Culture ed Wil-liam L Moran (Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1970) 207 first published inStudia Biblica et Orientalia vol 3 of Analecta Biblica et Orientalia XII (Rome Pontificio

Istituto Biblico 1959) 130ndash50 46 See James S Ackerman ldquoAn Exegetical Study of Psalm 82rdquo (PhD diss HarvardUniversity 1966) 186ndash93 47 For a recent survey of the issue which includes a survey of previous assessmentssee ryggve N D Mettinger Te Riddle o Resurrection ldquoDying and Rising Godsrdquo in the Ancient Near East (Stockholm Almqvist amp Wiksell 2001)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2149

286 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of defeatingrdquo Athtarrsquos assumption of the throne of Baal followed

by his descent to the underworld indicates that this portion of theBaal cycle from ancient Canaan fits the general category of the cosmic

revolt genre witnessed in texts such as Abraham 3 and Psalm 82

1 Kindly El the Compassionate answers

2 ldquoOne so small cannot race

3 with Baal cannot handle the lance

4 with Daganrsquos son when they test one anotherrdquo

5 Lady Athirat of the Sea answers 6 ldquoLet us enthrone Athtar the Strong

7 Let Athtar the Strong be kingrdquo

8 Ten Athtar the Strong

9 ascended the summit of Sapan

10 He sat upon the throne of Mightiest Baal

11 His feet would not reach its footstool

12 His head would not reach its top 13 Athtar the Strong answered

14 ldquoI cannot rule on the summit of Sapanrdquo

15 Athtar the Strong descended

16 He descended from the throne of Mightiest Baal

17 And he ruled over the underworld god of all of it

18 drew in barrels

19 drew in jars (KU 1649ndash67 translation)

Te fact that Athtar the Strong experienced a type of ldquodeathrdquo in which

he ldquoruled over the underworldrdquo following his descent from Baalrsquos

throne does not suggest that Athtar was a ldquobeing species-uniquerdquo from

the other deities any more than Inanna or Ishtar the Mesopotamian

goddesses who experienced a type of death in the underworld were of

a different species than the gods Ea Enki Marduk and so forth48 Hugh R Page Jr Te Myth o Cosmic Rebellion A Study o Its Reflexes in Ugaritic

and Biblical Literature (Leiden Brill 1996) 92 Pagersquos views concerning the Athtar mythhave been criticized by Gregorio del Olmo Lete ldquoIn Search of the Canaanite Luciferrdquo Aula Orientalis 19 (2001) 125ndash32

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 287

Still in his efforts to present Yahweh as a being species-unique

Heiser correctly draws attention to the other gods of the council whoare commanded to worship Yahweh In his analysis he focuses uponthe call given to the gods in Psalm 291ndash2 ldquoAscribe to Yahweh O sons ofGod ascribe to Yahweh glory and strength Ascribe to Yahweh the gloryof his name worship Yahweh in the splendor of holinessrdquo (as quotedon p 256) While Heiserrsquos observations certainly illustrate that biblicalauthors viewed their deity as uniquemdashthat is exceptionalmdashthroughout

Near Eastern tradition lesser gods regularly appear in a position inwhich they offer praise service and devotion to the higher gods of thecouncil Richard J Clifford explains that in the Phoenician view of theassembly ldquoas elsewhere in the ancient Near East the assemblies are pic-tured as subordinate to individual gods although the assemblyrsquos con-sent seems necessary for important decisionsrdquo Simply because ancienttextsmdashincluding the Biblemdashdepict the members of the assemblies asldquosubordinate to individual godsrdquo this in no way implies that the higher

deities somehow belonged to a separate species Ancient Near Easterntexts such as Mursilirsquos Hymn and Prayer to the Sun-goddess o Arinna (CH 376A) establish the fact that Near Eastern peoples believed thatgods of the same species paid homage to higher deities in a way compa-rable to the biblical view

You O Sun-goddess of Arinna are honored goddess Your

name is honored among names and your divinity is honoredamong gods Furthermore among the gods you are the mosthonored and the greatest Tere is no other god more honoredor greater than you You are the lord of just judgment Youcontrol the kingship of heaven and earth1048624

Holding the position ldquomost honoredrdquo among the gods did not estab-lish Arinna as species-unique Arinna was simply the god before

whom from the authorrsquos perspective the other gods would regularly49 Richard J Clifford ldquoPhoenician Religionrdquo Bulletin o the American Schools o

Oriental Research 279 (1990) 57 50 As cited in Itamar Singer Hittite Prayers (Atlanta Society of Biblical Literature2002) 51

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2349

288 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquofall downrdquo1048580 For the ancients the Near Eastern view of the divine

court clearly reflected or were expressed in terms of earthly realityTerefore just as the high king before whom other humans paid hom-age was still a human being so the god to whom other deities paidhomage was still a god matching in species For biblical authors Yah-weh stood at the head of the hierarchy in Israelite thought Yahwehwas unique as the God of gods but he was not unique in his divinityFrom a biblical perspective Yahweh even shared this divinity withhumanity

Humans as Teomorphic Beings

In his discussion concerning the biblical view regarding theomor-phic humans Peterson draws attention to Paulrsquos New estament ser-mon presented in Acts 1728ndash29

For in him we live and move and have our being as

certain also of your own poets have said For we are also hisoffspring

Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God we oughtnot to think that the Godhead is like unto gold or silver orstone graven by art and manrsquos device

Peterson in part argues for a biblical connection between God andhumanity based on the fact that ldquothe word rendered lsquooffspringrsquo by the

King James translators is the Greek genos which is cognate with theLatin genus and means lsquofamilyrsquo or lsquoracersquo or lsquokindrsquo or even and mostespecially interesting lsquodescendants of a common ancestorrsquo rdquo983044 ForLatter-day Saints human beings are literally the offspring of God andtherefore intrinsically theomorphic Part of the strength of Petersonrsquosessay lies in his recognition that like Latter-day Saints biblical authorsregularly blur the distinction between humanity and divine beings

Not only does Peterson draw attention to the prophetic interactionwith the council as support for his thesis but he also places consider-

51 Singer Hittite Prayers 51 52 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 542ndash43 53 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 289

able emphasis upon the deified dead in the Hebrew Bible and the early

Christian teaching regarding deification Heiser notwithstandingPetersonrsquos evidence rejects the idea that a genus equation of God and

humankind appears in the Bible

For his criticisms of Petersonrsquos views Heiser places considerable

weight on the notion that ldquothe concept of the image of God does not

advance the idea that there is a genus equation of God and human-

kind or that God was once a manrdquo (p 224) On some levels Heiserrsquos

point concerning the word tzelem or ldquoimagerdquo in Genesis 126ndash27is correct Concerning this controversial term Marc Z Brettler has

recently explained

Te word tzelem (ldquoimagerdquo) elsewhere always refers to a

physical representation For example the Book of Ezekiel

uses tzelem when it refers to ldquomen sculptured upon the walls

figures of Chaldeans drawn in vermilionrdquo (2314) or when it

accuses Israel of fornicating with ldquophallic imagesrdquo (1617) Teword oen refers to idols (eg Num 3352 Ezek 720 Amos

526 2 Chron 2317) It always signifies a concrete entity

rather than an abstract one Tis is not surprising since the

Bible (in contrast to most medieval philosophical traditions

both Jewish and Christian) oen depicts God in corporeal

terms

Genesis 126ndash27 suggests that Godrsquos physical likeness is similar to

humanityrsquos but Heiser is correct that the statement does not indicate

that biblical authors viewed humans as gods or that God himself was

once a human However many other texts from the Bible do present a

theomorphic view of humanity Peterson therefore is precisely correct

in stating that ldquothe Latter-day Saint understanding that humans are of

the same genus or species as God is thus clearly biblicalrdquo54 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509ndash28

55 Marc Z Brettler How to Read the Bible (Philadelphia Jewish Publication Society2005) 43ndash44 Hebrew word deleted 56 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 547

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2549

290 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Adam as a Divine Council Member

In addition to associating humanity with the tzelem of God theBible describes the first man as a deified member of the divine council

In the Eden story the Lord took advantage of the wet claylike soil and

ldquoformed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils

the breath of life and man became a living soulrdquo (Genesis 27) In an

important study concerning this imagery Walter Brueggemann has

shown that a biblical connection exists between being raised from the

dust and enthronement ldquoo be taken lsquofrom the dustrsquo means to be

elevated from obscurity to royal office and to return to dust means to

be deprived of that office and returned to obscurityrdquo Imagery such

as that witnessed in 1 Kings 162 supports Brueggemannrsquos interpreta-

tion ldquoForasmuch as I [God] exalted thee [Jehu] out of the dust and

made thee prince over my people Israel rdquo (1 Kings 162) Hence the

notion of the God raising man ldquofrom the dust of the earthrdquo in Genesis

27 in part suggests that Yahweh begins his creative activity by form-

ing a divine king According to Genesis 215 this divine king through

a type of imitatio dei would continue to perform the work of Yahweh

who ldquoplantedrdquo the garden ldquoAnd the Lord God took the man and put

him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep itrdquo In a simi-

lar fashion Mesopotamian kings such as Hammurapi glorified their

efforts through the use of creation and agricultural imageryI encircled [the wall] with a swamp I dug the Euphrates

as far as Sippar (and) made it reach a prosperous quay

I Hammu-rāpi who builds up the land caused Sippar

and Babylon to dwell in peaceful abodes forever What

from [primordial days] no one among the kings had done I

did in a grand fashion for the god Šamaš my lord

57 Walter Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestament-liche Wissenschaf 841 (1972) 1ndash18 58 Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo 2 59 Douglas Frayne Old Babylonian Period (2003ndash1595 BC) (oronto University oforonto Press 1990) 348ndash49

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 291

Te view presented in the Babylonian inscription on the wall

of Sippar reflects the common Near Eastern assumption featured inGenesis 2 of a God king participating in the act of creation from ldquopri-

mordial daysrdquo through structure1048624 As a king Hammurapi assumed

the same role filled by deities who created the universe by giving order

to preexistent chaos In its depiction of Adam as the primordial gar-

dener the Bible relies upon similar imagery

Manrsquos status as the archetypal gardener king in Genesis 2ndash3 con-

tains important parallels with Mesopotamian kingship theory1048580 Sev-eral examples of Mesopotamian iconography feature a depiction of the

tree (or plant) of life over which the king and priests appear pouring

libations In assessing the connection between Mesopotamian kings

and gardeners Geo Widengren cites these statements from the am-

muz text R IV 27 No I

A tamarisk which in the garden has no water to drink

Whose foliage on the plant sends forth no twig

A plant which they water no more in its pot

Whose roots are torn away

A herb which is in the garden has no water to drink

Among the flowers of the garden he sleeps

Among the flowers of the garden he is thrown

According to Widengren ldquothe ree of Life is watered by the kingwho pours out over it the Water of Life which he has in his possession

Te ree of Life constantly needs the Water of Life near which it is

growing in the garden of paradiserdquo983044 Te connection between king

and gardener was widely attested throughout ancient Mesopotamia

60 In his translation Frayne renders the Akkadian word szligi-a-tim as ldquothe pastrdquo Teinscription however clearly relies on creation imagery and I have therefore interpreted

szligiatim as ldquoprimordial daysrdquo in accordance with the information provided in Jeremy BlackAndrew George and Nicholas Postgate A Concise Dictionary o Akkadian (WiesbadenHarrassowitz 2000) 337 61 See Geo Widengren Te King and the ree o Lie in Ancient Near Eastern Reli- gion (Uppsala Uppsala Universitets Aringrsskri 1951) 62 Widengren King and the ree o Lie 15

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2749

292 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Tis portrayal of kingship appears in the birth legend of Sargon

wherein the monarch declaresAkki the waterscooper placed me as his gardenerWhen I was a gardener Ishtar was in love with meTe kingship I exercised during x + 5 years

Tese lines from the tale of Sargon the gardener whom the goddess Ishtarloved seem to provide an especially significant parallel with the biblical view presented in the story of Eden In the words of Nicholas Wyatt ldquotheman in his garden is a symbolic allusion to the king in his sanctuaryrdquo

One of the important connections between humanityrsquos enthrone-ment in the garden and later biblical traditions includes the anointingof an Israelite king in 1 Kings 128ndash40 at the Gihon Spring a rivernamed Gihon was one of the four rivers that flowed out of Eden andround the land of Cush (Genesis 213) Significantly the only otherexplicit reference to the Garden of Eden in the Hebrew Bible appears

in a context that addresses the link between kingship and divinity (seeEzekiel 282ndash13)

Concerning the attestation of biblical rituals that may preserveactual religious rites wherein Israelite kings assumed divinity Wyattargues that

the rituals which transform the status of the earthly kingremoving him from ldquomerely humanrdquo status to that of a sacralfigure to be couched in the form of a narrative about a godcarries with it the hint that the king himself is to be seen astransformed into a god Te enthronement of the king isthus his apotheosis

63 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoInterpreting the Creation and Fall Story in Genesis 2ndash3rdquo Zeit-schrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 931 (1981) 15 64 John van Seters has argued according to the Documentary Hypothesis that the

story of divine kingship in J derives from Babylonian influences and is therefore latepostexilic If P is in part a reaction to the J account then it is difficult to accept vanSetersrsquos dating see John van Seters ldquoTe Creation of Man and the Creation of the KingrdquoZeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 1013 (1989) 333ndash41 65 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinity Some Mythical and Ritual Aspects of WestSemitic Kingshiprdquo Ugarit-Forschungen 31 (1999) 857

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 293

In his exploration of biblical deification Wyatt refers to Psalm 198ndash10

as a possible ritual text transforming the king into a divine beingTe teaching of Yahweh is perfectrestoring the breastTe testimony of Yahweh is certainmaking wise the headTe precepts of Yahweh are uprightrejoicing the heart

Te commandment of Yahweh is puremaking bright the eyesTe speech of Yahweh is ritually purestanding for everTe judgments of Yahweh are truthTey are righteous all togethermore desirable than goldthan much pure goldmore sweet than honeyor the refined combYour servant is indeed illumined by themand in their observance is there great gain

Concerning this possible reference to ritual anointing Wyatt argues

It is true that there is no narrative statement about unc-

tion here oil is not even mentioned But only thus can thesuccessive blessings on various parts of the kingrsquos body beexplained For comparison we should consider the unction ofpriests in Exod 294ndash9 19ndash21 4012ndash5 and Lev 810ndash2 22ndash4where various parts of the priestrsquos body are anointed with oiland blood undoubtedly with some liturgical commentary onthe action such is now narrated in these passages providing

a suitable performative utteranceIf correct Wyattrsquos assessment of Israelite deification proves importantfor an analysis of Adam as divine king in the book of Genesis

66 Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinityrdquo 874ndash75

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2949

294 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

In Genesis chapter 2 Godrsquos initial creative act must be the creation

of man for as a divine king raised ldquofrom the dustrdquo man was specifi-cally formed to assist deity in the creation process God appears as agardener who causes to grow ldquoevery tree that is pleasant to the sightand good for foodrdquo (Genesis 29) Te account declares that the Lordplaced the man in the garden to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo his newly createdoasis (Genesis 215) As a gardener the Lord plants Eden as a gardenerthe Lord mixes the soil to form both man and beast As a gardener the

Lord creates man in his image to perform the work of a God Follow-ing his creation man assumes the role of divine gardenerFrom an ancient Near Eastern perspective the view of Adam as

divine gardener suggests that biblical authors viewed humanity asan earthly extension of the divine council According to the Edenaccount man was immortal (Genesis 217) man had received fromdeity the sacred ldquobreath of liferdquo (Genesis 27) man had been com-missioned to perform the work of a godmdashthat is to till and tend the

divine garden Terefore as an immortal gardener man was alreadyldquolike the godsrdquo prior to partaking of the forbidden fruit

In Mesopotamian myths for example the work of gardening wasassigned to lesser members of the divine council Hence the story ofAtrahasis opens with the following portrayal

When gods were man

Tey did forced labor they bore drudgeryGreat indeed was the drudgery of the godsTe forced labor was heavy the misery too muchTe seven() great Anunna-gods were burdeningTe Igigi-gods with forced labor

Like the account in Genesis the lesser gods of the divine council inAtrahasis were gardeners who did the laborious task of caring for the

canals trees and waterways that sustained the higher gods of the67 For additional examples of Yahweh portrayed in the role of gardener see Num-

bers 246 Psalm 10416 Isaiah 4414 68 Altrahasis II39 1ndash6 translation in Benjamin R Foster Beore the Muses An Anthol-ogy o Akkadian Literature (Bethesda MD CDL 1993) 1159

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 295

assembly Hence Adam as an immortal being clearly reflects the

position of the Igigi in Mesopotamian thought Te questions pre-sented to Job by Eliphaz regarding the primal human seem to share

this notion

Are you the firstborn of the human race

Were you brought forth before the hills

Have you listened in the council of God (Job 157ndash8 NRSV)

As Dexter Callender has observed concerning these questionsldquoTe allusion to the primal human in Job does not give us explicit

details concerning his incorporation into the sacred world It is clear

however that the idea is present in the reference that the primal human

lsquolistenedrsquo in the council of Godrdquo As a member of Godrsquos council man

held a stewardship to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo the deityrsquos garden (Genesis

215) According to the Genesis account when the man and woman

eat from the tree of knowledge God expels the humans from Edenand assigns the cherubim other traditional members of the divine

council to ldquokeeprdquo the garden (Genesis 324) Tis move may suggest

that in biblical thought ldquokeepingrdquo the garden is a task reserved for

members of the divine host As an immortal subordinate assigned an

important council task man however eventually appears in the Gen-

esis account as a being very much like the council deities mentioned

in Psalm 82 who receive the decree of death

I have said Ye are gods and all of you are children of the

most High

But ye shall die like men and fall like one of the princes

(Psalm 826ndash7)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou

shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thoushalt surely die (Genesis 217)

69 Dexter E Callender Jr Adam in Myth and History Ancient Israelite Perspectiveson the Primal Human (Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 2000) 212 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1749

282 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo (p 250)

Heiser incorrectly assumes that this apparent biblical teaching con-cerning Yahwehrsquos uniqueness among the gods is not inconsistent withLDS theology

Tough Latter-day Saints view God the Father and Jesus Christas two separate divine beings for the Saints the biblical titles associ-ated with these deities are clearly interchangeable Latter-day Saintshave no problem therefore in associating God the Father with thetitle Yahwehmdashthat is ldquoHe who causes to berdquo or even ldquoHe who procre-atesrdquo Te 1916 official declaration presented by the First Presidency ofthe church states ldquoGod the Eternal Father whom we designate by theexalted name-title Elohim is the literal Parent of our Lord and SaviorJesus Christ and of the spirits of the human racerdquo Clearly howeverthe First Presidencyrsquos move toward designating God the Father as Elo-him and Jesus the Son as Jehovah was primarily a move by churchleaders to create uniformity in Latter-day Saint expression In a recent

Ensign article Keith Meservy observed that ldquoin at least three Old es-tament passages it appears that L983151983154983140 [ie Jehovah] applies to Heav-enly Father not Jesus Christ Ps 1101 Ps 27 Isa 5310rdquo No doubtfor many Latter-day Saints this estimate offered by Meservy couldbe greatly augmented LDS teachings therefore do not preclude theontological uniqueness of God the Father that Heiser witnesses in theHebrew Bible

Yahweh as a Being ldquoSpecies-Uniquerdquo

Certainly Heiser is justified in suggesting that the gods of thedivine council appear inferior to Israelrsquos deity He uses this correctobservation however to build an argument that Israelrsquos God wastherefore somehow ldquospecies-uniquerdquo (p 250) In his discussion con-cerning the biblical evidence for Yahweh being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo

Heiser bases his interpretation on five points of evidence (1) ldquoYahweh36 ldquoTe Father and the Son A Doctrinal Exposition by the First Presidency and the

welverdquo as cited in Messages o the First Presidency o the Church o Jesus Christ o Latter-day Saints ed James R Clark (Salt Lake City Bookcra 1971) 526 emphasis added 37 Keith H Meservy ldquoLORD = Jehovahrdquo Ensign June 2002 29 n 3

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 283

is said to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo

(2) ldquoYahweh was considered pre-existent to all godsrdquo (3) Yahweh hasthe power to strip the other elohim of their immortality (4) Yahwehalone is referred to in the Bible as ha-elohim and (5) ldquothe other godsare commanded to worship Yahwehrdquo (see pp 250ndash57) Tough eachof Heiserrsquos five points of evidence do in fact appear in the Bible con-trary to Heiserrsquos suggestion none of these observations establishesYahweh as being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo In the Bible Yahweh is the God ofgods but the biblical gods were still biblical gods As Paul Sanders hasexplained according to the Deuteronomic vision ldquothe [Sons of Goddescribed in Deuteronomy 328] are relatively independent they havetheir own dominions like YHWHrdquo

Notwithstanding his acceptance of the importance of the divinecouncil of deities in biblical theology Heiserrsquos critique suffers in partthrough his effort to define Israelrsquos deity as a being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo(p 250) He is correct in drawing attention to the fact that biblical

authors viewed their deity as exceptionally powerful in the councilldquoFor the Lord your God is God of godsrdquo proclaims Deuteronomy 1017ldquoand Lord of lordsrdquo Unfortunately however in identifying Yahweh asa being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo Heiser forces the biblical view of deities intoan image somewhat consistent with radical monotheism Contraryto Heiserrsquos suggestion the creative act in and of itself does not set thecreator apart as an exclusive species Te same point also applies tothe issue Heiser raises concerning primogeniture In other words aman for instance may exist before both his children and his siblingsand though preeminence may render the person ldquouniquerdquo on somelevels prior existence would not in this or in any other case rendera being as ldquospecies-uniquerdquo rue the Bible speaks of gods separatefrom Israelrsquos primary deity as elohim a˙erimmdashthat is ldquoother godsrdquo(see Exodus 203 2313 Deuteronomy 57 614 etc) However as YairHoffman has observed ldquoA survey of the use of a˙erim [ldquootherrdquo] shows

38 Paul Sanders Te Provenance o Deuteronomy 32 (Leiden Brill 1996) 37039 Te term radical monotheism refers to the theological position that only one

divine being exists in the universe Te expression was popularized by ikva Frymer-Kensky In the Wake o the Goddesses Women Culture and the Biblical ransormationo Pagan Myth (New York Free Press 1992) 154

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1949

284 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

that when used attributively with regard to garments days messen-

gers and objects it clearly has a relative meaning something differ-ent yet o the same kind rdquo1048624 Terefore ldquothere is no reason to assumethat in the phrase elohim a˙erim the attribute has a more distinctivemeaningrdquo1048580 When all is said and done the biblical deities like Yah-weh himself were still gods

In addition contrary to Heiserrsquos assertion the simple fact that Elo-him possesses the power to strip the other deities of their immortalityin Psalm 82 does not indicate that these gods are of a different spe-cies than Elohim According to the Psalmistrsquos view Elohim is simplymore powerful than the other gods Analogies from the ancient NearEast illustrate the problematic nature of Heiserrsquos claim In the Babylo-nian story Enuma Elish for instance the primordial mother goddessiamat created the god Qingu as chief deity over iamatrsquos militaryforces As a result of his actions taken against the divine council thedeities of the assembly ldquobound [Qingu] and held him in front of Ea

[and they] imposed the penalty on him and cut off his bloodrdquo983044 Tefact that in Enuma Elish the council could strip Qingu of his immor-tality did not mean that the god Qingu was somehow of a different orlesser divine species In the Sumerian myth of Enlil and Ninlil Enlil(one of the ldquogreat godsrdquo of Mesopotamia) is brought to trial for havingraped the goddess Ninlil As Enlil returned to the city of Nippur hewas arrested by the assembly while walking through the temple court

Te trial commenced immediately In the myth the council pre-sented the verdict that ldquothe sex offender Enlil will leave the townrdquoAccordingly the myth reports that Enlil le Nippur headed towardthe netherworld In his assessment of the story Jacobsen points out

40 Yair Hoffman ldquoTe Conception of lsquoOther Godsrsquo in Deuteronomistic Literaturerdquoin Concepts o the Other in Near Eastern Religions ed Ilai Alon Ithamar Gruenwald andItamar Singer (Leiden Brill 1994) 107 emphasis added 41 Hoffman ldquoConception of Other Godsrdquo 107

42 As cited in Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia 261 43 For a summary of the myth see Gwendolyn Leick A Dictionary o Ancient NearEastern Mythology (London Routledge 1998) 47ndash48 for a translation see TorkildJacobsen Te Harps Tat Once Sumerian Poetry in ranslation (New Haven YaleUniversity Press 1987) 167ndash80 44 Jacobsen Harps 174

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 285

that Enlilrsquos descent to Hades may indicate that the high god in Meso-

potamian mythology was originally sentenced to death As notedby James Ackerman in his dissertation concerning Psalm 82 thesetypes of judgment scenes in which the council determines that godswill die like mortals carry important implications for interpreting thecultural background for the biblical text Contrary to Heiserrsquos inter-pretation none of these stories indicate that the dying gods were of adifferent species or order than the gods who issued the sentence

Near Eastern traditions oen place considerable emphasis on thedying-god motif In no sense however are these dying godsmdashevenwhen resurrectedmdashsomehow depicted as a lesser species Heiserrsquos con-fusion concerning the implications of a biblical statement that Godissued a judgment of death to the deities of the divine council illus-trates the fundamental need for biblical scholars to pursue Assyriol-ogy in connection with their efforts to interpret the Hebrew Bible

Also contrary to Heiserrsquos suggestion the punishment meted out

to usurpers in Near Eastern council stories never indicates that thecriminals derived from some sort of exceptional species Te storyof Athtar from ancient Canaan for instance presents the traditionof Athtarrsquos descent to the underworld following the deityrsquos ascensionto the throne of Baal Te details involved in Athtarrsquos story containimportant thematic elements depicted in ancient Near Eastern storiesof cosmic revolt Athtar seems to share some semblance with Baalrsquos

mortal enemy Mot or ldquoDeathrdquo into whom Baal himself descendsHence Hugh Page notes that Athtarrsquos ldquodescent to the underworld implies that on some level Athtar has placed himself in proxim-ity to or relationship with the only god that Baal proves incapable

45 Torkild Jacobsen ldquoAn Ancient Mesopotamian rial for Homiciderdquo in owardthe Image o ammuz and Other Essays on Mesopotamian History and Culture ed Wil-liam L Moran (Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1970) 207 first published inStudia Biblica et Orientalia vol 3 of Analecta Biblica et Orientalia XII (Rome Pontificio

Istituto Biblico 1959) 130ndash50 46 See James S Ackerman ldquoAn Exegetical Study of Psalm 82rdquo (PhD diss HarvardUniversity 1966) 186ndash93 47 For a recent survey of the issue which includes a survey of previous assessmentssee ryggve N D Mettinger Te Riddle o Resurrection ldquoDying and Rising Godsrdquo in the Ancient Near East (Stockholm Almqvist amp Wiksell 2001)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2149

286 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of defeatingrdquo Athtarrsquos assumption of the throne of Baal followed

by his descent to the underworld indicates that this portion of theBaal cycle from ancient Canaan fits the general category of the cosmic

revolt genre witnessed in texts such as Abraham 3 and Psalm 82

1 Kindly El the Compassionate answers

2 ldquoOne so small cannot race

3 with Baal cannot handle the lance

4 with Daganrsquos son when they test one anotherrdquo

5 Lady Athirat of the Sea answers 6 ldquoLet us enthrone Athtar the Strong

7 Let Athtar the Strong be kingrdquo

8 Ten Athtar the Strong

9 ascended the summit of Sapan

10 He sat upon the throne of Mightiest Baal

11 His feet would not reach its footstool

12 His head would not reach its top 13 Athtar the Strong answered

14 ldquoI cannot rule on the summit of Sapanrdquo

15 Athtar the Strong descended

16 He descended from the throne of Mightiest Baal

17 And he ruled over the underworld god of all of it

18 drew in barrels

19 drew in jars (KU 1649ndash67 translation)

Te fact that Athtar the Strong experienced a type of ldquodeathrdquo in which

he ldquoruled over the underworldrdquo following his descent from Baalrsquos

throne does not suggest that Athtar was a ldquobeing species-uniquerdquo from

the other deities any more than Inanna or Ishtar the Mesopotamian

goddesses who experienced a type of death in the underworld were of

a different species than the gods Ea Enki Marduk and so forth48 Hugh R Page Jr Te Myth o Cosmic Rebellion A Study o Its Reflexes in Ugaritic

and Biblical Literature (Leiden Brill 1996) 92 Pagersquos views concerning the Athtar mythhave been criticized by Gregorio del Olmo Lete ldquoIn Search of the Canaanite Luciferrdquo Aula Orientalis 19 (2001) 125ndash32

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 287

Still in his efforts to present Yahweh as a being species-unique

Heiser correctly draws attention to the other gods of the council whoare commanded to worship Yahweh In his analysis he focuses uponthe call given to the gods in Psalm 291ndash2 ldquoAscribe to Yahweh O sons ofGod ascribe to Yahweh glory and strength Ascribe to Yahweh the gloryof his name worship Yahweh in the splendor of holinessrdquo (as quotedon p 256) While Heiserrsquos observations certainly illustrate that biblicalauthors viewed their deity as uniquemdashthat is exceptionalmdashthroughout

Near Eastern tradition lesser gods regularly appear in a position inwhich they offer praise service and devotion to the higher gods of thecouncil Richard J Clifford explains that in the Phoenician view of theassembly ldquoas elsewhere in the ancient Near East the assemblies are pic-tured as subordinate to individual gods although the assemblyrsquos con-sent seems necessary for important decisionsrdquo Simply because ancienttextsmdashincluding the Biblemdashdepict the members of the assemblies asldquosubordinate to individual godsrdquo this in no way implies that the higher

deities somehow belonged to a separate species Ancient Near Easterntexts such as Mursilirsquos Hymn and Prayer to the Sun-goddess o Arinna (CH 376A) establish the fact that Near Eastern peoples believed thatgods of the same species paid homage to higher deities in a way compa-rable to the biblical view

You O Sun-goddess of Arinna are honored goddess Your

name is honored among names and your divinity is honoredamong gods Furthermore among the gods you are the mosthonored and the greatest Tere is no other god more honoredor greater than you You are the lord of just judgment Youcontrol the kingship of heaven and earth1048624

Holding the position ldquomost honoredrdquo among the gods did not estab-lish Arinna as species-unique Arinna was simply the god before

whom from the authorrsquos perspective the other gods would regularly49 Richard J Clifford ldquoPhoenician Religionrdquo Bulletin o the American Schools o

Oriental Research 279 (1990) 57 50 As cited in Itamar Singer Hittite Prayers (Atlanta Society of Biblical Literature2002) 51

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2349

288 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquofall downrdquo1048580 For the ancients the Near Eastern view of the divine

court clearly reflected or were expressed in terms of earthly realityTerefore just as the high king before whom other humans paid hom-age was still a human being so the god to whom other deities paidhomage was still a god matching in species For biblical authors Yah-weh stood at the head of the hierarchy in Israelite thought Yahwehwas unique as the God of gods but he was not unique in his divinityFrom a biblical perspective Yahweh even shared this divinity withhumanity

Humans as Teomorphic Beings

In his discussion concerning the biblical view regarding theomor-phic humans Peterson draws attention to Paulrsquos New estament ser-mon presented in Acts 1728ndash29

For in him we live and move and have our being as

certain also of your own poets have said For we are also hisoffspring

Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God we oughtnot to think that the Godhead is like unto gold or silver orstone graven by art and manrsquos device

Peterson in part argues for a biblical connection between God andhumanity based on the fact that ldquothe word rendered lsquooffspringrsquo by the

King James translators is the Greek genos which is cognate with theLatin genus and means lsquofamilyrsquo or lsquoracersquo or lsquokindrsquo or even and mostespecially interesting lsquodescendants of a common ancestorrsquo rdquo983044 ForLatter-day Saints human beings are literally the offspring of God andtherefore intrinsically theomorphic Part of the strength of Petersonrsquosessay lies in his recognition that like Latter-day Saints biblical authorsregularly blur the distinction between humanity and divine beings

Not only does Peterson draw attention to the prophetic interactionwith the council as support for his thesis but he also places consider-

51 Singer Hittite Prayers 51 52 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 542ndash43 53 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 289

able emphasis upon the deified dead in the Hebrew Bible and the early

Christian teaching regarding deification Heiser notwithstandingPetersonrsquos evidence rejects the idea that a genus equation of God and

humankind appears in the Bible

For his criticisms of Petersonrsquos views Heiser places considerable

weight on the notion that ldquothe concept of the image of God does not

advance the idea that there is a genus equation of God and human-

kind or that God was once a manrdquo (p 224) On some levels Heiserrsquos

point concerning the word tzelem or ldquoimagerdquo in Genesis 126ndash27is correct Concerning this controversial term Marc Z Brettler has

recently explained

Te word tzelem (ldquoimagerdquo) elsewhere always refers to a

physical representation For example the Book of Ezekiel

uses tzelem when it refers to ldquomen sculptured upon the walls

figures of Chaldeans drawn in vermilionrdquo (2314) or when it

accuses Israel of fornicating with ldquophallic imagesrdquo (1617) Teword oen refers to idols (eg Num 3352 Ezek 720 Amos

526 2 Chron 2317) It always signifies a concrete entity

rather than an abstract one Tis is not surprising since the

Bible (in contrast to most medieval philosophical traditions

both Jewish and Christian) oen depicts God in corporeal

terms

Genesis 126ndash27 suggests that Godrsquos physical likeness is similar to

humanityrsquos but Heiser is correct that the statement does not indicate

that biblical authors viewed humans as gods or that God himself was

once a human However many other texts from the Bible do present a

theomorphic view of humanity Peterson therefore is precisely correct

in stating that ldquothe Latter-day Saint understanding that humans are of

the same genus or species as God is thus clearly biblicalrdquo54 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509ndash28

55 Marc Z Brettler How to Read the Bible (Philadelphia Jewish Publication Society2005) 43ndash44 Hebrew word deleted 56 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 547

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2549

290 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Adam as a Divine Council Member

In addition to associating humanity with the tzelem of God theBible describes the first man as a deified member of the divine council

In the Eden story the Lord took advantage of the wet claylike soil and

ldquoformed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils

the breath of life and man became a living soulrdquo (Genesis 27) In an

important study concerning this imagery Walter Brueggemann has

shown that a biblical connection exists between being raised from the

dust and enthronement ldquoo be taken lsquofrom the dustrsquo means to be

elevated from obscurity to royal office and to return to dust means to

be deprived of that office and returned to obscurityrdquo Imagery such

as that witnessed in 1 Kings 162 supports Brueggemannrsquos interpreta-

tion ldquoForasmuch as I [God] exalted thee [Jehu] out of the dust and

made thee prince over my people Israel rdquo (1 Kings 162) Hence the

notion of the God raising man ldquofrom the dust of the earthrdquo in Genesis

27 in part suggests that Yahweh begins his creative activity by form-

ing a divine king According to Genesis 215 this divine king through

a type of imitatio dei would continue to perform the work of Yahweh

who ldquoplantedrdquo the garden ldquoAnd the Lord God took the man and put

him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep itrdquo In a simi-

lar fashion Mesopotamian kings such as Hammurapi glorified their

efforts through the use of creation and agricultural imageryI encircled [the wall] with a swamp I dug the Euphrates

as far as Sippar (and) made it reach a prosperous quay

I Hammu-rāpi who builds up the land caused Sippar

and Babylon to dwell in peaceful abodes forever What

from [primordial days] no one among the kings had done I

did in a grand fashion for the god Šamaš my lord

57 Walter Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestament-liche Wissenschaf 841 (1972) 1ndash18 58 Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo 2 59 Douglas Frayne Old Babylonian Period (2003ndash1595 BC) (oronto University oforonto Press 1990) 348ndash49

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 291

Te view presented in the Babylonian inscription on the wall

of Sippar reflects the common Near Eastern assumption featured inGenesis 2 of a God king participating in the act of creation from ldquopri-

mordial daysrdquo through structure1048624 As a king Hammurapi assumed

the same role filled by deities who created the universe by giving order

to preexistent chaos In its depiction of Adam as the primordial gar-

dener the Bible relies upon similar imagery

Manrsquos status as the archetypal gardener king in Genesis 2ndash3 con-

tains important parallels with Mesopotamian kingship theory1048580 Sev-eral examples of Mesopotamian iconography feature a depiction of the

tree (or plant) of life over which the king and priests appear pouring

libations In assessing the connection between Mesopotamian kings

and gardeners Geo Widengren cites these statements from the am-

muz text R IV 27 No I

A tamarisk which in the garden has no water to drink

Whose foliage on the plant sends forth no twig

A plant which they water no more in its pot

Whose roots are torn away

A herb which is in the garden has no water to drink

Among the flowers of the garden he sleeps

Among the flowers of the garden he is thrown

According to Widengren ldquothe ree of Life is watered by the kingwho pours out over it the Water of Life which he has in his possession

Te ree of Life constantly needs the Water of Life near which it is

growing in the garden of paradiserdquo983044 Te connection between king

and gardener was widely attested throughout ancient Mesopotamia

60 In his translation Frayne renders the Akkadian word szligi-a-tim as ldquothe pastrdquo Teinscription however clearly relies on creation imagery and I have therefore interpreted

szligiatim as ldquoprimordial daysrdquo in accordance with the information provided in Jeremy BlackAndrew George and Nicholas Postgate A Concise Dictionary o Akkadian (WiesbadenHarrassowitz 2000) 337 61 See Geo Widengren Te King and the ree o Lie in Ancient Near Eastern Reli- gion (Uppsala Uppsala Universitets Aringrsskri 1951) 62 Widengren King and the ree o Lie 15

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2749

292 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Tis portrayal of kingship appears in the birth legend of Sargon

wherein the monarch declaresAkki the waterscooper placed me as his gardenerWhen I was a gardener Ishtar was in love with meTe kingship I exercised during x + 5 years

Tese lines from the tale of Sargon the gardener whom the goddess Ishtarloved seem to provide an especially significant parallel with the biblical view presented in the story of Eden In the words of Nicholas Wyatt ldquotheman in his garden is a symbolic allusion to the king in his sanctuaryrdquo

One of the important connections between humanityrsquos enthrone-ment in the garden and later biblical traditions includes the anointingof an Israelite king in 1 Kings 128ndash40 at the Gihon Spring a rivernamed Gihon was one of the four rivers that flowed out of Eden andround the land of Cush (Genesis 213) Significantly the only otherexplicit reference to the Garden of Eden in the Hebrew Bible appears

in a context that addresses the link between kingship and divinity (seeEzekiel 282ndash13)

Concerning the attestation of biblical rituals that may preserveactual religious rites wherein Israelite kings assumed divinity Wyattargues that

the rituals which transform the status of the earthly kingremoving him from ldquomerely humanrdquo status to that of a sacralfigure to be couched in the form of a narrative about a godcarries with it the hint that the king himself is to be seen astransformed into a god Te enthronement of the king isthus his apotheosis

63 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoInterpreting the Creation and Fall Story in Genesis 2ndash3rdquo Zeit-schrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 931 (1981) 15 64 John van Seters has argued according to the Documentary Hypothesis that the

story of divine kingship in J derives from Babylonian influences and is therefore latepostexilic If P is in part a reaction to the J account then it is difficult to accept vanSetersrsquos dating see John van Seters ldquoTe Creation of Man and the Creation of the KingrdquoZeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 1013 (1989) 333ndash41 65 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinity Some Mythical and Ritual Aspects of WestSemitic Kingshiprdquo Ugarit-Forschungen 31 (1999) 857

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 293

In his exploration of biblical deification Wyatt refers to Psalm 198ndash10

as a possible ritual text transforming the king into a divine beingTe teaching of Yahweh is perfectrestoring the breastTe testimony of Yahweh is certainmaking wise the headTe precepts of Yahweh are uprightrejoicing the heart

Te commandment of Yahweh is puremaking bright the eyesTe speech of Yahweh is ritually purestanding for everTe judgments of Yahweh are truthTey are righteous all togethermore desirable than goldthan much pure goldmore sweet than honeyor the refined combYour servant is indeed illumined by themand in their observance is there great gain

Concerning this possible reference to ritual anointing Wyatt argues

It is true that there is no narrative statement about unc-

tion here oil is not even mentioned But only thus can thesuccessive blessings on various parts of the kingrsquos body beexplained For comparison we should consider the unction ofpriests in Exod 294ndash9 19ndash21 4012ndash5 and Lev 810ndash2 22ndash4where various parts of the priestrsquos body are anointed with oiland blood undoubtedly with some liturgical commentary onthe action such is now narrated in these passages providing

a suitable performative utteranceIf correct Wyattrsquos assessment of Israelite deification proves importantfor an analysis of Adam as divine king in the book of Genesis

66 Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinityrdquo 874ndash75

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2949

294 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

In Genesis chapter 2 Godrsquos initial creative act must be the creation

of man for as a divine king raised ldquofrom the dustrdquo man was specifi-cally formed to assist deity in the creation process God appears as agardener who causes to grow ldquoevery tree that is pleasant to the sightand good for foodrdquo (Genesis 29) Te account declares that the Lordplaced the man in the garden to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo his newly createdoasis (Genesis 215) As a gardener the Lord plants Eden as a gardenerthe Lord mixes the soil to form both man and beast As a gardener the

Lord creates man in his image to perform the work of a God Follow-ing his creation man assumes the role of divine gardenerFrom an ancient Near Eastern perspective the view of Adam as

divine gardener suggests that biblical authors viewed humanity asan earthly extension of the divine council According to the Edenaccount man was immortal (Genesis 217) man had received fromdeity the sacred ldquobreath of liferdquo (Genesis 27) man had been com-missioned to perform the work of a godmdashthat is to till and tend the

divine garden Terefore as an immortal gardener man was alreadyldquolike the godsrdquo prior to partaking of the forbidden fruit

In Mesopotamian myths for example the work of gardening wasassigned to lesser members of the divine council Hence the story ofAtrahasis opens with the following portrayal

When gods were man

Tey did forced labor they bore drudgeryGreat indeed was the drudgery of the godsTe forced labor was heavy the misery too muchTe seven() great Anunna-gods were burdeningTe Igigi-gods with forced labor

Like the account in Genesis the lesser gods of the divine council inAtrahasis were gardeners who did the laborious task of caring for the

canals trees and waterways that sustained the higher gods of the67 For additional examples of Yahweh portrayed in the role of gardener see Num-

bers 246 Psalm 10416 Isaiah 4414 68 Altrahasis II39 1ndash6 translation in Benjamin R Foster Beore the Muses An Anthol-ogy o Akkadian Literature (Bethesda MD CDL 1993) 1159

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 295

assembly Hence Adam as an immortal being clearly reflects the

position of the Igigi in Mesopotamian thought Te questions pre-sented to Job by Eliphaz regarding the primal human seem to share

this notion

Are you the firstborn of the human race

Were you brought forth before the hills

Have you listened in the council of God (Job 157ndash8 NRSV)

As Dexter Callender has observed concerning these questionsldquoTe allusion to the primal human in Job does not give us explicit

details concerning his incorporation into the sacred world It is clear

however that the idea is present in the reference that the primal human

lsquolistenedrsquo in the council of Godrdquo As a member of Godrsquos council man

held a stewardship to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo the deityrsquos garden (Genesis

215) According to the Genesis account when the man and woman

eat from the tree of knowledge God expels the humans from Edenand assigns the cherubim other traditional members of the divine

council to ldquokeeprdquo the garden (Genesis 324) Tis move may suggest

that in biblical thought ldquokeepingrdquo the garden is a task reserved for

members of the divine host As an immortal subordinate assigned an

important council task man however eventually appears in the Gen-

esis account as a being very much like the council deities mentioned

in Psalm 82 who receive the decree of death

I have said Ye are gods and all of you are children of the

most High

But ye shall die like men and fall like one of the princes

(Psalm 826ndash7)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou

shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thoushalt surely die (Genesis 217)

69 Dexter E Callender Jr Adam in Myth and History Ancient Israelite Perspectiveson the Primal Human (Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 2000) 212 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 283

is said to be the creator of all other members of the heavenly hostrdquo

(2) ldquoYahweh was considered pre-existent to all godsrdquo (3) Yahweh hasthe power to strip the other elohim of their immortality (4) Yahwehalone is referred to in the Bible as ha-elohim and (5) ldquothe other godsare commanded to worship Yahwehrdquo (see pp 250ndash57) Tough eachof Heiserrsquos five points of evidence do in fact appear in the Bible con-trary to Heiserrsquos suggestion none of these observations establishesYahweh as being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo In the Bible Yahweh is the God ofgods but the biblical gods were still biblical gods As Paul Sanders hasexplained according to the Deuteronomic vision ldquothe [Sons of Goddescribed in Deuteronomy 328] are relatively independent they havetheir own dominions like YHWHrdquo

Notwithstanding his acceptance of the importance of the divinecouncil of deities in biblical theology Heiserrsquos critique suffers in partthrough his effort to define Israelrsquos deity as a being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo(p 250) He is correct in drawing attention to the fact that biblical

authors viewed their deity as exceptionally powerful in the councilldquoFor the Lord your God is God of godsrdquo proclaims Deuteronomy 1017ldquoand Lord of lordsrdquo Unfortunately however in identifying Yahweh asa being ldquospecies-uniquerdquo Heiser forces the biblical view of deities intoan image somewhat consistent with radical monotheism Contraryto Heiserrsquos suggestion the creative act in and of itself does not set thecreator apart as an exclusive species Te same point also applies tothe issue Heiser raises concerning primogeniture In other words aman for instance may exist before both his children and his siblingsand though preeminence may render the person ldquouniquerdquo on somelevels prior existence would not in this or in any other case rendera being as ldquospecies-uniquerdquo rue the Bible speaks of gods separatefrom Israelrsquos primary deity as elohim a˙erimmdashthat is ldquoother godsrdquo(see Exodus 203 2313 Deuteronomy 57 614 etc) However as YairHoffman has observed ldquoA survey of the use of a˙erim [ldquootherrdquo] shows

38 Paul Sanders Te Provenance o Deuteronomy 32 (Leiden Brill 1996) 37039 Te term radical monotheism refers to the theological position that only one

divine being exists in the universe Te expression was popularized by ikva Frymer-Kensky In the Wake o the Goddesses Women Culture and the Biblical ransormationo Pagan Myth (New York Free Press 1992) 154

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1949

284 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

that when used attributively with regard to garments days messen-

gers and objects it clearly has a relative meaning something differ-ent yet o the same kind rdquo1048624 Terefore ldquothere is no reason to assumethat in the phrase elohim a˙erim the attribute has a more distinctivemeaningrdquo1048580 When all is said and done the biblical deities like Yah-weh himself were still gods

In addition contrary to Heiserrsquos assertion the simple fact that Elo-him possesses the power to strip the other deities of their immortalityin Psalm 82 does not indicate that these gods are of a different spe-cies than Elohim According to the Psalmistrsquos view Elohim is simplymore powerful than the other gods Analogies from the ancient NearEast illustrate the problematic nature of Heiserrsquos claim In the Babylo-nian story Enuma Elish for instance the primordial mother goddessiamat created the god Qingu as chief deity over iamatrsquos militaryforces As a result of his actions taken against the divine council thedeities of the assembly ldquobound [Qingu] and held him in front of Ea

[and they] imposed the penalty on him and cut off his bloodrdquo983044 Tefact that in Enuma Elish the council could strip Qingu of his immor-tality did not mean that the god Qingu was somehow of a different orlesser divine species In the Sumerian myth of Enlil and Ninlil Enlil(one of the ldquogreat godsrdquo of Mesopotamia) is brought to trial for havingraped the goddess Ninlil As Enlil returned to the city of Nippur hewas arrested by the assembly while walking through the temple court

Te trial commenced immediately In the myth the council pre-sented the verdict that ldquothe sex offender Enlil will leave the townrdquoAccordingly the myth reports that Enlil le Nippur headed towardthe netherworld In his assessment of the story Jacobsen points out

40 Yair Hoffman ldquoTe Conception of lsquoOther Godsrsquo in Deuteronomistic Literaturerdquoin Concepts o the Other in Near Eastern Religions ed Ilai Alon Ithamar Gruenwald andItamar Singer (Leiden Brill 1994) 107 emphasis added 41 Hoffman ldquoConception of Other Godsrdquo 107

42 As cited in Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia 261 43 For a summary of the myth see Gwendolyn Leick A Dictionary o Ancient NearEastern Mythology (London Routledge 1998) 47ndash48 for a translation see TorkildJacobsen Te Harps Tat Once Sumerian Poetry in ranslation (New Haven YaleUniversity Press 1987) 167ndash80 44 Jacobsen Harps 174

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 285

that Enlilrsquos descent to Hades may indicate that the high god in Meso-

potamian mythology was originally sentenced to death As notedby James Ackerman in his dissertation concerning Psalm 82 thesetypes of judgment scenes in which the council determines that godswill die like mortals carry important implications for interpreting thecultural background for the biblical text Contrary to Heiserrsquos inter-pretation none of these stories indicate that the dying gods were of adifferent species or order than the gods who issued the sentence

Near Eastern traditions oen place considerable emphasis on thedying-god motif In no sense however are these dying godsmdashevenwhen resurrectedmdashsomehow depicted as a lesser species Heiserrsquos con-fusion concerning the implications of a biblical statement that Godissued a judgment of death to the deities of the divine council illus-trates the fundamental need for biblical scholars to pursue Assyriol-ogy in connection with their efforts to interpret the Hebrew Bible

Also contrary to Heiserrsquos suggestion the punishment meted out

to usurpers in Near Eastern council stories never indicates that thecriminals derived from some sort of exceptional species Te storyof Athtar from ancient Canaan for instance presents the traditionof Athtarrsquos descent to the underworld following the deityrsquos ascensionto the throne of Baal Te details involved in Athtarrsquos story containimportant thematic elements depicted in ancient Near Eastern storiesof cosmic revolt Athtar seems to share some semblance with Baalrsquos

mortal enemy Mot or ldquoDeathrdquo into whom Baal himself descendsHence Hugh Page notes that Athtarrsquos ldquodescent to the underworld implies that on some level Athtar has placed himself in proxim-ity to or relationship with the only god that Baal proves incapable

45 Torkild Jacobsen ldquoAn Ancient Mesopotamian rial for Homiciderdquo in owardthe Image o ammuz and Other Essays on Mesopotamian History and Culture ed Wil-liam L Moran (Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1970) 207 first published inStudia Biblica et Orientalia vol 3 of Analecta Biblica et Orientalia XII (Rome Pontificio

Istituto Biblico 1959) 130ndash50 46 See James S Ackerman ldquoAn Exegetical Study of Psalm 82rdquo (PhD diss HarvardUniversity 1966) 186ndash93 47 For a recent survey of the issue which includes a survey of previous assessmentssee ryggve N D Mettinger Te Riddle o Resurrection ldquoDying and Rising Godsrdquo in the Ancient Near East (Stockholm Almqvist amp Wiksell 2001)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2149

286 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of defeatingrdquo Athtarrsquos assumption of the throne of Baal followed

by his descent to the underworld indicates that this portion of theBaal cycle from ancient Canaan fits the general category of the cosmic

revolt genre witnessed in texts such as Abraham 3 and Psalm 82

1 Kindly El the Compassionate answers

2 ldquoOne so small cannot race

3 with Baal cannot handle the lance

4 with Daganrsquos son when they test one anotherrdquo

5 Lady Athirat of the Sea answers 6 ldquoLet us enthrone Athtar the Strong

7 Let Athtar the Strong be kingrdquo

8 Ten Athtar the Strong

9 ascended the summit of Sapan

10 He sat upon the throne of Mightiest Baal

11 His feet would not reach its footstool

12 His head would not reach its top 13 Athtar the Strong answered

14 ldquoI cannot rule on the summit of Sapanrdquo

15 Athtar the Strong descended

16 He descended from the throne of Mightiest Baal

17 And he ruled over the underworld god of all of it

18 drew in barrels

19 drew in jars (KU 1649ndash67 translation)

Te fact that Athtar the Strong experienced a type of ldquodeathrdquo in which

he ldquoruled over the underworldrdquo following his descent from Baalrsquos

throne does not suggest that Athtar was a ldquobeing species-uniquerdquo from

the other deities any more than Inanna or Ishtar the Mesopotamian

goddesses who experienced a type of death in the underworld were of

a different species than the gods Ea Enki Marduk and so forth48 Hugh R Page Jr Te Myth o Cosmic Rebellion A Study o Its Reflexes in Ugaritic

and Biblical Literature (Leiden Brill 1996) 92 Pagersquos views concerning the Athtar mythhave been criticized by Gregorio del Olmo Lete ldquoIn Search of the Canaanite Luciferrdquo Aula Orientalis 19 (2001) 125ndash32

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 287

Still in his efforts to present Yahweh as a being species-unique

Heiser correctly draws attention to the other gods of the council whoare commanded to worship Yahweh In his analysis he focuses uponthe call given to the gods in Psalm 291ndash2 ldquoAscribe to Yahweh O sons ofGod ascribe to Yahweh glory and strength Ascribe to Yahweh the gloryof his name worship Yahweh in the splendor of holinessrdquo (as quotedon p 256) While Heiserrsquos observations certainly illustrate that biblicalauthors viewed their deity as uniquemdashthat is exceptionalmdashthroughout

Near Eastern tradition lesser gods regularly appear in a position inwhich they offer praise service and devotion to the higher gods of thecouncil Richard J Clifford explains that in the Phoenician view of theassembly ldquoas elsewhere in the ancient Near East the assemblies are pic-tured as subordinate to individual gods although the assemblyrsquos con-sent seems necessary for important decisionsrdquo Simply because ancienttextsmdashincluding the Biblemdashdepict the members of the assemblies asldquosubordinate to individual godsrdquo this in no way implies that the higher

deities somehow belonged to a separate species Ancient Near Easterntexts such as Mursilirsquos Hymn and Prayer to the Sun-goddess o Arinna (CH 376A) establish the fact that Near Eastern peoples believed thatgods of the same species paid homage to higher deities in a way compa-rable to the biblical view

You O Sun-goddess of Arinna are honored goddess Your

name is honored among names and your divinity is honoredamong gods Furthermore among the gods you are the mosthonored and the greatest Tere is no other god more honoredor greater than you You are the lord of just judgment Youcontrol the kingship of heaven and earth1048624

Holding the position ldquomost honoredrdquo among the gods did not estab-lish Arinna as species-unique Arinna was simply the god before

whom from the authorrsquos perspective the other gods would regularly49 Richard J Clifford ldquoPhoenician Religionrdquo Bulletin o the American Schools o

Oriental Research 279 (1990) 57 50 As cited in Itamar Singer Hittite Prayers (Atlanta Society of Biblical Literature2002) 51

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2349

288 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquofall downrdquo1048580 For the ancients the Near Eastern view of the divine

court clearly reflected or were expressed in terms of earthly realityTerefore just as the high king before whom other humans paid hom-age was still a human being so the god to whom other deities paidhomage was still a god matching in species For biblical authors Yah-weh stood at the head of the hierarchy in Israelite thought Yahwehwas unique as the God of gods but he was not unique in his divinityFrom a biblical perspective Yahweh even shared this divinity withhumanity

Humans as Teomorphic Beings

In his discussion concerning the biblical view regarding theomor-phic humans Peterson draws attention to Paulrsquos New estament ser-mon presented in Acts 1728ndash29

For in him we live and move and have our being as

certain also of your own poets have said For we are also hisoffspring

Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God we oughtnot to think that the Godhead is like unto gold or silver orstone graven by art and manrsquos device

Peterson in part argues for a biblical connection between God andhumanity based on the fact that ldquothe word rendered lsquooffspringrsquo by the

King James translators is the Greek genos which is cognate with theLatin genus and means lsquofamilyrsquo or lsquoracersquo or lsquokindrsquo or even and mostespecially interesting lsquodescendants of a common ancestorrsquo rdquo983044 ForLatter-day Saints human beings are literally the offspring of God andtherefore intrinsically theomorphic Part of the strength of Petersonrsquosessay lies in his recognition that like Latter-day Saints biblical authorsregularly blur the distinction between humanity and divine beings

Not only does Peterson draw attention to the prophetic interactionwith the council as support for his thesis but he also places consider-

51 Singer Hittite Prayers 51 52 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 542ndash43 53 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 289

able emphasis upon the deified dead in the Hebrew Bible and the early

Christian teaching regarding deification Heiser notwithstandingPetersonrsquos evidence rejects the idea that a genus equation of God and

humankind appears in the Bible

For his criticisms of Petersonrsquos views Heiser places considerable

weight on the notion that ldquothe concept of the image of God does not

advance the idea that there is a genus equation of God and human-

kind or that God was once a manrdquo (p 224) On some levels Heiserrsquos

point concerning the word tzelem or ldquoimagerdquo in Genesis 126ndash27is correct Concerning this controversial term Marc Z Brettler has

recently explained

Te word tzelem (ldquoimagerdquo) elsewhere always refers to a

physical representation For example the Book of Ezekiel

uses tzelem when it refers to ldquomen sculptured upon the walls

figures of Chaldeans drawn in vermilionrdquo (2314) or when it

accuses Israel of fornicating with ldquophallic imagesrdquo (1617) Teword oen refers to idols (eg Num 3352 Ezek 720 Amos

526 2 Chron 2317) It always signifies a concrete entity

rather than an abstract one Tis is not surprising since the

Bible (in contrast to most medieval philosophical traditions

both Jewish and Christian) oen depicts God in corporeal

terms

Genesis 126ndash27 suggests that Godrsquos physical likeness is similar to

humanityrsquos but Heiser is correct that the statement does not indicate

that biblical authors viewed humans as gods or that God himself was

once a human However many other texts from the Bible do present a

theomorphic view of humanity Peterson therefore is precisely correct

in stating that ldquothe Latter-day Saint understanding that humans are of

the same genus or species as God is thus clearly biblicalrdquo54 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509ndash28

55 Marc Z Brettler How to Read the Bible (Philadelphia Jewish Publication Society2005) 43ndash44 Hebrew word deleted 56 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 547

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2549

290 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Adam as a Divine Council Member

In addition to associating humanity with the tzelem of God theBible describes the first man as a deified member of the divine council

In the Eden story the Lord took advantage of the wet claylike soil and

ldquoformed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils

the breath of life and man became a living soulrdquo (Genesis 27) In an

important study concerning this imagery Walter Brueggemann has

shown that a biblical connection exists between being raised from the

dust and enthronement ldquoo be taken lsquofrom the dustrsquo means to be

elevated from obscurity to royal office and to return to dust means to

be deprived of that office and returned to obscurityrdquo Imagery such

as that witnessed in 1 Kings 162 supports Brueggemannrsquos interpreta-

tion ldquoForasmuch as I [God] exalted thee [Jehu] out of the dust and

made thee prince over my people Israel rdquo (1 Kings 162) Hence the

notion of the God raising man ldquofrom the dust of the earthrdquo in Genesis

27 in part suggests that Yahweh begins his creative activity by form-

ing a divine king According to Genesis 215 this divine king through

a type of imitatio dei would continue to perform the work of Yahweh

who ldquoplantedrdquo the garden ldquoAnd the Lord God took the man and put

him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep itrdquo In a simi-

lar fashion Mesopotamian kings such as Hammurapi glorified their

efforts through the use of creation and agricultural imageryI encircled [the wall] with a swamp I dug the Euphrates

as far as Sippar (and) made it reach a prosperous quay

I Hammu-rāpi who builds up the land caused Sippar

and Babylon to dwell in peaceful abodes forever What

from [primordial days] no one among the kings had done I

did in a grand fashion for the god Šamaš my lord

57 Walter Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestament-liche Wissenschaf 841 (1972) 1ndash18 58 Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo 2 59 Douglas Frayne Old Babylonian Period (2003ndash1595 BC) (oronto University oforonto Press 1990) 348ndash49

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 291

Te view presented in the Babylonian inscription on the wall

of Sippar reflects the common Near Eastern assumption featured inGenesis 2 of a God king participating in the act of creation from ldquopri-

mordial daysrdquo through structure1048624 As a king Hammurapi assumed

the same role filled by deities who created the universe by giving order

to preexistent chaos In its depiction of Adam as the primordial gar-

dener the Bible relies upon similar imagery

Manrsquos status as the archetypal gardener king in Genesis 2ndash3 con-

tains important parallels with Mesopotamian kingship theory1048580 Sev-eral examples of Mesopotamian iconography feature a depiction of the

tree (or plant) of life over which the king and priests appear pouring

libations In assessing the connection between Mesopotamian kings

and gardeners Geo Widengren cites these statements from the am-

muz text R IV 27 No I

A tamarisk which in the garden has no water to drink

Whose foliage on the plant sends forth no twig

A plant which they water no more in its pot

Whose roots are torn away

A herb which is in the garden has no water to drink

Among the flowers of the garden he sleeps

Among the flowers of the garden he is thrown

According to Widengren ldquothe ree of Life is watered by the kingwho pours out over it the Water of Life which he has in his possession

Te ree of Life constantly needs the Water of Life near which it is

growing in the garden of paradiserdquo983044 Te connection between king

and gardener was widely attested throughout ancient Mesopotamia

60 In his translation Frayne renders the Akkadian word szligi-a-tim as ldquothe pastrdquo Teinscription however clearly relies on creation imagery and I have therefore interpreted

szligiatim as ldquoprimordial daysrdquo in accordance with the information provided in Jeremy BlackAndrew George and Nicholas Postgate A Concise Dictionary o Akkadian (WiesbadenHarrassowitz 2000) 337 61 See Geo Widengren Te King and the ree o Lie in Ancient Near Eastern Reli- gion (Uppsala Uppsala Universitets Aringrsskri 1951) 62 Widengren King and the ree o Lie 15

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2749

292 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Tis portrayal of kingship appears in the birth legend of Sargon

wherein the monarch declaresAkki the waterscooper placed me as his gardenerWhen I was a gardener Ishtar was in love with meTe kingship I exercised during x + 5 years

Tese lines from the tale of Sargon the gardener whom the goddess Ishtarloved seem to provide an especially significant parallel with the biblical view presented in the story of Eden In the words of Nicholas Wyatt ldquotheman in his garden is a symbolic allusion to the king in his sanctuaryrdquo

One of the important connections between humanityrsquos enthrone-ment in the garden and later biblical traditions includes the anointingof an Israelite king in 1 Kings 128ndash40 at the Gihon Spring a rivernamed Gihon was one of the four rivers that flowed out of Eden andround the land of Cush (Genesis 213) Significantly the only otherexplicit reference to the Garden of Eden in the Hebrew Bible appears

in a context that addresses the link between kingship and divinity (seeEzekiel 282ndash13)

Concerning the attestation of biblical rituals that may preserveactual religious rites wherein Israelite kings assumed divinity Wyattargues that

the rituals which transform the status of the earthly kingremoving him from ldquomerely humanrdquo status to that of a sacralfigure to be couched in the form of a narrative about a godcarries with it the hint that the king himself is to be seen astransformed into a god Te enthronement of the king isthus his apotheosis

63 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoInterpreting the Creation and Fall Story in Genesis 2ndash3rdquo Zeit-schrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 931 (1981) 15 64 John van Seters has argued according to the Documentary Hypothesis that the

story of divine kingship in J derives from Babylonian influences and is therefore latepostexilic If P is in part a reaction to the J account then it is difficult to accept vanSetersrsquos dating see John van Seters ldquoTe Creation of Man and the Creation of the KingrdquoZeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 1013 (1989) 333ndash41 65 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinity Some Mythical and Ritual Aspects of WestSemitic Kingshiprdquo Ugarit-Forschungen 31 (1999) 857

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 293

In his exploration of biblical deification Wyatt refers to Psalm 198ndash10

as a possible ritual text transforming the king into a divine beingTe teaching of Yahweh is perfectrestoring the breastTe testimony of Yahweh is certainmaking wise the headTe precepts of Yahweh are uprightrejoicing the heart

Te commandment of Yahweh is puremaking bright the eyesTe speech of Yahweh is ritually purestanding for everTe judgments of Yahweh are truthTey are righteous all togethermore desirable than goldthan much pure goldmore sweet than honeyor the refined combYour servant is indeed illumined by themand in their observance is there great gain

Concerning this possible reference to ritual anointing Wyatt argues

It is true that there is no narrative statement about unc-

tion here oil is not even mentioned But only thus can thesuccessive blessings on various parts of the kingrsquos body beexplained For comparison we should consider the unction ofpriests in Exod 294ndash9 19ndash21 4012ndash5 and Lev 810ndash2 22ndash4where various parts of the priestrsquos body are anointed with oiland blood undoubtedly with some liturgical commentary onthe action such is now narrated in these passages providing

a suitable performative utteranceIf correct Wyattrsquos assessment of Israelite deification proves importantfor an analysis of Adam as divine king in the book of Genesis

66 Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinityrdquo 874ndash75

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2949

294 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

In Genesis chapter 2 Godrsquos initial creative act must be the creation

of man for as a divine king raised ldquofrom the dustrdquo man was specifi-cally formed to assist deity in the creation process God appears as agardener who causes to grow ldquoevery tree that is pleasant to the sightand good for foodrdquo (Genesis 29) Te account declares that the Lordplaced the man in the garden to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo his newly createdoasis (Genesis 215) As a gardener the Lord plants Eden as a gardenerthe Lord mixes the soil to form both man and beast As a gardener the

Lord creates man in his image to perform the work of a God Follow-ing his creation man assumes the role of divine gardenerFrom an ancient Near Eastern perspective the view of Adam as

divine gardener suggests that biblical authors viewed humanity asan earthly extension of the divine council According to the Edenaccount man was immortal (Genesis 217) man had received fromdeity the sacred ldquobreath of liferdquo (Genesis 27) man had been com-missioned to perform the work of a godmdashthat is to till and tend the

divine garden Terefore as an immortal gardener man was alreadyldquolike the godsrdquo prior to partaking of the forbidden fruit

In Mesopotamian myths for example the work of gardening wasassigned to lesser members of the divine council Hence the story ofAtrahasis opens with the following portrayal

When gods were man

Tey did forced labor they bore drudgeryGreat indeed was the drudgery of the godsTe forced labor was heavy the misery too muchTe seven() great Anunna-gods were burdeningTe Igigi-gods with forced labor

Like the account in Genesis the lesser gods of the divine council inAtrahasis were gardeners who did the laborious task of caring for the

canals trees and waterways that sustained the higher gods of the67 For additional examples of Yahweh portrayed in the role of gardener see Num-

bers 246 Psalm 10416 Isaiah 4414 68 Altrahasis II39 1ndash6 translation in Benjamin R Foster Beore the Muses An Anthol-ogy o Akkadian Literature (Bethesda MD CDL 1993) 1159

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 295

assembly Hence Adam as an immortal being clearly reflects the

position of the Igigi in Mesopotamian thought Te questions pre-sented to Job by Eliphaz regarding the primal human seem to share

this notion

Are you the firstborn of the human race

Were you brought forth before the hills

Have you listened in the council of God (Job 157ndash8 NRSV)

As Dexter Callender has observed concerning these questionsldquoTe allusion to the primal human in Job does not give us explicit

details concerning his incorporation into the sacred world It is clear

however that the idea is present in the reference that the primal human

lsquolistenedrsquo in the council of Godrdquo As a member of Godrsquos council man

held a stewardship to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo the deityrsquos garden (Genesis

215) According to the Genesis account when the man and woman

eat from the tree of knowledge God expels the humans from Edenand assigns the cherubim other traditional members of the divine

council to ldquokeeprdquo the garden (Genesis 324) Tis move may suggest

that in biblical thought ldquokeepingrdquo the garden is a task reserved for

members of the divine host As an immortal subordinate assigned an

important council task man however eventually appears in the Gen-

esis account as a being very much like the council deities mentioned

in Psalm 82 who receive the decree of death

I have said Ye are gods and all of you are children of the

most High

But ye shall die like men and fall like one of the princes

(Psalm 826ndash7)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou

shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thoushalt surely die (Genesis 217)

69 Dexter E Callender Jr Adam in Myth and History Ancient Israelite Perspectiveson the Primal Human (Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 2000) 212 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 1949

284 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

that when used attributively with regard to garments days messen-

gers and objects it clearly has a relative meaning something differ-ent yet o the same kind rdquo1048624 Terefore ldquothere is no reason to assumethat in the phrase elohim a˙erim the attribute has a more distinctivemeaningrdquo1048580 When all is said and done the biblical deities like Yah-weh himself were still gods

In addition contrary to Heiserrsquos assertion the simple fact that Elo-him possesses the power to strip the other deities of their immortalityin Psalm 82 does not indicate that these gods are of a different spe-cies than Elohim According to the Psalmistrsquos view Elohim is simplymore powerful than the other gods Analogies from the ancient NearEast illustrate the problematic nature of Heiserrsquos claim In the Babylo-nian story Enuma Elish for instance the primordial mother goddessiamat created the god Qingu as chief deity over iamatrsquos militaryforces As a result of his actions taken against the divine council thedeities of the assembly ldquobound [Qingu] and held him in front of Ea

[and they] imposed the penalty on him and cut off his bloodrdquo983044 Tefact that in Enuma Elish the council could strip Qingu of his immor-tality did not mean that the god Qingu was somehow of a different orlesser divine species In the Sumerian myth of Enlil and Ninlil Enlil(one of the ldquogreat godsrdquo of Mesopotamia) is brought to trial for havingraped the goddess Ninlil As Enlil returned to the city of Nippur hewas arrested by the assembly while walking through the temple court

Te trial commenced immediately In the myth the council pre-sented the verdict that ldquothe sex offender Enlil will leave the townrdquoAccordingly the myth reports that Enlil le Nippur headed towardthe netherworld In his assessment of the story Jacobsen points out

40 Yair Hoffman ldquoTe Conception of lsquoOther Godsrsquo in Deuteronomistic Literaturerdquoin Concepts o the Other in Near Eastern Religions ed Ilai Alon Ithamar Gruenwald andItamar Singer (Leiden Brill 1994) 107 emphasis added 41 Hoffman ldquoConception of Other Godsrdquo 107

42 As cited in Dalley Myths rom Mesopotamia 261 43 For a summary of the myth see Gwendolyn Leick A Dictionary o Ancient NearEastern Mythology (London Routledge 1998) 47ndash48 for a translation see TorkildJacobsen Te Harps Tat Once Sumerian Poetry in ranslation (New Haven YaleUniversity Press 1987) 167ndash80 44 Jacobsen Harps 174

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 285

that Enlilrsquos descent to Hades may indicate that the high god in Meso-

potamian mythology was originally sentenced to death As notedby James Ackerman in his dissertation concerning Psalm 82 thesetypes of judgment scenes in which the council determines that godswill die like mortals carry important implications for interpreting thecultural background for the biblical text Contrary to Heiserrsquos inter-pretation none of these stories indicate that the dying gods were of adifferent species or order than the gods who issued the sentence

Near Eastern traditions oen place considerable emphasis on thedying-god motif In no sense however are these dying godsmdashevenwhen resurrectedmdashsomehow depicted as a lesser species Heiserrsquos con-fusion concerning the implications of a biblical statement that Godissued a judgment of death to the deities of the divine council illus-trates the fundamental need for biblical scholars to pursue Assyriol-ogy in connection with their efforts to interpret the Hebrew Bible

Also contrary to Heiserrsquos suggestion the punishment meted out

to usurpers in Near Eastern council stories never indicates that thecriminals derived from some sort of exceptional species Te storyof Athtar from ancient Canaan for instance presents the traditionof Athtarrsquos descent to the underworld following the deityrsquos ascensionto the throne of Baal Te details involved in Athtarrsquos story containimportant thematic elements depicted in ancient Near Eastern storiesof cosmic revolt Athtar seems to share some semblance with Baalrsquos

mortal enemy Mot or ldquoDeathrdquo into whom Baal himself descendsHence Hugh Page notes that Athtarrsquos ldquodescent to the underworld implies that on some level Athtar has placed himself in proxim-ity to or relationship with the only god that Baal proves incapable

45 Torkild Jacobsen ldquoAn Ancient Mesopotamian rial for Homiciderdquo in owardthe Image o ammuz and Other Essays on Mesopotamian History and Culture ed Wil-liam L Moran (Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1970) 207 first published inStudia Biblica et Orientalia vol 3 of Analecta Biblica et Orientalia XII (Rome Pontificio

Istituto Biblico 1959) 130ndash50 46 See James S Ackerman ldquoAn Exegetical Study of Psalm 82rdquo (PhD diss HarvardUniversity 1966) 186ndash93 47 For a recent survey of the issue which includes a survey of previous assessmentssee ryggve N D Mettinger Te Riddle o Resurrection ldquoDying and Rising Godsrdquo in the Ancient Near East (Stockholm Almqvist amp Wiksell 2001)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2149

286 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of defeatingrdquo Athtarrsquos assumption of the throne of Baal followed

by his descent to the underworld indicates that this portion of theBaal cycle from ancient Canaan fits the general category of the cosmic

revolt genre witnessed in texts such as Abraham 3 and Psalm 82

1 Kindly El the Compassionate answers

2 ldquoOne so small cannot race

3 with Baal cannot handle the lance

4 with Daganrsquos son when they test one anotherrdquo

5 Lady Athirat of the Sea answers 6 ldquoLet us enthrone Athtar the Strong

7 Let Athtar the Strong be kingrdquo

8 Ten Athtar the Strong

9 ascended the summit of Sapan

10 He sat upon the throne of Mightiest Baal

11 His feet would not reach its footstool

12 His head would not reach its top 13 Athtar the Strong answered

14 ldquoI cannot rule on the summit of Sapanrdquo

15 Athtar the Strong descended

16 He descended from the throne of Mightiest Baal

17 And he ruled over the underworld god of all of it

18 drew in barrels

19 drew in jars (KU 1649ndash67 translation)

Te fact that Athtar the Strong experienced a type of ldquodeathrdquo in which

he ldquoruled over the underworldrdquo following his descent from Baalrsquos

throne does not suggest that Athtar was a ldquobeing species-uniquerdquo from

the other deities any more than Inanna or Ishtar the Mesopotamian

goddesses who experienced a type of death in the underworld were of

a different species than the gods Ea Enki Marduk and so forth48 Hugh R Page Jr Te Myth o Cosmic Rebellion A Study o Its Reflexes in Ugaritic

and Biblical Literature (Leiden Brill 1996) 92 Pagersquos views concerning the Athtar mythhave been criticized by Gregorio del Olmo Lete ldquoIn Search of the Canaanite Luciferrdquo Aula Orientalis 19 (2001) 125ndash32

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 287

Still in his efforts to present Yahweh as a being species-unique

Heiser correctly draws attention to the other gods of the council whoare commanded to worship Yahweh In his analysis he focuses uponthe call given to the gods in Psalm 291ndash2 ldquoAscribe to Yahweh O sons ofGod ascribe to Yahweh glory and strength Ascribe to Yahweh the gloryof his name worship Yahweh in the splendor of holinessrdquo (as quotedon p 256) While Heiserrsquos observations certainly illustrate that biblicalauthors viewed their deity as uniquemdashthat is exceptionalmdashthroughout

Near Eastern tradition lesser gods regularly appear in a position inwhich they offer praise service and devotion to the higher gods of thecouncil Richard J Clifford explains that in the Phoenician view of theassembly ldquoas elsewhere in the ancient Near East the assemblies are pic-tured as subordinate to individual gods although the assemblyrsquos con-sent seems necessary for important decisionsrdquo Simply because ancienttextsmdashincluding the Biblemdashdepict the members of the assemblies asldquosubordinate to individual godsrdquo this in no way implies that the higher

deities somehow belonged to a separate species Ancient Near Easterntexts such as Mursilirsquos Hymn and Prayer to the Sun-goddess o Arinna (CH 376A) establish the fact that Near Eastern peoples believed thatgods of the same species paid homage to higher deities in a way compa-rable to the biblical view

You O Sun-goddess of Arinna are honored goddess Your

name is honored among names and your divinity is honoredamong gods Furthermore among the gods you are the mosthonored and the greatest Tere is no other god more honoredor greater than you You are the lord of just judgment Youcontrol the kingship of heaven and earth1048624

Holding the position ldquomost honoredrdquo among the gods did not estab-lish Arinna as species-unique Arinna was simply the god before

whom from the authorrsquos perspective the other gods would regularly49 Richard J Clifford ldquoPhoenician Religionrdquo Bulletin o the American Schools o

Oriental Research 279 (1990) 57 50 As cited in Itamar Singer Hittite Prayers (Atlanta Society of Biblical Literature2002) 51

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2349

288 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquofall downrdquo1048580 For the ancients the Near Eastern view of the divine

court clearly reflected or were expressed in terms of earthly realityTerefore just as the high king before whom other humans paid hom-age was still a human being so the god to whom other deities paidhomage was still a god matching in species For biblical authors Yah-weh stood at the head of the hierarchy in Israelite thought Yahwehwas unique as the God of gods but he was not unique in his divinityFrom a biblical perspective Yahweh even shared this divinity withhumanity

Humans as Teomorphic Beings

In his discussion concerning the biblical view regarding theomor-phic humans Peterson draws attention to Paulrsquos New estament ser-mon presented in Acts 1728ndash29

For in him we live and move and have our being as

certain also of your own poets have said For we are also hisoffspring

Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God we oughtnot to think that the Godhead is like unto gold or silver orstone graven by art and manrsquos device

Peterson in part argues for a biblical connection between God andhumanity based on the fact that ldquothe word rendered lsquooffspringrsquo by the

King James translators is the Greek genos which is cognate with theLatin genus and means lsquofamilyrsquo or lsquoracersquo or lsquokindrsquo or even and mostespecially interesting lsquodescendants of a common ancestorrsquo rdquo983044 ForLatter-day Saints human beings are literally the offspring of God andtherefore intrinsically theomorphic Part of the strength of Petersonrsquosessay lies in his recognition that like Latter-day Saints biblical authorsregularly blur the distinction between humanity and divine beings

Not only does Peterson draw attention to the prophetic interactionwith the council as support for his thesis but he also places consider-

51 Singer Hittite Prayers 51 52 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 542ndash43 53 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 289

able emphasis upon the deified dead in the Hebrew Bible and the early

Christian teaching regarding deification Heiser notwithstandingPetersonrsquos evidence rejects the idea that a genus equation of God and

humankind appears in the Bible

For his criticisms of Petersonrsquos views Heiser places considerable

weight on the notion that ldquothe concept of the image of God does not

advance the idea that there is a genus equation of God and human-

kind or that God was once a manrdquo (p 224) On some levels Heiserrsquos

point concerning the word tzelem or ldquoimagerdquo in Genesis 126ndash27is correct Concerning this controversial term Marc Z Brettler has

recently explained

Te word tzelem (ldquoimagerdquo) elsewhere always refers to a

physical representation For example the Book of Ezekiel

uses tzelem when it refers to ldquomen sculptured upon the walls

figures of Chaldeans drawn in vermilionrdquo (2314) or when it

accuses Israel of fornicating with ldquophallic imagesrdquo (1617) Teword oen refers to idols (eg Num 3352 Ezek 720 Amos

526 2 Chron 2317) It always signifies a concrete entity

rather than an abstract one Tis is not surprising since the

Bible (in contrast to most medieval philosophical traditions

both Jewish and Christian) oen depicts God in corporeal

terms

Genesis 126ndash27 suggests that Godrsquos physical likeness is similar to

humanityrsquos but Heiser is correct that the statement does not indicate

that biblical authors viewed humans as gods or that God himself was

once a human However many other texts from the Bible do present a

theomorphic view of humanity Peterson therefore is precisely correct

in stating that ldquothe Latter-day Saint understanding that humans are of

the same genus or species as God is thus clearly biblicalrdquo54 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509ndash28

55 Marc Z Brettler How to Read the Bible (Philadelphia Jewish Publication Society2005) 43ndash44 Hebrew word deleted 56 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 547

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2549

290 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Adam as a Divine Council Member

In addition to associating humanity with the tzelem of God theBible describes the first man as a deified member of the divine council

In the Eden story the Lord took advantage of the wet claylike soil and

ldquoformed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils

the breath of life and man became a living soulrdquo (Genesis 27) In an

important study concerning this imagery Walter Brueggemann has

shown that a biblical connection exists between being raised from the

dust and enthronement ldquoo be taken lsquofrom the dustrsquo means to be

elevated from obscurity to royal office and to return to dust means to

be deprived of that office and returned to obscurityrdquo Imagery such

as that witnessed in 1 Kings 162 supports Brueggemannrsquos interpreta-

tion ldquoForasmuch as I [God] exalted thee [Jehu] out of the dust and

made thee prince over my people Israel rdquo (1 Kings 162) Hence the

notion of the God raising man ldquofrom the dust of the earthrdquo in Genesis

27 in part suggests that Yahweh begins his creative activity by form-

ing a divine king According to Genesis 215 this divine king through

a type of imitatio dei would continue to perform the work of Yahweh

who ldquoplantedrdquo the garden ldquoAnd the Lord God took the man and put

him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep itrdquo In a simi-

lar fashion Mesopotamian kings such as Hammurapi glorified their

efforts through the use of creation and agricultural imageryI encircled [the wall] with a swamp I dug the Euphrates

as far as Sippar (and) made it reach a prosperous quay

I Hammu-rāpi who builds up the land caused Sippar

and Babylon to dwell in peaceful abodes forever What

from [primordial days] no one among the kings had done I

did in a grand fashion for the god Šamaš my lord

57 Walter Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestament-liche Wissenschaf 841 (1972) 1ndash18 58 Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo 2 59 Douglas Frayne Old Babylonian Period (2003ndash1595 BC) (oronto University oforonto Press 1990) 348ndash49

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 291

Te view presented in the Babylonian inscription on the wall

of Sippar reflects the common Near Eastern assumption featured inGenesis 2 of a God king participating in the act of creation from ldquopri-

mordial daysrdquo through structure1048624 As a king Hammurapi assumed

the same role filled by deities who created the universe by giving order

to preexistent chaos In its depiction of Adam as the primordial gar-

dener the Bible relies upon similar imagery

Manrsquos status as the archetypal gardener king in Genesis 2ndash3 con-

tains important parallels with Mesopotamian kingship theory1048580 Sev-eral examples of Mesopotamian iconography feature a depiction of the

tree (or plant) of life over which the king and priests appear pouring

libations In assessing the connection between Mesopotamian kings

and gardeners Geo Widengren cites these statements from the am-

muz text R IV 27 No I

A tamarisk which in the garden has no water to drink

Whose foliage on the plant sends forth no twig

A plant which they water no more in its pot

Whose roots are torn away

A herb which is in the garden has no water to drink

Among the flowers of the garden he sleeps

Among the flowers of the garden he is thrown

According to Widengren ldquothe ree of Life is watered by the kingwho pours out over it the Water of Life which he has in his possession

Te ree of Life constantly needs the Water of Life near which it is

growing in the garden of paradiserdquo983044 Te connection between king

and gardener was widely attested throughout ancient Mesopotamia

60 In his translation Frayne renders the Akkadian word szligi-a-tim as ldquothe pastrdquo Teinscription however clearly relies on creation imagery and I have therefore interpreted

szligiatim as ldquoprimordial daysrdquo in accordance with the information provided in Jeremy BlackAndrew George and Nicholas Postgate A Concise Dictionary o Akkadian (WiesbadenHarrassowitz 2000) 337 61 See Geo Widengren Te King and the ree o Lie in Ancient Near Eastern Reli- gion (Uppsala Uppsala Universitets Aringrsskri 1951) 62 Widengren King and the ree o Lie 15

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2749

292 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Tis portrayal of kingship appears in the birth legend of Sargon

wherein the monarch declaresAkki the waterscooper placed me as his gardenerWhen I was a gardener Ishtar was in love with meTe kingship I exercised during x + 5 years

Tese lines from the tale of Sargon the gardener whom the goddess Ishtarloved seem to provide an especially significant parallel with the biblical view presented in the story of Eden In the words of Nicholas Wyatt ldquotheman in his garden is a symbolic allusion to the king in his sanctuaryrdquo

One of the important connections between humanityrsquos enthrone-ment in the garden and later biblical traditions includes the anointingof an Israelite king in 1 Kings 128ndash40 at the Gihon Spring a rivernamed Gihon was one of the four rivers that flowed out of Eden andround the land of Cush (Genesis 213) Significantly the only otherexplicit reference to the Garden of Eden in the Hebrew Bible appears

in a context that addresses the link between kingship and divinity (seeEzekiel 282ndash13)

Concerning the attestation of biblical rituals that may preserveactual religious rites wherein Israelite kings assumed divinity Wyattargues that

the rituals which transform the status of the earthly kingremoving him from ldquomerely humanrdquo status to that of a sacralfigure to be couched in the form of a narrative about a godcarries with it the hint that the king himself is to be seen astransformed into a god Te enthronement of the king isthus his apotheosis

63 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoInterpreting the Creation and Fall Story in Genesis 2ndash3rdquo Zeit-schrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 931 (1981) 15 64 John van Seters has argued according to the Documentary Hypothesis that the

story of divine kingship in J derives from Babylonian influences and is therefore latepostexilic If P is in part a reaction to the J account then it is difficult to accept vanSetersrsquos dating see John van Seters ldquoTe Creation of Man and the Creation of the KingrdquoZeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 1013 (1989) 333ndash41 65 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinity Some Mythical and Ritual Aspects of WestSemitic Kingshiprdquo Ugarit-Forschungen 31 (1999) 857

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 293

In his exploration of biblical deification Wyatt refers to Psalm 198ndash10

as a possible ritual text transforming the king into a divine beingTe teaching of Yahweh is perfectrestoring the breastTe testimony of Yahweh is certainmaking wise the headTe precepts of Yahweh are uprightrejoicing the heart

Te commandment of Yahweh is puremaking bright the eyesTe speech of Yahweh is ritually purestanding for everTe judgments of Yahweh are truthTey are righteous all togethermore desirable than goldthan much pure goldmore sweet than honeyor the refined combYour servant is indeed illumined by themand in their observance is there great gain

Concerning this possible reference to ritual anointing Wyatt argues

It is true that there is no narrative statement about unc-

tion here oil is not even mentioned But only thus can thesuccessive blessings on various parts of the kingrsquos body beexplained For comparison we should consider the unction ofpriests in Exod 294ndash9 19ndash21 4012ndash5 and Lev 810ndash2 22ndash4where various parts of the priestrsquos body are anointed with oiland blood undoubtedly with some liturgical commentary onthe action such is now narrated in these passages providing

a suitable performative utteranceIf correct Wyattrsquos assessment of Israelite deification proves importantfor an analysis of Adam as divine king in the book of Genesis

66 Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinityrdquo 874ndash75

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2949

294 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

In Genesis chapter 2 Godrsquos initial creative act must be the creation

of man for as a divine king raised ldquofrom the dustrdquo man was specifi-cally formed to assist deity in the creation process God appears as agardener who causes to grow ldquoevery tree that is pleasant to the sightand good for foodrdquo (Genesis 29) Te account declares that the Lordplaced the man in the garden to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo his newly createdoasis (Genesis 215) As a gardener the Lord plants Eden as a gardenerthe Lord mixes the soil to form both man and beast As a gardener the

Lord creates man in his image to perform the work of a God Follow-ing his creation man assumes the role of divine gardenerFrom an ancient Near Eastern perspective the view of Adam as

divine gardener suggests that biblical authors viewed humanity asan earthly extension of the divine council According to the Edenaccount man was immortal (Genesis 217) man had received fromdeity the sacred ldquobreath of liferdquo (Genesis 27) man had been com-missioned to perform the work of a godmdashthat is to till and tend the

divine garden Terefore as an immortal gardener man was alreadyldquolike the godsrdquo prior to partaking of the forbidden fruit

In Mesopotamian myths for example the work of gardening wasassigned to lesser members of the divine council Hence the story ofAtrahasis opens with the following portrayal

When gods were man

Tey did forced labor they bore drudgeryGreat indeed was the drudgery of the godsTe forced labor was heavy the misery too muchTe seven() great Anunna-gods were burdeningTe Igigi-gods with forced labor

Like the account in Genesis the lesser gods of the divine council inAtrahasis were gardeners who did the laborious task of caring for the

canals trees and waterways that sustained the higher gods of the67 For additional examples of Yahweh portrayed in the role of gardener see Num-

bers 246 Psalm 10416 Isaiah 4414 68 Altrahasis II39 1ndash6 translation in Benjamin R Foster Beore the Muses An Anthol-ogy o Akkadian Literature (Bethesda MD CDL 1993) 1159

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 295

assembly Hence Adam as an immortal being clearly reflects the

position of the Igigi in Mesopotamian thought Te questions pre-sented to Job by Eliphaz regarding the primal human seem to share

this notion

Are you the firstborn of the human race

Were you brought forth before the hills

Have you listened in the council of God (Job 157ndash8 NRSV)

As Dexter Callender has observed concerning these questionsldquoTe allusion to the primal human in Job does not give us explicit

details concerning his incorporation into the sacred world It is clear

however that the idea is present in the reference that the primal human

lsquolistenedrsquo in the council of Godrdquo As a member of Godrsquos council man

held a stewardship to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo the deityrsquos garden (Genesis

215) According to the Genesis account when the man and woman

eat from the tree of knowledge God expels the humans from Edenand assigns the cherubim other traditional members of the divine

council to ldquokeeprdquo the garden (Genesis 324) Tis move may suggest

that in biblical thought ldquokeepingrdquo the garden is a task reserved for

members of the divine host As an immortal subordinate assigned an

important council task man however eventually appears in the Gen-

esis account as a being very much like the council deities mentioned

in Psalm 82 who receive the decree of death

I have said Ye are gods and all of you are children of the

most High

But ye shall die like men and fall like one of the princes

(Psalm 826ndash7)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou

shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thoushalt surely die (Genesis 217)

69 Dexter E Callender Jr Adam in Myth and History Ancient Israelite Perspectiveson the Primal Human (Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 2000) 212 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 285

that Enlilrsquos descent to Hades may indicate that the high god in Meso-

potamian mythology was originally sentenced to death As notedby James Ackerman in his dissertation concerning Psalm 82 thesetypes of judgment scenes in which the council determines that godswill die like mortals carry important implications for interpreting thecultural background for the biblical text Contrary to Heiserrsquos inter-pretation none of these stories indicate that the dying gods were of adifferent species or order than the gods who issued the sentence

Near Eastern traditions oen place considerable emphasis on thedying-god motif In no sense however are these dying godsmdashevenwhen resurrectedmdashsomehow depicted as a lesser species Heiserrsquos con-fusion concerning the implications of a biblical statement that Godissued a judgment of death to the deities of the divine council illus-trates the fundamental need for biblical scholars to pursue Assyriol-ogy in connection with their efforts to interpret the Hebrew Bible

Also contrary to Heiserrsquos suggestion the punishment meted out

to usurpers in Near Eastern council stories never indicates that thecriminals derived from some sort of exceptional species Te storyof Athtar from ancient Canaan for instance presents the traditionof Athtarrsquos descent to the underworld following the deityrsquos ascensionto the throne of Baal Te details involved in Athtarrsquos story containimportant thematic elements depicted in ancient Near Eastern storiesof cosmic revolt Athtar seems to share some semblance with Baalrsquos

mortal enemy Mot or ldquoDeathrdquo into whom Baal himself descendsHence Hugh Page notes that Athtarrsquos ldquodescent to the underworld implies that on some level Athtar has placed himself in proxim-ity to or relationship with the only god that Baal proves incapable

45 Torkild Jacobsen ldquoAn Ancient Mesopotamian rial for Homiciderdquo in owardthe Image o ammuz and Other Essays on Mesopotamian History and Culture ed Wil-liam L Moran (Cambridge MA Harvard University Press 1970) 207 first published inStudia Biblica et Orientalia vol 3 of Analecta Biblica et Orientalia XII (Rome Pontificio

Istituto Biblico 1959) 130ndash50 46 See James S Ackerman ldquoAn Exegetical Study of Psalm 82rdquo (PhD diss HarvardUniversity 1966) 186ndash93 47 For a recent survey of the issue which includes a survey of previous assessmentssee ryggve N D Mettinger Te Riddle o Resurrection ldquoDying and Rising Godsrdquo in the Ancient Near East (Stockholm Almqvist amp Wiksell 2001)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2149

286 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of defeatingrdquo Athtarrsquos assumption of the throne of Baal followed

by his descent to the underworld indicates that this portion of theBaal cycle from ancient Canaan fits the general category of the cosmic

revolt genre witnessed in texts such as Abraham 3 and Psalm 82

1 Kindly El the Compassionate answers

2 ldquoOne so small cannot race

3 with Baal cannot handle the lance

4 with Daganrsquos son when they test one anotherrdquo

5 Lady Athirat of the Sea answers 6 ldquoLet us enthrone Athtar the Strong

7 Let Athtar the Strong be kingrdquo

8 Ten Athtar the Strong

9 ascended the summit of Sapan

10 He sat upon the throne of Mightiest Baal

11 His feet would not reach its footstool

12 His head would not reach its top 13 Athtar the Strong answered

14 ldquoI cannot rule on the summit of Sapanrdquo

15 Athtar the Strong descended

16 He descended from the throne of Mightiest Baal

17 And he ruled over the underworld god of all of it

18 drew in barrels

19 drew in jars (KU 1649ndash67 translation)

Te fact that Athtar the Strong experienced a type of ldquodeathrdquo in which

he ldquoruled over the underworldrdquo following his descent from Baalrsquos

throne does not suggest that Athtar was a ldquobeing species-uniquerdquo from

the other deities any more than Inanna or Ishtar the Mesopotamian

goddesses who experienced a type of death in the underworld were of

a different species than the gods Ea Enki Marduk and so forth48 Hugh R Page Jr Te Myth o Cosmic Rebellion A Study o Its Reflexes in Ugaritic

and Biblical Literature (Leiden Brill 1996) 92 Pagersquos views concerning the Athtar mythhave been criticized by Gregorio del Olmo Lete ldquoIn Search of the Canaanite Luciferrdquo Aula Orientalis 19 (2001) 125ndash32

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 287

Still in his efforts to present Yahweh as a being species-unique

Heiser correctly draws attention to the other gods of the council whoare commanded to worship Yahweh In his analysis he focuses uponthe call given to the gods in Psalm 291ndash2 ldquoAscribe to Yahweh O sons ofGod ascribe to Yahweh glory and strength Ascribe to Yahweh the gloryof his name worship Yahweh in the splendor of holinessrdquo (as quotedon p 256) While Heiserrsquos observations certainly illustrate that biblicalauthors viewed their deity as uniquemdashthat is exceptionalmdashthroughout

Near Eastern tradition lesser gods regularly appear in a position inwhich they offer praise service and devotion to the higher gods of thecouncil Richard J Clifford explains that in the Phoenician view of theassembly ldquoas elsewhere in the ancient Near East the assemblies are pic-tured as subordinate to individual gods although the assemblyrsquos con-sent seems necessary for important decisionsrdquo Simply because ancienttextsmdashincluding the Biblemdashdepict the members of the assemblies asldquosubordinate to individual godsrdquo this in no way implies that the higher

deities somehow belonged to a separate species Ancient Near Easterntexts such as Mursilirsquos Hymn and Prayer to the Sun-goddess o Arinna (CH 376A) establish the fact that Near Eastern peoples believed thatgods of the same species paid homage to higher deities in a way compa-rable to the biblical view

You O Sun-goddess of Arinna are honored goddess Your

name is honored among names and your divinity is honoredamong gods Furthermore among the gods you are the mosthonored and the greatest Tere is no other god more honoredor greater than you You are the lord of just judgment Youcontrol the kingship of heaven and earth1048624

Holding the position ldquomost honoredrdquo among the gods did not estab-lish Arinna as species-unique Arinna was simply the god before

whom from the authorrsquos perspective the other gods would regularly49 Richard J Clifford ldquoPhoenician Religionrdquo Bulletin o the American Schools o

Oriental Research 279 (1990) 57 50 As cited in Itamar Singer Hittite Prayers (Atlanta Society of Biblical Literature2002) 51

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2349

288 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquofall downrdquo1048580 For the ancients the Near Eastern view of the divine

court clearly reflected or were expressed in terms of earthly realityTerefore just as the high king before whom other humans paid hom-age was still a human being so the god to whom other deities paidhomage was still a god matching in species For biblical authors Yah-weh stood at the head of the hierarchy in Israelite thought Yahwehwas unique as the God of gods but he was not unique in his divinityFrom a biblical perspective Yahweh even shared this divinity withhumanity

Humans as Teomorphic Beings

In his discussion concerning the biblical view regarding theomor-phic humans Peterson draws attention to Paulrsquos New estament ser-mon presented in Acts 1728ndash29

For in him we live and move and have our being as

certain also of your own poets have said For we are also hisoffspring

Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God we oughtnot to think that the Godhead is like unto gold or silver orstone graven by art and manrsquos device

Peterson in part argues for a biblical connection between God andhumanity based on the fact that ldquothe word rendered lsquooffspringrsquo by the

King James translators is the Greek genos which is cognate with theLatin genus and means lsquofamilyrsquo or lsquoracersquo or lsquokindrsquo or even and mostespecially interesting lsquodescendants of a common ancestorrsquo rdquo983044 ForLatter-day Saints human beings are literally the offspring of God andtherefore intrinsically theomorphic Part of the strength of Petersonrsquosessay lies in his recognition that like Latter-day Saints biblical authorsregularly blur the distinction between humanity and divine beings

Not only does Peterson draw attention to the prophetic interactionwith the council as support for his thesis but he also places consider-

51 Singer Hittite Prayers 51 52 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 542ndash43 53 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 289

able emphasis upon the deified dead in the Hebrew Bible and the early

Christian teaching regarding deification Heiser notwithstandingPetersonrsquos evidence rejects the idea that a genus equation of God and

humankind appears in the Bible

For his criticisms of Petersonrsquos views Heiser places considerable

weight on the notion that ldquothe concept of the image of God does not

advance the idea that there is a genus equation of God and human-

kind or that God was once a manrdquo (p 224) On some levels Heiserrsquos

point concerning the word tzelem or ldquoimagerdquo in Genesis 126ndash27is correct Concerning this controversial term Marc Z Brettler has

recently explained

Te word tzelem (ldquoimagerdquo) elsewhere always refers to a

physical representation For example the Book of Ezekiel

uses tzelem when it refers to ldquomen sculptured upon the walls

figures of Chaldeans drawn in vermilionrdquo (2314) or when it

accuses Israel of fornicating with ldquophallic imagesrdquo (1617) Teword oen refers to idols (eg Num 3352 Ezek 720 Amos

526 2 Chron 2317) It always signifies a concrete entity

rather than an abstract one Tis is not surprising since the

Bible (in contrast to most medieval philosophical traditions

both Jewish and Christian) oen depicts God in corporeal

terms

Genesis 126ndash27 suggests that Godrsquos physical likeness is similar to

humanityrsquos but Heiser is correct that the statement does not indicate

that biblical authors viewed humans as gods or that God himself was

once a human However many other texts from the Bible do present a

theomorphic view of humanity Peterson therefore is precisely correct

in stating that ldquothe Latter-day Saint understanding that humans are of

the same genus or species as God is thus clearly biblicalrdquo54 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509ndash28

55 Marc Z Brettler How to Read the Bible (Philadelphia Jewish Publication Society2005) 43ndash44 Hebrew word deleted 56 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 547

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2549

290 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Adam as a Divine Council Member

In addition to associating humanity with the tzelem of God theBible describes the first man as a deified member of the divine council

In the Eden story the Lord took advantage of the wet claylike soil and

ldquoformed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils

the breath of life and man became a living soulrdquo (Genesis 27) In an

important study concerning this imagery Walter Brueggemann has

shown that a biblical connection exists between being raised from the

dust and enthronement ldquoo be taken lsquofrom the dustrsquo means to be

elevated from obscurity to royal office and to return to dust means to

be deprived of that office and returned to obscurityrdquo Imagery such

as that witnessed in 1 Kings 162 supports Brueggemannrsquos interpreta-

tion ldquoForasmuch as I [God] exalted thee [Jehu] out of the dust and

made thee prince over my people Israel rdquo (1 Kings 162) Hence the

notion of the God raising man ldquofrom the dust of the earthrdquo in Genesis

27 in part suggests that Yahweh begins his creative activity by form-

ing a divine king According to Genesis 215 this divine king through

a type of imitatio dei would continue to perform the work of Yahweh

who ldquoplantedrdquo the garden ldquoAnd the Lord God took the man and put

him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep itrdquo In a simi-

lar fashion Mesopotamian kings such as Hammurapi glorified their

efforts through the use of creation and agricultural imageryI encircled [the wall] with a swamp I dug the Euphrates

as far as Sippar (and) made it reach a prosperous quay

I Hammu-rāpi who builds up the land caused Sippar

and Babylon to dwell in peaceful abodes forever What

from [primordial days] no one among the kings had done I

did in a grand fashion for the god Šamaš my lord

57 Walter Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestament-liche Wissenschaf 841 (1972) 1ndash18 58 Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo 2 59 Douglas Frayne Old Babylonian Period (2003ndash1595 BC) (oronto University oforonto Press 1990) 348ndash49

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 291

Te view presented in the Babylonian inscription on the wall

of Sippar reflects the common Near Eastern assumption featured inGenesis 2 of a God king participating in the act of creation from ldquopri-

mordial daysrdquo through structure1048624 As a king Hammurapi assumed

the same role filled by deities who created the universe by giving order

to preexistent chaos In its depiction of Adam as the primordial gar-

dener the Bible relies upon similar imagery

Manrsquos status as the archetypal gardener king in Genesis 2ndash3 con-

tains important parallels with Mesopotamian kingship theory1048580 Sev-eral examples of Mesopotamian iconography feature a depiction of the

tree (or plant) of life over which the king and priests appear pouring

libations In assessing the connection between Mesopotamian kings

and gardeners Geo Widengren cites these statements from the am-

muz text R IV 27 No I

A tamarisk which in the garden has no water to drink

Whose foliage on the plant sends forth no twig

A plant which they water no more in its pot

Whose roots are torn away

A herb which is in the garden has no water to drink

Among the flowers of the garden he sleeps

Among the flowers of the garden he is thrown

According to Widengren ldquothe ree of Life is watered by the kingwho pours out over it the Water of Life which he has in his possession

Te ree of Life constantly needs the Water of Life near which it is

growing in the garden of paradiserdquo983044 Te connection between king

and gardener was widely attested throughout ancient Mesopotamia

60 In his translation Frayne renders the Akkadian word szligi-a-tim as ldquothe pastrdquo Teinscription however clearly relies on creation imagery and I have therefore interpreted

szligiatim as ldquoprimordial daysrdquo in accordance with the information provided in Jeremy BlackAndrew George and Nicholas Postgate A Concise Dictionary o Akkadian (WiesbadenHarrassowitz 2000) 337 61 See Geo Widengren Te King and the ree o Lie in Ancient Near Eastern Reli- gion (Uppsala Uppsala Universitets Aringrsskri 1951) 62 Widengren King and the ree o Lie 15

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2749

292 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Tis portrayal of kingship appears in the birth legend of Sargon

wherein the monarch declaresAkki the waterscooper placed me as his gardenerWhen I was a gardener Ishtar was in love with meTe kingship I exercised during x + 5 years

Tese lines from the tale of Sargon the gardener whom the goddess Ishtarloved seem to provide an especially significant parallel with the biblical view presented in the story of Eden In the words of Nicholas Wyatt ldquotheman in his garden is a symbolic allusion to the king in his sanctuaryrdquo

One of the important connections between humanityrsquos enthrone-ment in the garden and later biblical traditions includes the anointingof an Israelite king in 1 Kings 128ndash40 at the Gihon Spring a rivernamed Gihon was one of the four rivers that flowed out of Eden andround the land of Cush (Genesis 213) Significantly the only otherexplicit reference to the Garden of Eden in the Hebrew Bible appears

in a context that addresses the link between kingship and divinity (seeEzekiel 282ndash13)

Concerning the attestation of biblical rituals that may preserveactual religious rites wherein Israelite kings assumed divinity Wyattargues that

the rituals which transform the status of the earthly kingremoving him from ldquomerely humanrdquo status to that of a sacralfigure to be couched in the form of a narrative about a godcarries with it the hint that the king himself is to be seen astransformed into a god Te enthronement of the king isthus his apotheosis

63 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoInterpreting the Creation and Fall Story in Genesis 2ndash3rdquo Zeit-schrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 931 (1981) 15 64 John van Seters has argued according to the Documentary Hypothesis that the

story of divine kingship in J derives from Babylonian influences and is therefore latepostexilic If P is in part a reaction to the J account then it is difficult to accept vanSetersrsquos dating see John van Seters ldquoTe Creation of Man and the Creation of the KingrdquoZeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 1013 (1989) 333ndash41 65 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinity Some Mythical and Ritual Aspects of WestSemitic Kingshiprdquo Ugarit-Forschungen 31 (1999) 857

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 293

In his exploration of biblical deification Wyatt refers to Psalm 198ndash10

as a possible ritual text transforming the king into a divine beingTe teaching of Yahweh is perfectrestoring the breastTe testimony of Yahweh is certainmaking wise the headTe precepts of Yahweh are uprightrejoicing the heart

Te commandment of Yahweh is puremaking bright the eyesTe speech of Yahweh is ritually purestanding for everTe judgments of Yahweh are truthTey are righteous all togethermore desirable than goldthan much pure goldmore sweet than honeyor the refined combYour servant is indeed illumined by themand in their observance is there great gain

Concerning this possible reference to ritual anointing Wyatt argues

It is true that there is no narrative statement about unc-

tion here oil is not even mentioned But only thus can thesuccessive blessings on various parts of the kingrsquos body beexplained For comparison we should consider the unction ofpriests in Exod 294ndash9 19ndash21 4012ndash5 and Lev 810ndash2 22ndash4where various parts of the priestrsquos body are anointed with oiland blood undoubtedly with some liturgical commentary onthe action such is now narrated in these passages providing

a suitable performative utteranceIf correct Wyattrsquos assessment of Israelite deification proves importantfor an analysis of Adam as divine king in the book of Genesis

66 Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinityrdquo 874ndash75

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2949

294 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

In Genesis chapter 2 Godrsquos initial creative act must be the creation

of man for as a divine king raised ldquofrom the dustrdquo man was specifi-cally formed to assist deity in the creation process God appears as agardener who causes to grow ldquoevery tree that is pleasant to the sightand good for foodrdquo (Genesis 29) Te account declares that the Lordplaced the man in the garden to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo his newly createdoasis (Genesis 215) As a gardener the Lord plants Eden as a gardenerthe Lord mixes the soil to form both man and beast As a gardener the

Lord creates man in his image to perform the work of a God Follow-ing his creation man assumes the role of divine gardenerFrom an ancient Near Eastern perspective the view of Adam as

divine gardener suggests that biblical authors viewed humanity asan earthly extension of the divine council According to the Edenaccount man was immortal (Genesis 217) man had received fromdeity the sacred ldquobreath of liferdquo (Genesis 27) man had been com-missioned to perform the work of a godmdashthat is to till and tend the

divine garden Terefore as an immortal gardener man was alreadyldquolike the godsrdquo prior to partaking of the forbidden fruit

In Mesopotamian myths for example the work of gardening wasassigned to lesser members of the divine council Hence the story ofAtrahasis opens with the following portrayal

When gods were man

Tey did forced labor they bore drudgeryGreat indeed was the drudgery of the godsTe forced labor was heavy the misery too muchTe seven() great Anunna-gods were burdeningTe Igigi-gods with forced labor

Like the account in Genesis the lesser gods of the divine council inAtrahasis were gardeners who did the laborious task of caring for the

canals trees and waterways that sustained the higher gods of the67 For additional examples of Yahweh portrayed in the role of gardener see Num-

bers 246 Psalm 10416 Isaiah 4414 68 Altrahasis II39 1ndash6 translation in Benjamin R Foster Beore the Muses An Anthol-ogy o Akkadian Literature (Bethesda MD CDL 1993) 1159

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 295

assembly Hence Adam as an immortal being clearly reflects the

position of the Igigi in Mesopotamian thought Te questions pre-sented to Job by Eliphaz regarding the primal human seem to share

this notion

Are you the firstborn of the human race

Were you brought forth before the hills

Have you listened in the council of God (Job 157ndash8 NRSV)

As Dexter Callender has observed concerning these questionsldquoTe allusion to the primal human in Job does not give us explicit

details concerning his incorporation into the sacred world It is clear

however that the idea is present in the reference that the primal human

lsquolistenedrsquo in the council of Godrdquo As a member of Godrsquos council man

held a stewardship to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo the deityrsquos garden (Genesis

215) According to the Genesis account when the man and woman

eat from the tree of knowledge God expels the humans from Edenand assigns the cherubim other traditional members of the divine

council to ldquokeeprdquo the garden (Genesis 324) Tis move may suggest

that in biblical thought ldquokeepingrdquo the garden is a task reserved for

members of the divine host As an immortal subordinate assigned an

important council task man however eventually appears in the Gen-

esis account as a being very much like the council deities mentioned

in Psalm 82 who receive the decree of death

I have said Ye are gods and all of you are children of the

most High

But ye shall die like men and fall like one of the princes

(Psalm 826ndash7)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou

shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thoushalt surely die (Genesis 217)

69 Dexter E Callender Jr Adam in Myth and History Ancient Israelite Perspectiveson the Primal Human (Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 2000) 212 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2149

286 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

of defeatingrdquo Athtarrsquos assumption of the throne of Baal followed

by his descent to the underworld indicates that this portion of theBaal cycle from ancient Canaan fits the general category of the cosmic

revolt genre witnessed in texts such as Abraham 3 and Psalm 82

1 Kindly El the Compassionate answers

2 ldquoOne so small cannot race

3 with Baal cannot handle the lance

4 with Daganrsquos son when they test one anotherrdquo

5 Lady Athirat of the Sea answers 6 ldquoLet us enthrone Athtar the Strong

7 Let Athtar the Strong be kingrdquo

8 Ten Athtar the Strong

9 ascended the summit of Sapan

10 He sat upon the throne of Mightiest Baal

11 His feet would not reach its footstool

12 His head would not reach its top 13 Athtar the Strong answered

14 ldquoI cannot rule on the summit of Sapanrdquo

15 Athtar the Strong descended

16 He descended from the throne of Mightiest Baal

17 And he ruled over the underworld god of all of it

18 drew in barrels

19 drew in jars (KU 1649ndash67 translation)

Te fact that Athtar the Strong experienced a type of ldquodeathrdquo in which

he ldquoruled over the underworldrdquo following his descent from Baalrsquos

throne does not suggest that Athtar was a ldquobeing species-uniquerdquo from

the other deities any more than Inanna or Ishtar the Mesopotamian

goddesses who experienced a type of death in the underworld were of

a different species than the gods Ea Enki Marduk and so forth48 Hugh R Page Jr Te Myth o Cosmic Rebellion A Study o Its Reflexes in Ugaritic

and Biblical Literature (Leiden Brill 1996) 92 Pagersquos views concerning the Athtar mythhave been criticized by Gregorio del Olmo Lete ldquoIn Search of the Canaanite Luciferrdquo Aula Orientalis 19 (2001) 125ndash32

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 287

Still in his efforts to present Yahweh as a being species-unique

Heiser correctly draws attention to the other gods of the council whoare commanded to worship Yahweh In his analysis he focuses uponthe call given to the gods in Psalm 291ndash2 ldquoAscribe to Yahweh O sons ofGod ascribe to Yahweh glory and strength Ascribe to Yahweh the gloryof his name worship Yahweh in the splendor of holinessrdquo (as quotedon p 256) While Heiserrsquos observations certainly illustrate that biblicalauthors viewed their deity as uniquemdashthat is exceptionalmdashthroughout

Near Eastern tradition lesser gods regularly appear in a position inwhich they offer praise service and devotion to the higher gods of thecouncil Richard J Clifford explains that in the Phoenician view of theassembly ldquoas elsewhere in the ancient Near East the assemblies are pic-tured as subordinate to individual gods although the assemblyrsquos con-sent seems necessary for important decisionsrdquo Simply because ancienttextsmdashincluding the Biblemdashdepict the members of the assemblies asldquosubordinate to individual godsrdquo this in no way implies that the higher

deities somehow belonged to a separate species Ancient Near Easterntexts such as Mursilirsquos Hymn and Prayer to the Sun-goddess o Arinna (CH 376A) establish the fact that Near Eastern peoples believed thatgods of the same species paid homage to higher deities in a way compa-rable to the biblical view

You O Sun-goddess of Arinna are honored goddess Your

name is honored among names and your divinity is honoredamong gods Furthermore among the gods you are the mosthonored and the greatest Tere is no other god more honoredor greater than you You are the lord of just judgment Youcontrol the kingship of heaven and earth1048624

Holding the position ldquomost honoredrdquo among the gods did not estab-lish Arinna as species-unique Arinna was simply the god before

whom from the authorrsquos perspective the other gods would regularly49 Richard J Clifford ldquoPhoenician Religionrdquo Bulletin o the American Schools o

Oriental Research 279 (1990) 57 50 As cited in Itamar Singer Hittite Prayers (Atlanta Society of Biblical Literature2002) 51

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2349

288 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquofall downrdquo1048580 For the ancients the Near Eastern view of the divine

court clearly reflected or were expressed in terms of earthly realityTerefore just as the high king before whom other humans paid hom-age was still a human being so the god to whom other deities paidhomage was still a god matching in species For biblical authors Yah-weh stood at the head of the hierarchy in Israelite thought Yahwehwas unique as the God of gods but he was not unique in his divinityFrom a biblical perspective Yahweh even shared this divinity withhumanity

Humans as Teomorphic Beings

In his discussion concerning the biblical view regarding theomor-phic humans Peterson draws attention to Paulrsquos New estament ser-mon presented in Acts 1728ndash29

For in him we live and move and have our being as

certain also of your own poets have said For we are also hisoffspring

Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God we oughtnot to think that the Godhead is like unto gold or silver orstone graven by art and manrsquos device

Peterson in part argues for a biblical connection between God andhumanity based on the fact that ldquothe word rendered lsquooffspringrsquo by the

King James translators is the Greek genos which is cognate with theLatin genus and means lsquofamilyrsquo or lsquoracersquo or lsquokindrsquo or even and mostespecially interesting lsquodescendants of a common ancestorrsquo rdquo983044 ForLatter-day Saints human beings are literally the offspring of God andtherefore intrinsically theomorphic Part of the strength of Petersonrsquosessay lies in his recognition that like Latter-day Saints biblical authorsregularly blur the distinction between humanity and divine beings

Not only does Peterson draw attention to the prophetic interactionwith the council as support for his thesis but he also places consider-

51 Singer Hittite Prayers 51 52 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 542ndash43 53 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 289

able emphasis upon the deified dead in the Hebrew Bible and the early

Christian teaching regarding deification Heiser notwithstandingPetersonrsquos evidence rejects the idea that a genus equation of God and

humankind appears in the Bible

For his criticisms of Petersonrsquos views Heiser places considerable

weight on the notion that ldquothe concept of the image of God does not

advance the idea that there is a genus equation of God and human-

kind or that God was once a manrdquo (p 224) On some levels Heiserrsquos

point concerning the word tzelem or ldquoimagerdquo in Genesis 126ndash27is correct Concerning this controversial term Marc Z Brettler has

recently explained

Te word tzelem (ldquoimagerdquo) elsewhere always refers to a

physical representation For example the Book of Ezekiel

uses tzelem when it refers to ldquomen sculptured upon the walls

figures of Chaldeans drawn in vermilionrdquo (2314) or when it

accuses Israel of fornicating with ldquophallic imagesrdquo (1617) Teword oen refers to idols (eg Num 3352 Ezek 720 Amos

526 2 Chron 2317) It always signifies a concrete entity

rather than an abstract one Tis is not surprising since the

Bible (in contrast to most medieval philosophical traditions

both Jewish and Christian) oen depicts God in corporeal

terms

Genesis 126ndash27 suggests that Godrsquos physical likeness is similar to

humanityrsquos but Heiser is correct that the statement does not indicate

that biblical authors viewed humans as gods or that God himself was

once a human However many other texts from the Bible do present a

theomorphic view of humanity Peterson therefore is precisely correct

in stating that ldquothe Latter-day Saint understanding that humans are of

the same genus or species as God is thus clearly biblicalrdquo54 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509ndash28

55 Marc Z Brettler How to Read the Bible (Philadelphia Jewish Publication Society2005) 43ndash44 Hebrew word deleted 56 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 547

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2549

290 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Adam as a Divine Council Member

In addition to associating humanity with the tzelem of God theBible describes the first man as a deified member of the divine council

In the Eden story the Lord took advantage of the wet claylike soil and

ldquoformed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils

the breath of life and man became a living soulrdquo (Genesis 27) In an

important study concerning this imagery Walter Brueggemann has

shown that a biblical connection exists between being raised from the

dust and enthronement ldquoo be taken lsquofrom the dustrsquo means to be

elevated from obscurity to royal office and to return to dust means to

be deprived of that office and returned to obscurityrdquo Imagery such

as that witnessed in 1 Kings 162 supports Brueggemannrsquos interpreta-

tion ldquoForasmuch as I [God] exalted thee [Jehu] out of the dust and

made thee prince over my people Israel rdquo (1 Kings 162) Hence the

notion of the God raising man ldquofrom the dust of the earthrdquo in Genesis

27 in part suggests that Yahweh begins his creative activity by form-

ing a divine king According to Genesis 215 this divine king through

a type of imitatio dei would continue to perform the work of Yahweh

who ldquoplantedrdquo the garden ldquoAnd the Lord God took the man and put

him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep itrdquo In a simi-

lar fashion Mesopotamian kings such as Hammurapi glorified their

efforts through the use of creation and agricultural imageryI encircled [the wall] with a swamp I dug the Euphrates

as far as Sippar (and) made it reach a prosperous quay

I Hammu-rāpi who builds up the land caused Sippar

and Babylon to dwell in peaceful abodes forever What

from [primordial days] no one among the kings had done I

did in a grand fashion for the god Šamaš my lord

57 Walter Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestament-liche Wissenschaf 841 (1972) 1ndash18 58 Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo 2 59 Douglas Frayne Old Babylonian Period (2003ndash1595 BC) (oronto University oforonto Press 1990) 348ndash49

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 291

Te view presented in the Babylonian inscription on the wall

of Sippar reflects the common Near Eastern assumption featured inGenesis 2 of a God king participating in the act of creation from ldquopri-

mordial daysrdquo through structure1048624 As a king Hammurapi assumed

the same role filled by deities who created the universe by giving order

to preexistent chaos In its depiction of Adam as the primordial gar-

dener the Bible relies upon similar imagery

Manrsquos status as the archetypal gardener king in Genesis 2ndash3 con-

tains important parallels with Mesopotamian kingship theory1048580 Sev-eral examples of Mesopotamian iconography feature a depiction of the

tree (or plant) of life over which the king and priests appear pouring

libations In assessing the connection between Mesopotamian kings

and gardeners Geo Widengren cites these statements from the am-

muz text R IV 27 No I

A tamarisk which in the garden has no water to drink

Whose foliage on the plant sends forth no twig

A plant which they water no more in its pot

Whose roots are torn away

A herb which is in the garden has no water to drink

Among the flowers of the garden he sleeps

Among the flowers of the garden he is thrown

According to Widengren ldquothe ree of Life is watered by the kingwho pours out over it the Water of Life which he has in his possession

Te ree of Life constantly needs the Water of Life near which it is

growing in the garden of paradiserdquo983044 Te connection between king

and gardener was widely attested throughout ancient Mesopotamia

60 In his translation Frayne renders the Akkadian word szligi-a-tim as ldquothe pastrdquo Teinscription however clearly relies on creation imagery and I have therefore interpreted

szligiatim as ldquoprimordial daysrdquo in accordance with the information provided in Jeremy BlackAndrew George and Nicholas Postgate A Concise Dictionary o Akkadian (WiesbadenHarrassowitz 2000) 337 61 See Geo Widengren Te King and the ree o Lie in Ancient Near Eastern Reli- gion (Uppsala Uppsala Universitets Aringrsskri 1951) 62 Widengren King and the ree o Lie 15

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2749

292 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Tis portrayal of kingship appears in the birth legend of Sargon

wherein the monarch declaresAkki the waterscooper placed me as his gardenerWhen I was a gardener Ishtar was in love with meTe kingship I exercised during x + 5 years

Tese lines from the tale of Sargon the gardener whom the goddess Ishtarloved seem to provide an especially significant parallel with the biblical view presented in the story of Eden In the words of Nicholas Wyatt ldquotheman in his garden is a symbolic allusion to the king in his sanctuaryrdquo

One of the important connections between humanityrsquos enthrone-ment in the garden and later biblical traditions includes the anointingof an Israelite king in 1 Kings 128ndash40 at the Gihon Spring a rivernamed Gihon was one of the four rivers that flowed out of Eden andround the land of Cush (Genesis 213) Significantly the only otherexplicit reference to the Garden of Eden in the Hebrew Bible appears

in a context that addresses the link between kingship and divinity (seeEzekiel 282ndash13)

Concerning the attestation of biblical rituals that may preserveactual religious rites wherein Israelite kings assumed divinity Wyattargues that

the rituals which transform the status of the earthly kingremoving him from ldquomerely humanrdquo status to that of a sacralfigure to be couched in the form of a narrative about a godcarries with it the hint that the king himself is to be seen astransformed into a god Te enthronement of the king isthus his apotheosis

63 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoInterpreting the Creation and Fall Story in Genesis 2ndash3rdquo Zeit-schrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 931 (1981) 15 64 John van Seters has argued according to the Documentary Hypothesis that the

story of divine kingship in J derives from Babylonian influences and is therefore latepostexilic If P is in part a reaction to the J account then it is difficult to accept vanSetersrsquos dating see John van Seters ldquoTe Creation of Man and the Creation of the KingrdquoZeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 1013 (1989) 333ndash41 65 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinity Some Mythical and Ritual Aspects of WestSemitic Kingshiprdquo Ugarit-Forschungen 31 (1999) 857

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 293

In his exploration of biblical deification Wyatt refers to Psalm 198ndash10

as a possible ritual text transforming the king into a divine beingTe teaching of Yahweh is perfectrestoring the breastTe testimony of Yahweh is certainmaking wise the headTe precepts of Yahweh are uprightrejoicing the heart

Te commandment of Yahweh is puremaking bright the eyesTe speech of Yahweh is ritually purestanding for everTe judgments of Yahweh are truthTey are righteous all togethermore desirable than goldthan much pure goldmore sweet than honeyor the refined combYour servant is indeed illumined by themand in their observance is there great gain

Concerning this possible reference to ritual anointing Wyatt argues

It is true that there is no narrative statement about unc-

tion here oil is not even mentioned But only thus can thesuccessive blessings on various parts of the kingrsquos body beexplained For comparison we should consider the unction ofpriests in Exod 294ndash9 19ndash21 4012ndash5 and Lev 810ndash2 22ndash4where various parts of the priestrsquos body are anointed with oiland blood undoubtedly with some liturgical commentary onthe action such is now narrated in these passages providing

a suitable performative utteranceIf correct Wyattrsquos assessment of Israelite deification proves importantfor an analysis of Adam as divine king in the book of Genesis

66 Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinityrdquo 874ndash75

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2949

294 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

In Genesis chapter 2 Godrsquos initial creative act must be the creation

of man for as a divine king raised ldquofrom the dustrdquo man was specifi-cally formed to assist deity in the creation process God appears as agardener who causes to grow ldquoevery tree that is pleasant to the sightand good for foodrdquo (Genesis 29) Te account declares that the Lordplaced the man in the garden to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo his newly createdoasis (Genesis 215) As a gardener the Lord plants Eden as a gardenerthe Lord mixes the soil to form both man and beast As a gardener the

Lord creates man in his image to perform the work of a God Follow-ing his creation man assumes the role of divine gardenerFrom an ancient Near Eastern perspective the view of Adam as

divine gardener suggests that biblical authors viewed humanity asan earthly extension of the divine council According to the Edenaccount man was immortal (Genesis 217) man had received fromdeity the sacred ldquobreath of liferdquo (Genesis 27) man had been com-missioned to perform the work of a godmdashthat is to till and tend the

divine garden Terefore as an immortal gardener man was alreadyldquolike the godsrdquo prior to partaking of the forbidden fruit

In Mesopotamian myths for example the work of gardening wasassigned to lesser members of the divine council Hence the story ofAtrahasis opens with the following portrayal

When gods were man

Tey did forced labor they bore drudgeryGreat indeed was the drudgery of the godsTe forced labor was heavy the misery too muchTe seven() great Anunna-gods were burdeningTe Igigi-gods with forced labor

Like the account in Genesis the lesser gods of the divine council inAtrahasis were gardeners who did the laborious task of caring for the

canals trees and waterways that sustained the higher gods of the67 For additional examples of Yahweh portrayed in the role of gardener see Num-

bers 246 Psalm 10416 Isaiah 4414 68 Altrahasis II39 1ndash6 translation in Benjamin R Foster Beore the Muses An Anthol-ogy o Akkadian Literature (Bethesda MD CDL 1993) 1159

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 295

assembly Hence Adam as an immortal being clearly reflects the

position of the Igigi in Mesopotamian thought Te questions pre-sented to Job by Eliphaz regarding the primal human seem to share

this notion

Are you the firstborn of the human race

Were you brought forth before the hills

Have you listened in the council of God (Job 157ndash8 NRSV)

As Dexter Callender has observed concerning these questionsldquoTe allusion to the primal human in Job does not give us explicit

details concerning his incorporation into the sacred world It is clear

however that the idea is present in the reference that the primal human

lsquolistenedrsquo in the council of Godrdquo As a member of Godrsquos council man

held a stewardship to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo the deityrsquos garden (Genesis

215) According to the Genesis account when the man and woman

eat from the tree of knowledge God expels the humans from Edenand assigns the cherubim other traditional members of the divine

council to ldquokeeprdquo the garden (Genesis 324) Tis move may suggest

that in biblical thought ldquokeepingrdquo the garden is a task reserved for

members of the divine host As an immortal subordinate assigned an

important council task man however eventually appears in the Gen-

esis account as a being very much like the council deities mentioned

in Psalm 82 who receive the decree of death

I have said Ye are gods and all of you are children of the

most High

But ye shall die like men and fall like one of the princes

(Psalm 826ndash7)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou

shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thoushalt surely die (Genesis 217)

69 Dexter E Callender Jr Adam in Myth and History Ancient Israelite Perspectiveson the Primal Human (Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 2000) 212 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 287

Still in his efforts to present Yahweh as a being species-unique

Heiser correctly draws attention to the other gods of the council whoare commanded to worship Yahweh In his analysis he focuses uponthe call given to the gods in Psalm 291ndash2 ldquoAscribe to Yahweh O sons ofGod ascribe to Yahweh glory and strength Ascribe to Yahweh the gloryof his name worship Yahweh in the splendor of holinessrdquo (as quotedon p 256) While Heiserrsquos observations certainly illustrate that biblicalauthors viewed their deity as uniquemdashthat is exceptionalmdashthroughout

Near Eastern tradition lesser gods regularly appear in a position inwhich they offer praise service and devotion to the higher gods of thecouncil Richard J Clifford explains that in the Phoenician view of theassembly ldquoas elsewhere in the ancient Near East the assemblies are pic-tured as subordinate to individual gods although the assemblyrsquos con-sent seems necessary for important decisionsrdquo Simply because ancienttextsmdashincluding the Biblemdashdepict the members of the assemblies asldquosubordinate to individual godsrdquo this in no way implies that the higher

deities somehow belonged to a separate species Ancient Near Easterntexts such as Mursilirsquos Hymn and Prayer to the Sun-goddess o Arinna (CH 376A) establish the fact that Near Eastern peoples believed thatgods of the same species paid homage to higher deities in a way compa-rable to the biblical view

You O Sun-goddess of Arinna are honored goddess Your

name is honored among names and your divinity is honoredamong gods Furthermore among the gods you are the mosthonored and the greatest Tere is no other god more honoredor greater than you You are the lord of just judgment Youcontrol the kingship of heaven and earth1048624

Holding the position ldquomost honoredrdquo among the gods did not estab-lish Arinna as species-unique Arinna was simply the god before

whom from the authorrsquos perspective the other gods would regularly49 Richard J Clifford ldquoPhoenician Religionrdquo Bulletin o the American Schools o

Oriental Research 279 (1990) 57 50 As cited in Itamar Singer Hittite Prayers (Atlanta Society of Biblical Literature2002) 51

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2349

288 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquofall downrdquo1048580 For the ancients the Near Eastern view of the divine

court clearly reflected or were expressed in terms of earthly realityTerefore just as the high king before whom other humans paid hom-age was still a human being so the god to whom other deities paidhomage was still a god matching in species For biblical authors Yah-weh stood at the head of the hierarchy in Israelite thought Yahwehwas unique as the God of gods but he was not unique in his divinityFrom a biblical perspective Yahweh even shared this divinity withhumanity

Humans as Teomorphic Beings

In his discussion concerning the biblical view regarding theomor-phic humans Peterson draws attention to Paulrsquos New estament ser-mon presented in Acts 1728ndash29

For in him we live and move and have our being as

certain also of your own poets have said For we are also hisoffspring

Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God we oughtnot to think that the Godhead is like unto gold or silver orstone graven by art and manrsquos device

Peterson in part argues for a biblical connection between God andhumanity based on the fact that ldquothe word rendered lsquooffspringrsquo by the

King James translators is the Greek genos which is cognate with theLatin genus and means lsquofamilyrsquo or lsquoracersquo or lsquokindrsquo or even and mostespecially interesting lsquodescendants of a common ancestorrsquo rdquo983044 ForLatter-day Saints human beings are literally the offspring of God andtherefore intrinsically theomorphic Part of the strength of Petersonrsquosessay lies in his recognition that like Latter-day Saints biblical authorsregularly blur the distinction between humanity and divine beings

Not only does Peterson draw attention to the prophetic interactionwith the council as support for his thesis but he also places consider-

51 Singer Hittite Prayers 51 52 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 542ndash43 53 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 289

able emphasis upon the deified dead in the Hebrew Bible and the early

Christian teaching regarding deification Heiser notwithstandingPetersonrsquos evidence rejects the idea that a genus equation of God and

humankind appears in the Bible

For his criticisms of Petersonrsquos views Heiser places considerable

weight on the notion that ldquothe concept of the image of God does not

advance the idea that there is a genus equation of God and human-

kind or that God was once a manrdquo (p 224) On some levels Heiserrsquos

point concerning the word tzelem or ldquoimagerdquo in Genesis 126ndash27is correct Concerning this controversial term Marc Z Brettler has

recently explained

Te word tzelem (ldquoimagerdquo) elsewhere always refers to a

physical representation For example the Book of Ezekiel

uses tzelem when it refers to ldquomen sculptured upon the walls

figures of Chaldeans drawn in vermilionrdquo (2314) or when it

accuses Israel of fornicating with ldquophallic imagesrdquo (1617) Teword oen refers to idols (eg Num 3352 Ezek 720 Amos

526 2 Chron 2317) It always signifies a concrete entity

rather than an abstract one Tis is not surprising since the

Bible (in contrast to most medieval philosophical traditions

both Jewish and Christian) oen depicts God in corporeal

terms

Genesis 126ndash27 suggests that Godrsquos physical likeness is similar to

humanityrsquos but Heiser is correct that the statement does not indicate

that biblical authors viewed humans as gods or that God himself was

once a human However many other texts from the Bible do present a

theomorphic view of humanity Peterson therefore is precisely correct

in stating that ldquothe Latter-day Saint understanding that humans are of

the same genus or species as God is thus clearly biblicalrdquo54 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509ndash28

55 Marc Z Brettler How to Read the Bible (Philadelphia Jewish Publication Society2005) 43ndash44 Hebrew word deleted 56 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 547

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2549

290 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Adam as a Divine Council Member

In addition to associating humanity with the tzelem of God theBible describes the first man as a deified member of the divine council

In the Eden story the Lord took advantage of the wet claylike soil and

ldquoformed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils

the breath of life and man became a living soulrdquo (Genesis 27) In an

important study concerning this imagery Walter Brueggemann has

shown that a biblical connection exists between being raised from the

dust and enthronement ldquoo be taken lsquofrom the dustrsquo means to be

elevated from obscurity to royal office and to return to dust means to

be deprived of that office and returned to obscurityrdquo Imagery such

as that witnessed in 1 Kings 162 supports Brueggemannrsquos interpreta-

tion ldquoForasmuch as I [God] exalted thee [Jehu] out of the dust and

made thee prince over my people Israel rdquo (1 Kings 162) Hence the

notion of the God raising man ldquofrom the dust of the earthrdquo in Genesis

27 in part suggests that Yahweh begins his creative activity by form-

ing a divine king According to Genesis 215 this divine king through

a type of imitatio dei would continue to perform the work of Yahweh

who ldquoplantedrdquo the garden ldquoAnd the Lord God took the man and put

him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep itrdquo In a simi-

lar fashion Mesopotamian kings such as Hammurapi glorified their

efforts through the use of creation and agricultural imageryI encircled [the wall] with a swamp I dug the Euphrates

as far as Sippar (and) made it reach a prosperous quay

I Hammu-rāpi who builds up the land caused Sippar

and Babylon to dwell in peaceful abodes forever What

from [primordial days] no one among the kings had done I

did in a grand fashion for the god Šamaš my lord

57 Walter Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestament-liche Wissenschaf 841 (1972) 1ndash18 58 Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo 2 59 Douglas Frayne Old Babylonian Period (2003ndash1595 BC) (oronto University oforonto Press 1990) 348ndash49

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 291

Te view presented in the Babylonian inscription on the wall

of Sippar reflects the common Near Eastern assumption featured inGenesis 2 of a God king participating in the act of creation from ldquopri-

mordial daysrdquo through structure1048624 As a king Hammurapi assumed

the same role filled by deities who created the universe by giving order

to preexistent chaos In its depiction of Adam as the primordial gar-

dener the Bible relies upon similar imagery

Manrsquos status as the archetypal gardener king in Genesis 2ndash3 con-

tains important parallels with Mesopotamian kingship theory1048580 Sev-eral examples of Mesopotamian iconography feature a depiction of the

tree (or plant) of life over which the king and priests appear pouring

libations In assessing the connection between Mesopotamian kings

and gardeners Geo Widengren cites these statements from the am-

muz text R IV 27 No I

A tamarisk which in the garden has no water to drink

Whose foliage on the plant sends forth no twig

A plant which they water no more in its pot

Whose roots are torn away

A herb which is in the garden has no water to drink

Among the flowers of the garden he sleeps

Among the flowers of the garden he is thrown

According to Widengren ldquothe ree of Life is watered by the kingwho pours out over it the Water of Life which he has in his possession

Te ree of Life constantly needs the Water of Life near which it is

growing in the garden of paradiserdquo983044 Te connection between king

and gardener was widely attested throughout ancient Mesopotamia

60 In his translation Frayne renders the Akkadian word szligi-a-tim as ldquothe pastrdquo Teinscription however clearly relies on creation imagery and I have therefore interpreted

szligiatim as ldquoprimordial daysrdquo in accordance with the information provided in Jeremy BlackAndrew George and Nicholas Postgate A Concise Dictionary o Akkadian (WiesbadenHarrassowitz 2000) 337 61 See Geo Widengren Te King and the ree o Lie in Ancient Near Eastern Reli- gion (Uppsala Uppsala Universitets Aringrsskri 1951) 62 Widengren King and the ree o Lie 15

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2749

292 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Tis portrayal of kingship appears in the birth legend of Sargon

wherein the monarch declaresAkki the waterscooper placed me as his gardenerWhen I was a gardener Ishtar was in love with meTe kingship I exercised during x + 5 years

Tese lines from the tale of Sargon the gardener whom the goddess Ishtarloved seem to provide an especially significant parallel with the biblical view presented in the story of Eden In the words of Nicholas Wyatt ldquotheman in his garden is a symbolic allusion to the king in his sanctuaryrdquo

One of the important connections between humanityrsquos enthrone-ment in the garden and later biblical traditions includes the anointingof an Israelite king in 1 Kings 128ndash40 at the Gihon Spring a rivernamed Gihon was one of the four rivers that flowed out of Eden andround the land of Cush (Genesis 213) Significantly the only otherexplicit reference to the Garden of Eden in the Hebrew Bible appears

in a context that addresses the link between kingship and divinity (seeEzekiel 282ndash13)

Concerning the attestation of biblical rituals that may preserveactual religious rites wherein Israelite kings assumed divinity Wyattargues that

the rituals which transform the status of the earthly kingremoving him from ldquomerely humanrdquo status to that of a sacralfigure to be couched in the form of a narrative about a godcarries with it the hint that the king himself is to be seen astransformed into a god Te enthronement of the king isthus his apotheosis

63 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoInterpreting the Creation and Fall Story in Genesis 2ndash3rdquo Zeit-schrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 931 (1981) 15 64 John van Seters has argued according to the Documentary Hypothesis that the

story of divine kingship in J derives from Babylonian influences and is therefore latepostexilic If P is in part a reaction to the J account then it is difficult to accept vanSetersrsquos dating see John van Seters ldquoTe Creation of Man and the Creation of the KingrdquoZeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 1013 (1989) 333ndash41 65 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinity Some Mythical and Ritual Aspects of WestSemitic Kingshiprdquo Ugarit-Forschungen 31 (1999) 857

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 293

In his exploration of biblical deification Wyatt refers to Psalm 198ndash10

as a possible ritual text transforming the king into a divine beingTe teaching of Yahweh is perfectrestoring the breastTe testimony of Yahweh is certainmaking wise the headTe precepts of Yahweh are uprightrejoicing the heart

Te commandment of Yahweh is puremaking bright the eyesTe speech of Yahweh is ritually purestanding for everTe judgments of Yahweh are truthTey are righteous all togethermore desirable than goldthan much pure goldmore sweet than honeyor the refined combYour servant is indeed illumined by themand in their observance is there great gain

Concerning this possible reference to ritual anointing Wyatt argues

It is true that there is no narrative statement about unc-

tion here oil is not even mentioned But only thus can thesuccessive blessings on various parts of the kingrsquos body beexplained For comparison we should consider the unction ofpriests in Exod 294ndash9 19ndash21 4012ndash5 and Lev 810ndash2 22ndash4where various parts of the priestrsquos body are anointed with oiland blood undoubtedly with some liturgical commentary onthe action such is now narrated in these passages providing

a suitable performative utteranceIf correct Wyattrsquos assessment of Israelite deification proves importantfor an analysis of Adam as divine king in the book of Genesis

66 Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinityrdquo 874ndash75

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2949

294 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

In Genesis chapter 2 Godrsquos initial creative act must be the creation

of man for as a divine king raised ldquofrom the dustrdquo man was specifi-cally formed to assist deity in the creation process God appears as agardener who causes to grow ldquoevery tree that is pleasant to the sightand good for foodrdquo (Genesis 29) Te account declares that the Lordplaced the man in the garden to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo his newly createdoasis (Genesis 215) As a gardener the Lord plants Eden as a gardenerthe Lord mixes the soil to form both man and beast As a gardener the

Lord creates man in his image to perform the work of a God Follow-ing his creation man assumes the role of divine gardenerFrom an ancient Near Eastern perspective the view of Adam as

divine gardener suggests that biblical authors viewed humanity asan earthly extension of the divine council According to the Edenaccount man was immortal (Genesis 217) man had received fromdeity the sacred ldquobreath of liferdquo (Genesis 27) man had been com-missioned to perform the work of a godmdashthat is to till and tend the

divine garden Terefore as an immortal gardener man was alreadyldquolike the godsrdquo prior to partaking of the forbidden fruit

In Mesopotamian myths for example the work of gardening wasassigned to lesser members of the divine council Hence the story ofAtrahasis opens with the following portrayal

When gods were man

Tey did forced labor they bore drudgeryGreat indeed was the drudgery of the godsTe forced labor was heavy the misery too muchTe seven() great Anunna-gods were burdeningTe Igigi-gods with forced labor

Like the account in Genesis the lesser gods of the divine council inAtrahasis were gardeners who did the laborious task of caring for the

canals trees and waterways that sustained the higher gods of the67 For additional examples of Yahweh portrayed in the role of gardener see Num-

bers 246 Psalm 10416 Isaiah 4414 68 Altrahasis II39 1ndash6 translation in Benjamin R Foster Beore the Muses An Anthol-ogy o Akkadian Literature (Bethesda MD CDL 1993) 1159

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 295

assembly Hence Adam as an immortal being clearly reflects the

position of the Igigi in Mesopotamian thought Te questions pre-sented to Job by Eliphaz regarding the primal human seem to share

this notion

Are you the firstborn of the human race

Were you brought forth before the hills

Have you listened in the council of God (Job 157ndash8 NRSV)

As Dexter Callender has observed concerning these questionsldquoTe allusion to the primal human in Job does not give us explicit

details concerning his incorporation into the sacred world It is clear

however that the idea is present in the reference that the primal human

lsquolistenedrsquo in the council of Godrdquo As a member of Godrsquos council man

held a stewardship to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo the deityrsquos garden (Genesis

215) According to the Genesis account when the man and woman

eat from the tree of knowledge God expels the humans from Edenand assigns the cherubim other traditional members of the divine

council to ldquokeeprdquo the garden (Genesis 324) Tis move may suggest

that in biblical thought ldquokeepingrdquo the garden is a task reserved for

members of the divine host As an immortal subordinate assigned an

important council task man however eventually appears in the Gen-

esis account as a being very much like the council deities mentioned

in Psalm 82 who receive the decree of death

I have said Ye are gods and all of you are children of the

most High

But ye shall die like men and fall like one of the princes

(Psalm 826ndash7)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou

shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thoushalt surely die (Genesis 217)

69 Dexter E Callender Jr Adam in Myth and History Ancient Israelite Perspectiveson the Primal Human (Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 2000) 212 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2349

288 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquofall downrdquo1048580 For the ancients the Near Eastern view of the divine

court clearly reflected or were expressed in terms of earthly realityTerefore just as the high king before whom other humans paid hom-age was still a human being so the god to whom other deities paidhomage was still a god matching in species For biblical authors Yah-weh stood at the head of the hierarchy in Israelite thought Yahwehwas unique as the God of gods but he was not unique in his divinityFrom a biblical perspective Yahweh even shared this divinity withhumanity

Humans as Teomorphic Beings

In his discussion concerning the biblical view regarding theomor-phic humans Peterson draws attention to Paulrsquos New estament ser-mon presented in Acts 1728ndash29

For in him we live and move and have our being as

certain also of your own poets have said For we are also hisoffspring

Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God we oughtnot to think that the Godhead is like unto gold or silver orstone graven by art and manrsquos device

Peterson in part argues for a biblical connection between God andhumanity based on the fact that ldquothe word rendered lsquooffspringrsquo by the

King James translators is the Greek genos which is cognate with theLatin genus and means lsquofamilyrsquo or lsquoracersquo or lsquokindrsquo or even and mostespecially interesting lsquodescendants of a common ancestorrsquo rdquo983044 ForLatter-day Saints human beings are literally the offspring of God andtherefore intrinsically theomorphic Part of the strength of Petersonrsquosessay lies in his recognition that like Latter-day Saints biblical authorsregularly blur the distinction between humanity and divine beings

Not only does Peterson draw attention to the prophetic interactionwith the council as support for his thesis but he also places consider-

51 Singer Hittite Prayers 51 52 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 542ndash43 53 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 289

able emphasis upon the deified dead in the Hebrew Bible and the early

Christian teaching regarding deification Heiser notwithstandingPetersonrsquos evidence rejects the idea that a genus equation of God and

humankind appears in the Bible

For his criticisms of Petersonrsquos views Heiser places considerable

weight on the notion that ldquothe concept of the image of God does not

advance the idea that there is a genus equation of God and human-

kind or that God was once a manrdquo (p 224) On some levels Heiserrsquos

point concerning the word tzelem or ldquoimagerdquo in Genesis 126ndash27is correct Concerning this controversial term Marc Z Brettler has

recently explained

Te word tzelem (ldquoimagerdquo) elsewhere always refers to a

physical representation For example the Book of Ezekiel

uses tzelem when it refers to ldquomen sculptured upon the walls

figures of Chaldeans drawn in vermilionrdquo (2314) or when it

accuses Israel of fornicating with ldquophallic imagesrdquo (1617) Teword oen refers to idols (eg Num 3352 Ezek 720 Amos

526 2 Chron 2317) It always signifies a concrete entity

rather than an abstract one Tis is not surprising since the

Bible (in contrast to most medieval philosophical traditions

both Jewish and Christian) oen depicts God in corporeal

terms

Genesis 126ndash27 suggests that Godrsquos physical likeness is similar to

humanityrsquos but Heiser is correct that the statement does not indicate

that biblical authors viewed humans as gods or that God himself was

once a human However many other texts from the Bible do present a

theomorphic view of humanity Peterson therefore is precisely correct

in stating that ldquothe Latter-day Saint understanding that humans are of

the same genus or species as God is thus clearly biblicalrdquo54 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509ndash28

55 Marc Z Brettler How to Read the Bible (Philadelphia Jewish Publication Society2005) 43ndash44 Hebrew word deleted 56 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 547

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2549

290 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Adam as a Divine Council Member

In addition to associating humanity with the tzelem of God theBible describes the first man as a deified member of the divine council

In the Eden story the Lord took advantage of the wet claylike soil and

ldquoformed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils

the breath of life and man became a living soulrdquo (Genesis 27) In an

important study concerning this imagery Walter Brueggemann has

shown that a biblical connection exists between being raised from the

dust and enthronement ldquoo be taken lsquofrom the dustrsquo means to be

elevated from obscurity to royal office and to return to dust means to

be deprived of that office and returned to obscurityrdquo Imagery such

as that witnessed in 1 Kings 162 supports Brueggemannrsquos interpreta-

tion ldquoForasmuch as I [God] exalted thee [Jehu] out of the dust and

made thee prince over my people Israel rdquo (1 Kings 162) Hence the

notion of the God raising man ldquofrom the dust of the earthrdquo in Genesis

27 in part suggests that Yahweh begins his creative activity by form-

ing a divine king According to Genesis 215 this divine king through

a type of imitatio dei would continue to perform the work of Yahweh

who ldquoplantedrdquo the garden ldquoAnd the Lord God took the man and put

him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep itrdquo In a simi-

lar fashion Mesopotamian kings such as Hammurapi glorified their

efforts through the use of creation and agricultural imageryI encircled [the wall] with a swamp I dug the Euphrates

as far as Sippar (and) made it reach a prosperous quay

I Hammu-rāpi who builds up the land caused Sippar

and Babylon to dwell in peaceful abodes forever What

from [primordial days] no one among the kings had done I

did in a grand fashion for the god Šamaš my lord

57 Walter Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestament-liche Wissenschaf 841 (1972) 1ndash18 58 Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo 2 59 Douglas Frayne Old Babylonian Period (2003ndash1595 BC) (oronto University oforonto Press 1990) 348ndash49

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 291

Te view presented in the Babylonian inscription on the wall

of Sippar reflects the common Near Eastern assumption featured inGenesis 2 of a God king participating in the act of creation from ldquopri-

mordial daysrdquo through structure1048624 As a king Hammurapi assumed

the same role filled by deities who created the universe by giving order

to preexistent chaos In its depiction of Adam as the primordial gar-

dener the Bible relies upon similar imagery

Manrsquos status as the archetypal gardener king in Genesis 2ndash3 con-

tains important parallels with Mesopotamian kingship theory1048580 Sev-eral examples of Mesopotamian iconography feature a depiction of the

tree (or plant) of life over which the king and priests appear pouring

libations In assessing the connection between Mesopotamian kings

and gardeners Geo Widengren cites these statements from the am-

muz text R IV 27 No I

A tamarisk which in the garden has no water to drink

Whose foliage on the plant sends forth no twig

A plant which they water no more in its pot

Whose roots are torn away

A herb which is in the garden has no water to drink

Among the flowers of the garden he sleeps

Among the flowers of the garden he is thrown

According to Widengren ldquothe ree of Life is watered by the kingwho pours out over it the Water of Life which he has in his possession

Te ree of Life constantly needs the Water of Life near which it is

growing in the garden of paradiserdquo983044 Te connection between king

and gardener was widely attested throughout ancient Mesopotamia

60 In his translation Frayne renders the Akkadian word szligi-a-tim as ldquothe pastrdquo Teinscription however clearly relies on creation imagery and I have therefore interpreted

szligiatim as ldquoprimordial daysrdquo in accordance with the information provided in Jeremy BlackAndrew George and Nicholas Postgate A Concise Dictionary o Akkadian (WiesbadenHarrassowitz 2000) 337 61 See Geo Widengren Te King and the ree o Lie in Ancient Near Eastern Reli- gion (Uppsala Uppsala Universitets Aringrsskri 1951) 62 Widengren King and the ree o Lie 15

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2749

292 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Tis portrayal of kingship appears in the birth legend of Sargon

wherein the monarch declaresAkki the waterscooper placed me as his gardenerWhen I was a gardener Ishtar was in love with meTe kingship I exercised during x + 5 years

Tese lines from the tale of Sargon the gardener whom the goddess Ishtarloved seem to provide an especially significant parallel with the biblical view presented in the story of Eden In the words of Nicholas Wyatt ldquotheman in his garden is a symbolic allusion to the king in his sanctuaryrdquo

One of the important connections between humanityrsquos enthrone-ment in the garden and later biblical traditions includes the anointingof an Israelite king in 1 Kings 128ndash40 at the Gihon Spring a rivernamed Gihon was one of the four rivers that flowed out of Eden andround the land of Cush (Genesis 213) Significantly the only otherexplicit reference to the Garden of Eden in the Hebrew Bible appears

in a context that addresses the link between kingship and divinity (seeEzekiel 282ndash13)

Concerning the attestation of biblical rituals that may preserveactual religious rites wherein Israelite kings assumed divinity Wyattargues that

the rituals which transform the status of the earthly kingremoving him from ldquomerely humanrdquo status to that of a sacralfigure to be couched in the form of a narrative about a godcarries with it the hint that the king himself is to be seen astransformed into a god Te enthronement of the king isthus his apotheosis

63 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoInterpreting the Creation and Fall Story in Genesis 2ndash3rdquo Zeit-schrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 931 (1981) 15 64 John van Seters has argued according to the Documentary Hypothesis that the

story of divine kingship in J derives from Babylonian influences and is therefore latepostexilic If P is in part a reaction to the J account then it is difficult to accept vanSetersrsquos dating see John van Seters ldquoTe Creation of Man and the Creation of the KingrdquoZeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 1013 (1989) 333ndash41 65 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinity Some Mythical and Ritual Aspects of WestSemitic Kingshiprdquo Ugarit-Forschungen 31 (1999) 857

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 293

In his exploration of biblical deification Wyatt refers to Psalm 198ndash10

as a possible ritual text transforming the king into a divine beingTe teaching of Yahweh is perfectrestoring the breastTe testimony of Yahweh is certainmaking wise the headTe precepts of Yahweh are uprightrejoicing the heart

Te commandment of Yahweh is puremaking bright the eyesTe speech of Yahweh is ritually purestanding for everTe judgments of Yahweh are truthTey are righteous all togethermore desirable than goldthan much pure goldmore sweet than honeyor the refined combYour servant is indeed illumined by themand in their observance is there great gain

Concerning this possible reference to ritual anointing Wyatt argues

It is true that there is no narrative statement about unc-

tion here oil is not even mentioned But only thus can thesuccessive blessings on various parts of the kingrsquos body beexplained For comparison we should consider the unction ofpriests in Exod 294ndash9 19ndash21 4012ndash5 and Lev 810ndash2 22ndash4where various parts of the priestrsquos body are anointed with oiland blood undoubtedly with some liturgical commentary onthe action such is now narrated in these passages providing

a suitable performative utteranceIf correct Wyattrsquos assessment of Israelite deification proves importantfor an analysis of Adam as divine king in the book of Genesis

66 Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinityrdquo 874ndash75

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2949

294 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

In Genesis chapter 2 Godrsquos initial creative act must be the creation

of man for as a divine king raised ldquofrom the dustrdquo man was specifi-cally formed to assist deity in the creation process God appears as agardener who causes to grow ldquoevery tree that is pleasant to the sightand good for foodrdquo (Genesis 29) Te account declares that the Lordplaced the man in the garden to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo his newly createdoasis (Genesis 215) As a gardener the Lord plants Eden as a gardenerthe Lord mixes the soil to form both man and beast As a gardener the

Lord creates man in his image to perform the work of a God Follow-ing his creation man assumes the role of divine gardenerFrom an ancient Near Eastern perspective the view of Adam as

divine gardener suggests that biblical authors viewed humanity asan earthly extension of the divine council According to the Edenaccount man was immortal (Genesis 217) man had received fromdeity the sacred ldquobreath of liferdquo (Genesis 27) man had been com-missioned to perform the work of a godmdashthat is to till and tend the

divine garden Terefore as an immortal gardener man was alreadyldquolike the godsrdquo prior to partaking of the forbidden fruit

In Mesopotamian myths for example the work of gardening wasassigned to lesser members of the divine council Hence the story ofAtrahasis opens with the following portrayal

When gods were man

Tey did forced labor they bore drudgeryGreat indeed was the drudgery of the godsTe forced labor was heavy the misery too muchTe seven() great Anunna-gods were burdeningTe Igigi-gods with forced labor

Like the account in Genesis the lesser gods of the divine council inAtrahasis were gardeners who did the laborious task of caring for the

canals trees and waterways that sustained the higher gods of the67 For additional examples of Yahweh portrayed in the role of gardener see Num-

bers 246 Psalm 10416 Isaiah 4414 68 Altrahasis II39 1ndash6 translation in Benjamin R Foster Beore the Muses An Anthol-ogy o Akkadian Literature (Bethesda MD CDL 1993) 1159

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 295

assembly Hence Adam as an immortal being clearly reflects the

position of the Igigi in Mesopotamian thought Te questions pre-sented to Job by Eliphaz regarding the primal human seem to share

this notion

Are you the firstborn of the human race

Were you brought forth before the hills

Have you listened in the council of God (Job 157ndash8 NRSV)

As Dexter Callender has observed concerning these questionsldquoTe allusion to the primal human in Job does not give us explicit

details concerning his incorporation into the sacred world It is clear

however that the idea is present in the reference that the primal human

lsquolistenedrsquo in the council of Godrdquo As a member of Godrsquos council man

held a stewardship to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo the deityrsquos garden (Genesis

215) According to the Genesis account when the man and woman

eat from the tree of knowledge God expels the humans from Edenand assigns the cherubim other traditional members of the divine

council to ldquokeeprdquo the garden (Genesis 324) Tis move may suggest

that in biblical thought ldquokeepingrdquo the garden is a task reserved for

members of the divine host As an immortal subordinate assigned an

important council task man however eventually appears in the Gen-

esis account as a being very much like the council deities mentioned

in Psalm 82 who receive the decree of death

I have said Ye are gods and all of you are children of the

most High

But ye shall die like men and fall like one of the princes

(Psalm 826ndash7)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou

shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thoushalt surely die (Genesis 217)

69 Dexter E Callender Jr Adam in Myth and History Ancient Israelite Perspectiveson the Primal Human (Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 2000) 212 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 289

able emphasis upon the deified dead in the Hebrew Bible and the early

Christian teaching regarding deification Heiser notwithstandingPetersonrsquos evidence rejects the idea that a genus equation of God and

humankind appears in the Bible

For his criticisms of Petersonrsquos views Heiser places considerable

weight on the notion that ldquothe concept of the image of God does not

advance the idea that there is a genus equation of God and human-

kind or that God was once a manrdquo (p 224) On some levels Heiserrsquos

point concerning the word tzelem or ldquoimagerdquo in Genesis 126ndash27is correct Concerning this controversial term Marc Z Brettler has

recently explained

Te word tzelem (ldquoimagerdquo) elsewhere always refers to a

physical representation For example the Book of Ezekiel

uses tzelem when it refers to ldquomen sculptured upon the walls

figures of Chaldeans drawn in vermilionrdquo (2314) or when it

accuses Israel of fornicating with ldquophallic imagesrdquo (1617) Teword oen refers to idols (eg Num 3352 Ezek 720 Amos

526 2 Chron 2317) It always signifies a concrete entity

rather than an abstract one Tis is not surprising since the

Bible (in contrast to most medieval philosophical traditions

both Jewish and Christian) oen depicts God in corporeal

terms

Genesis 126ndash27 suggests that Godrsquos physical likeness is similar to

humanityrsquos but Heiser is correct that the statement does not indicate

that biblical authors viewed humans as gods or that God himself was

once a human However many other texts from the Bible do present a

theomorphic view of humanity Peterson therefore is precisely correct

in stating that ldquothe Latter-day Saint understanding that humans are of

the same genus or species as God is thus clearly biblicalrdquo54 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509ndash28

55 Marc Z Brettler How to Read the Bible (Philadelphia Jewish Publication Society2005) 43ndash44 Hebrew word deleted 56 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 547

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2549

290 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Adam as a Divine Council Member

In addition to associating humanity with the tzelem of God theBible describes the first man as a deified member of the divine council

In the Eden story the Lord took advantage of the wet claylike soil and

ldquoformed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils

the breath of life and man became a living soulrdquo (Genesis 27) In an

important study concerning this imagery Walter Brueggemann has

shown that a biblical connection exists between being raised from the

dust and enthronement ldquoo be taken lsquofrom the dustrsquo means to be

elevated from obscurity to royal office and to return to dust means to

be deprived of that office and returned to obscurityrdquo Imagery such

as that witnessed in 1 Kings 162 supports Brueggemannrsquos interpreta-

tion ldquoForasmuch as I [God] exalted thee [Jehu] out of the dust and

made thee prince over my people Israel rdquo (1 Kings 162) Hence the

notion of the God raising man ldquofrom the dust of the earthrdquo in Genesis

27 in part suggests that Yahweh begins his creative activity by form-

ing a divine king According to Genesis 215 this divine king through

a type of imitatio dei would continue to perform the work of Yahweh

who ldquoplantedrdquo the garden ldquoAnd the Lord God took the man and put

him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep itrdquo In a simi-

lar fashion Mesopotamian kings such as Hammurapi glorified their

efforts through the use of creation and agricultural imageryI encircled [the wall] with a swamp I dug the Euphrates

as far as Sippar (and) made it reach a prosperous quay

I Hammu-rāpi who builds up the land caused Sippar

and Babylon to dwell in peaceful abodes forever What

from [primordial days] no one among the kings had done I

did in a grand fashion for the god Šamaš my lord

57 Walter Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestament-liche Wissenschaf 841 (1972) 1ndash18 58 Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo 2 59 Douglas Frayne Old Babylonian Period (2003ndash1595 BC) (oronto University oforonto Press 1990) 348ndash49

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 291

Te view presented in the Babylonian inscription on the wall

of Sippar reflects the common Near Eastern assumption featured inGenesis 2 of a God king participating in the act of creation from ldquopri-

mordial daysrdquo through structure1048624 As a king Hammurapi assumed

the same role filled by deities who created the universe by giving order

to preexistent chaos In its depiction of Adam as the primordial gar-

dener the Bible relies upon similar imagery

Manrsquos status as the archetypal gardener king in Genesis 2ndash3 con-

tains important parallels with Mesopotamian kingship theory1048580 Sev-eral examples of Mesopotamian iconography feature a depiction of the

tree (or plant) of life over which the king and priests appear pouring

libations In assessing the connection between Mesopotamian kings

and gardeners Geo Widengren cites these statements from the am-

muz text R IV 27 No I

A tamarisk which in the garden has no water to drink

Whose foliage on the plant sends forth no twig

A plant which they water no more in its pot

Whose roots are torn away

A herb which is in the garden has no water to drink

Among the flowers of the garden he sleeps

Among the flowers of the garden he is thrown

According to Widengren ldquothe ree of Life is watered by the kingwho pours out over it the Water of Life which he has in his possession

Te ree of Life constantly needs the Water of Life near which it is

growing in the garden of paradiserdquo983044 Te connection between king

and gardener was widely attested throughout ancient Mesopotamia

60 In his translation Frayne renders the Akkadian word szligi-a-tim as ldquothe pastrdquo Teinscription however clearly relies on creation imagery and I have therefore interpreted

szligiatim as ldquoprimordial daysrdquo in accordance with the information provided in Jeremy BlackAndrew George and Nicholas Postgate A Concise Dictionary o Akkadian (WiesbadenHarrassowitz 2000) 337 61 See Geo Widengren Te King and the ree o Lie in Ancient Near Eastern Reli- gion (Uppsala Uppsala Universitets Aringrsskri 1951) 62 Widengren King and the ree o Lie 15

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2749

292 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Tis portrayal of kingship appears in the birth legend of Sargon

wherein the monarch declaresAkki the waterscooper placed me as his gardenerWhen I was a gardener Ishtar was in love with meTe kingship I exercised during x + 5 years

Tese lines from the tale of Sargon the gardener whom the goddess Ishtarloved seem to provide an especially significant parallel with the biblical view presented in the story of Eden In the words of Nicholas Wyatt ldquotheman in his garden is a symbolic allusion to the king in his sanctuaryrdquo

One of the important connections between humanityrsquos enthrone-ment in the garden and later biblical traditions includes the anointingof an Israelite king in 1 Kings 128ndash40 at the Gihon Spring a rivernamed Gihon was one of the four rivers that flowed out of Eden andround the land of Cush (Genesis 213) Significantly the only otherexplicit reference to the Garden of Eden in the Hebrew Bible appears

in a context that addresses the link between kingship and divinity (seeEzekiel 282ndash13)

Concerning the attestation of biblical rituals that may preserveactual religious rites wherein Israelite kings assumed divinity Wyattargues that

the rituals which transform the status of the earthly kingremoving him from ldquomerely humanrdquo status to that of a sacralfigure to be couched in the form of a narrative about a godcarries with it the hint that the king himself is to be seen astransformed into a god Te enthronement of the king isthus his apotheosis

63 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoInterpreting the Creation and Fall Story in Genesis 2ndash3rdquo Zeit-schrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 931 (1981) 15 64 John van Seters has argued according to the Documentary Hypothesis that the

story of divine kingship in J derives from Babylonian influences and is therefore latepostexilic If P is in part a reaction to the J account then it is difficult to accept vanSetersrsquos dating see John van Seters ldquoTe Creation of Man and the Creation of the KingrdquoZeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 1013 (1989) 333ndash41 65 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinity Some Mythical and Ritual Aspects of WestSemitic Kingshiprdquo Ugarit-Forschungen 31 (1999) 857

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 293

In his exploration of biblical deification Wyatt refers to Psalm 198ndash10

as a possible ritual text transforming the king into a divine beingTe teaching of Yahweh is perfectrestoring the breastTe testimony of Yahweh is certainmaking wise the headTe precepts of Yahweh are uprightrejoicing the heart

Te commandment of Yahweh is puremaking bright the eyesTe speech of Yahweh is ritually purestanding for everTe judgments of Yahweh are truthTey are righteous all togethermore desirable than goldthan much pure goldmore sweet than honeyor the refined combYour servant is indeed illumined by themand in their observance is there great gain

Concerning this possible reference to ritual anointing Wyatt argues

It is true that there is no narrative statement about unc-

tion here oil is not even mentioned But only thus can thesuccessive blessings on various parts of the kingrsquos body beexplained For comparison we should consider the unction ofpriests in Exod 294ndash9 19ndash21 4012ndash5 and Lev 810ndash2 22ndash4where various parts of the priestrsquos body are anointed with oiland blood undoubtedly with some liturgical commentary onthe action such is now narrated in these passages providing

a suitable performative utteranceIf correct Wyattrsquos assessment of Israelite deification proves importantfor an analysis of Adam as divine king in the book of Genesis

66 Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinityrdquo 874ndash75

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2949

294 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

In Genesis chapter 2 Godrsquos initial creative act must be the creation

of man for as a divine king raised ldquofrom the dustrdquo man was specifi-cally formed to assist deity in the creation process God appears as agardener who causes to grow ldquoevery tree that is pleasant to the sightand good for foodrdquo (Genesis 29) Te account declares that the Lordplaced the man in the garden to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo his newly createdoasis (Genesis 215) As a gardener the Lord plants Eden as a gardenerthe Lord mixes the soil to form both man and beast As a gardener the

Lord creates man in his image to perform the work of a God Follow-ing his creation man assumes the role of divine gardenerFrom an ancient Near Eastern perspective the view of Adam as

divine gardener suggests that biblical authors viewed humanity asan earthly extension of the divine council According to the Edenaccount man was immortal (Genesis 217) man had received fromdeity the sacred ldquobreath of liferdquo (Genesis 27) man had been com-missioned to perform the work of a godmdashthat is to till and tend the

divine garden Terefore as an immortal gardener man was alreadyldquolike the godsrdquo prior to partaking of the forbidden fruit

In Mesopotamian myths for example the work of gardening wasassigned to lesser members of the divine council Hence the story ofAtrahasis opens with the following portrayal

When gods were man

Tey did forced labor they bore drudgeryGreat indeed was the drudgery of the godsTe forced labor was heavy the misery too muchTe seven() great Anunna-gods were burdeningTe Igigi-gods with forced labor

Like the account in Genesis the lesser gods of the divine council inAtrahasis were gardeners who did the laborious task of caring for the

canals trees and waterways that sustained the higher gods of the67 For additional examples of Yahweh portrayed in the role of gardener see Num-

bers 246 Psalm 10416 Isaiah 4414 68 Altrahasis II39 1ndash6 translation in Benjamin R Foster Beore the Muses An Anthol-ogy o Akkadian Literature (Bethesda MD CDL 1993) 1159

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 295

assembly Hence Adam as an immortal being clearly reflects the

position of the Igigi in Mesopotamian thought Te questions pre-sented to Job by Eliphaz regarding the primal human seem to share

this notion

Are you the firstborn of the human race

Were you brought forth before the hills

Have you listened in the council of God (Job 157ndash8 NRSV)

As Dexter Callender has observed concerning these questionsldquoTe allusion to the primal human in Job does not give us explicit

details concerning his incorporation into the sacred world It is clear

however that the idea is present in the reference that the primal human

lsquolistenedrsquo in the council of Godrdquo As a member of Godrsquos council man

held a stewardship to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo the deityrsquos garden (Genesis

215) According to the Genesis account when the man and woman

eat from the tree of knowledge God expels the humans from Edenand assigns the cherubim other traditional members of the divine

council to ldquokeeprdquo the garden (Genesis 324) Tis move may suggest

that in biblical thought ldquokeepingrdquo the garden is a task reserved for

members of the divine host As an immortal subordinate assigned an

important council task man however eventually appears in the Gen-

esis account as a being very much like the council deities mentioned

in Psalm 82 who receive the decree of death

I have said Ye are gods and all of you are children of the

most High

But ye shall die like men and fall like one of the princes

(Psalm 826ndash7)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou

shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thoushalt surely die (Genesis 217)

69 Dexter E Callender Jr Adam in Myth and History Ancient Israelite Perspectiveson the Primal Human (Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 2000) 212 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2549

290 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Adam as a Divine Council Member

In addition to associating humanity with the tzelem of God theBible describes the first man as a deified member of the divine council

In the Eden story the Lord took advantage of the wet claylike soil and

ldquoformed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils

the breath of life and man became a living soulrdquo (Genesis 27) In an

important study concerning this imagery Walter Brueggemann has

shown that a biblical connection exists between being raised from the

dust and enthronement ldquoo be taken lsquofrom the dustrsquo means to be

elevated from obscurity to royal office and to return to dust means to

be deprived of that office and returned to obscurityrdquo Imagery such

as that witnessed in 1 Kings 162 supports Brueggemannrsquos interpreta-

tion ldquoForasmuch as I [God] exalted thee [Jehu] out of the dust and

made thee prince over my people Israel rdquo (1 Kings 162) Hence the

notion of the God raising man ldquofrom the dust of the earthrdquo in Genesis

27 in part suggests that Yahweh begins his creative activity by form-

ing a divine king According to Genesis 215 this divine king through

a type of imitatio dei would continue to perform the work of Yahweh

who ldquoplantedrdquo the garden ldquoAnd the Lord God took the man and put

him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep itrdquo In a simi-

lar fashion Mesopotamian kings such as Hammurapi glorified their

efforts through the use of creation and agricultural imageryI encircled [the wall] with a swamp I dug the Euphrates

as far as Sippar (and) made it reach a prosperous quay

I Hammu-rāpi who builds up the land caused Sippar

and Babylon to dwell in peaceful abodes forever What

from [primordial days] no one among the kings had done I

did in a grand fashion for the god Šamaš my lord

57 Walter Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo Zeitschrif uumlr die Alttestament-liche Wissenschaf 841 (1972) 1ndash18 58 Brueggemann ldquoFrom Dust to Kingshiprdquo 2 59 Douglas Frayne Old Babylonian Period (2003ndash1595 BC) (oronto University oforonto Press 1990) 348ndash49

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 291

Te view presented in the Babylonian inscription on the wall

of Sippar reflects the common Near Eastern assumption featured inGenesis 2 of a God king participating in the act of creation from ldquopri-

mordial daysrdquo through structure1048624 As a king Hammurapi assumed

the same role filled by deities who created the universe by giving order

to preexistent chaos In its depiction of Adam as the primordial gar-

dener the Bible relies upon similar imagery

Manrsquos status as the archetypal gardener king in Genesis 2ndash3 con-

tains important parallels with Mesopotamian kingship theory1048580 Sev-eral examples of Mesopotamian iconography feature a depiction of the

tree (or plant) of life over which the king and priests appear pouring

libations In assessing the connection between Mesopotamian kings

and gardeners Geo Widengren cites these statements from the am-

muz text R IV 27 No I

A tamarisk which in the garden has no water to drink

Whose foliage on the plant sends forth no twig

A plant which they water no more in its pot

Whose roots are torn away

A herb which is in the garden has no water to drink

Among the flowers of the garden he sleeps

Among the flowers of the garden he is thrown

According to Widengren ldquothe ree of Life is watered by the kingwho pours out over it the Water of Life which he has in his possession

Te ree of Life constantly needs the Water of Life near which it is

growing in the garden of paradiserdquo983044 Te connection between king

and gardener was widely attested throughout ancient Mesopotamia

60 In his translation Frayne renders the Akkadian word szligi-a-tim as ldquothe pastrdquo Teinscription however clearly relies on creation imagery and I have therefore interpreted

szligiatim as ldquoprimordial daysrdquo in accordance with the information provided in Jeremy BlackAndrew George and Nicholas Postgate A Concise Dictionary o Akkadian (WiesbadenHarrassowitz 2000) 337 61 See Geo Widengren Te King and the ree o Lie in Ancient Near Eastern Reli- gion (Uppsala Uppsala Universitets Aringrsskri 1951) 62 Widengren King and the ree o Lie 15

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2749

292 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Tis portrayal of kingship appears in the birth legend of Sargon

wherein the monarch declaresAkki the waterscooper placed me as his gardenerWhen I was a gardener Ishtar was in love with meTe kingship I exercised during x + 5 years

Tese lines from the tale of Sargon the gardener whom the goddess Ishtarloved seem to provide an especially significant parallel with the biblical view presented in the story of Eden In the words of Nicholas Wyatt ldquotheman in his garden is a symbolic allusion to the king in his sanctuaryrdquo

One of the important connections between humanityrsquos enthrone-ment in the garden and later biblical traditions includes the anointingof an Israelite king in 1 Kings 128ndash40 at the Gihon Spring a rivernamed Gihon was one of the four rivers that flowed out of Eden andround the land of Cush (Genesis 213) Significantly the only otherexplicit reference to the Garden of Eden in the Hebrew Bible appears

in a context that addresses the link between kingship and divinity (seeEzekiel 282ndash13)

Concerning the attestation of biblical rituals that may preserveactual religious rites wherein Israelite kings assumed divinity Wyattargues that

the rituals which transform the status of the earthly kingremoving him from ldquomerely humanrdquo status to that of a sacralfigure to be couched in the form of a narrative about a godcarries with it the hint that the king himself is to be seen astransformed into a god Te enthronement of the king isthus his apotheosis

63 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoInterpreting the Creation and Fall Story in Genesis 2ndash3rdquo Zeit-schrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 931 (1981) 15 64 John van Seters has argued according to the Documentary Hypothesis that the

story of divine kingship in J derives from Babylonian influences and is therefore latepostexilic If P is in part a reaction to the J account then it is difficult to accept vanSetersrsquos dating see John van Seters ldquoTe Creation of Man and the Creation of the KingrdquoZeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 1013 (1989) 333ndash41 65 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinity Some Mythical and Ritual Aspects of WestSemitic Kingshiprdquo Ugarit-Forschungen 31 (1999) 857

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 293

In his exploration of biblical deification Wyatt refers to Psalm 198ndash10

as a possible ritual text transforming the king into a divine beingTe teaching of Yahweh is perfectrestoring the breastTe testimony of Yahweh is certainmaking wise the headTe precepts of Yahweh are uprightrejoicing the heart

Te commandment of Yahweh is puremaking bright the eyesTe speech of Yahweh is ritually purestanding for everTe judgments of Yahweh are truthTey are righteous all togethermore desirable than goldthan much pure goldmore sweet than honeyor the refined combYour servant is indeed illumined by themand in their observance is there great gain

Concerning this possible reference to ritual anointing Wyatt argues

It is true that there is no narrative statement about unc-

tion here oil is not even mentioned But only thus can thesuccessive blessings on various parts of the kingrsquos body beexplained For comparison we should consider the unction ofpriests in Exod 294ndash9 19ndash21 4012ndash5 and Lev 810ndash2 22ndash4where various parts of the priestrsquos body are anointed with oiland blood undoubtedly with some liturgical commentary onthe action such is now narrated in these passages providing

a suitable performative utteranceIf correct Wyattrsquos assessment of Israelite deification proves importantfor an analysis of Adam as divine king in the book of Genesis

66 Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinityrdquo 874ndash75

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2949

294 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

In Genesis chapter 2 Godrsquos initial creative act must be the creation

of man for as a divine king raised ldquofrom the dustrdquo man was specifi-cally formed to assist deity in the creation process God appears as agardener who causes to grow ldquoevery tree that is pleasant to the sightand good for foodrdquo (Genesis 29) Te account declares that the Lordplaced the man in the garden to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo his newly createdoasis (Genesis 215) As a gardener the Lord plants Eden as a gardenerthe Lord mixes the soil to form both man and beast As a gardener the

Lord creates man in his image to perform the work of a God Follow-ing his creation man assumes the role of divine gardenerFrom an ancient Near Eastern perspective the view of Adam as

divine gardener suggests that biblical authors viewed humanity asan earthly extension of the divine council According to the Edenaccount man was immortal (Genesis 217) man had received fromdeity the sacred ldquobreath of liferdquo (Genesis 27) man had been com-missioned to perform the work of a godmdashthat is to till and tend the

divine garden Terefore as an immortal gardener man was alreadyldquolike the godsrdquo prior to partaking of the forbidden fruit

In Mesopotamian myths for example the work of gardening wasassigned to lesser members of the divine council Hence the story ofAtrahasis opens with the following portrayal

When gods were man

Tey did forced labor they bore drudgeryGreat indeed was the drudgery of the godsTe forced labor was heavy the misery too muchTe seven() great Anunna-gods were burdeningTe Igigi-gods with forced labor

Like the account in Genesis the lesser gods of the divine council inAtrahasis were gardeners who did the laborious task of caring for the

canals trees and waterways that sustained the higher gods of the67 For additional examples of Yahweh portrayed in the role of gardener see Num-

bers 246 Psalm 10416 Isaiah 4414 68 Altrahasis II39 1ndash6 translation in Benjamin R Foster Beore the Muses An Anthol-ogy o Akkadian Literature (Bethesda MD CDL 1993) 1159

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 295

assembly Hence Adam as an immortal being clearly reflects the

position of the Igigi in Mesopotamian thought Te questions pre-sented to Job by Eliphaz regarding the primal human seem to share

this notion

Are you the firstborn of the human race

Were you brought forth before the hills

Have you listened in the council of God (Job 157ndash8 NRSV)

As Dexter Callender has observed concerning these questionsldquoTe allusion to the primal human in Job does not give us explicit

details concerning his incorporation into the sacred world It is clear

however that the idea is present in the reference that the primal human

lsquolistenedrsquo in the council of Godrdquo As a member of Godrsquos council man

held a stewardship to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo the deityrsquos garden (Genesis

215) According to the Genesis account when the man and woman

eat from the tree of knowledge God expels the humans from Edenand assigns the cherubim other traditional members of the divine

council to ldquokeeprdquo the garden (Genesis 324) Tis move may suggest

that in biblical thought ldquokeepingrdquo the garden is a task reserved for

members of the divine host As an immortal subordinate assigned an

important council task man however eventually appears in the Gen-

esis account as a being very much like the council deities mentioned

in Psalm 82 who receive the decree of death

I have said Ye are gods and all of you are children of the

most High

But ye shall die like men and fall like one of the princes

(Psalm 826ndash7)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou

shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thoushalt surely die (Genesis 217)

69 Dexter E Callender Jr Adam in Myth and History Ancient Israelite Perspectiveson the Primal Human (Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 2000) 212 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 291

Te view presented in the Babylonian inscription on the wall

of Sippar reflects the common Near Eastern assumption featured inGenesis 2 of a God king participating in the act of creation from ldquopri-

mordial daysrdquo through structure1048624 As a king Hammurapi assumed

the same role filled by deities who created the universe by giving order

to preexistent chaos In its depiction of Adam as the primordial gar-

dener the Bible relies upon similar imagery

Manrsquos status as the archetypal gardener king in Genesis 2ndash3 con-

tains important parallels with Mesopotamian kingship theory1048580 Sev-eral examples of Mesopotamian iconography feature a depiction of the

tree (or plant) of life over which the king and priests appear pouring

libations In assessing the connection between Mesopotamian kings

and gardeners Geo Widengren cites these statements from the am-

muz text R IV 27 No I

A tamarisk which in the garden has no water to drink

Whose foliage on the plant sends forth no twig

A plant which they water no more in its pot

Whose roots are torn away

A herb which is in the garden has no water to drink

Among the flowers of the garden he sleeps

Among the flowers of the garden he is thrown

According to Widengren ldquothe ree of Life is watered by the kingwho pours out over it the Water of Life which he has in his possession

Te ree of Life constantly needs the Water of Life near which it is

growing in the garden of paradiserdquo983044 Te connection between king

and gardener was widely attested throughout ancient Mesopotamia

60 In his translation Frayne renders the Akkadian word szligi-a-tim as ldquothe pastrdquo Teinscription however clearly relies on creation imagery and I have therefore interpreted

szligiatim as ldquoprimordial daysrdquo in accordance with the information provided in Jeremy BlackAndrew George and Nicholas Postgate A Concise Dictionary o Akkadian (WiesbadenHarrassowitz 2000) 337 61 See Geo Widengren Te King and the ree o Lie in Ancient Near Eastern Reli- gion (Uppsala Uppsala Universitets Aringrsskri 1951) 62 Widengren King and the ree o Lie 15

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2749

292 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Tis portrayal of kingship appears in the birth legend of Sargon

wherein the monarch declaresAkki the waterscooper placed me as his gardenerWhen I was a gardener Ishtar was in love with meTe kingship I exercised during x + 5 years

Tese lines from the tale of Sargon the gardener whom the goddess Ishtarloved seem to provide an especially significant parallel with the biblical view presented in the story of Eden In the words of Nicholas Wyatt ldquotheman in his garden is a symbolic allusion to the king in his sanctuaryrdquo

One of the important connections between humanityrsquos enthrone-ment in the garden and later biblical traditions includes the anointingof an Israelite king in 1 Kings 128ndash40 at the Gihon Spring a rivernamed Gihon was one of the four rivers that flowed out of Eden andround the land of Cush (Genesis 213) Significantly the only otherexplicit reference to the Garden of Eden in the Hebrew Bible appears

in a context that addresses the link between kingship and divinity (seeEzekiel 282ndash13)

Concerning the attestation of biblical rituals that may preserveactual religious rites wherein Israelite kings assumed divinity Wyattargues that

the rituals which transform the status of the earthly kingremoving him from ldquomerely humanrdquo status to that of a sacralfigure to be couched in the form of a narrative about a godcarries with it the hint that the king himself is to be seen astransformed into a god Te enthronement of the king isthus his apotheosis

63 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoInterpreting the Creation and Fall Story in Genesis 2ndash3rdquo Zeit-schrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 931 (1981) 15 64 John van Seters has argued according to the Documentary Hypothesis that the

story of divine kingship in J derives from Babylonian influences and is therefore latepostexilic If P is in part a reaction to the J account then it is difficult to accept vanSetersrsquos dating see John van Seters ldquoTe Creation of Man and the Creation of the KingrdquoZeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 1013 (1989) 333ndash41 65 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinity Some Mythical and Ritual Aspects of WestSemitic Kingshiprdquo Ugarit-Forschungen 31 (1999) 857

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 293

In his exploration of biblical deification Wyatt refers to Psalm 198ndash10

as a possible ritual text transforming the king into a divine beingTe teaching of Yahweh is perfectrestoring the breastTe testimony of Yahweh is certainmaking wise the headTe precepts of Yahweh are uprightrejoicing the heart

Te commandment of Yahweh is puremaking bright the eyesTe speech of Yahweh is ritually purestanding for everTe judgments of Yahweh are truthTey are righteous all togethermore desirable than goldthan much pure goldmore sweet than honeyor the refined combYour servant is indeed illumined by themand in their observance is there great gain

Concerning this possible reference to ritual anointing Wyatt argues

It is true that there is no narrative statement about unc-

tion here oil is not even mentioned But only thus can thesuccessive blessings on various parts of the kingrsquos body beexplained For comparison we should consider the unction ofpriests in Exod 294ndash9 19ndash21 4012ndash5 and Lev 810ndash2 22ndash4where various parts of the priestrsquos body are anointed with oiland blood undoubtedly with some liturgical commentary onthe action such is now narrated in these passages providing

a suitable performative utteranceIf correct Wyattrsquos assessment of Israelite deification proves importantfor an analysis of Adam as divine king in the book of Genesis

66 Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinityrdquo 874ndash75

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2949

294 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

In Genesis chapter 2 Godrsquos initial creative act must be the creation

of man for as a divine king raised ldquofrom the dustrdquo man was specifi-cally formed to assist deity in the creation process God appears as agardener who causes to grow ldquoevery tree that is pleasant to the sightand good for foodrdquo (Genesis 29) Te account declares that the Lordplaced the man in the garden to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo his newly createdoasis (Genesis 215) As a gardener the Lord plants Eden as a gardenerthe Lord mixes the soil to form both man and beast As a gardener the

Lord creates man in his image to perform the work of a God Follow-ing his creation man assumes the role of divine gardenerFrom an ancient Near Eastern perspective the view of Adam as

divine gardener suggests that biblical authors viewed humanity asan earthly extension of the divine council According to the Edenaccount man was immortal (Genesis 217) man had received fromdeity the sacred ldquobreath of liferdquo (Genesis 27) man had been com-missioned to perform the work of a godmdashthat is to till and tend the

divine garden Terefore as an immortal gardener man was alreadyldquolike the godsrdquo prior to partaking of the forbidden fruit

In Mesopotamian myths for example the work of gardening wasassigned to lesser members of the divine council Hence the story ofAtrahasis opens with the following portrayal

When gods were man

Tey did forced labor they bore drudgeryGreat indeed was the drudgery of the godsTe forced labor was heavy the misery too muchTe seven() great Anunna-gods were burdeningTe Igigi-gods with forced labor

Like the account in Genesis the lesser gods of the divine council inAtrahasis were gardeners who did the laborious task of caring for the

canals trees and waterways that sustained the higher gods of the67 For additional examples of Yahweh portrayed in the role of gardener see Num-

bers 246 Psalm 10416 Isaiah 4414 68 Altrahasis II39 1ndash6 translation in Benjamin R Foster Beore the Muses An Anthol-ogy o Akkadian Literature (Bethesda MD CDL 1993) 1159

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 295

assembly Hence Adam as an immortal being clearly reflects the

position of the Igigi in Mesopotamian thought Te questions pre-sented to Job by Eliphaz regarding the primal human seem to share

this notion

Are you the firstborn of the human race

Were you brought forth before the hills

Have you listened in the council of God (Job 157ndash8 NRSV)

As Dexter Callender has observed concerning these questionsldquoTe allusion to the primal human in Job does not give us explicit

details concerning his incorporation into the sacred world It is clear

however that the idea is present in the reference that the primal human

lsquolistenedrsquo in the council of Godrdquo As a member of Godrsquos council man

held a stewardship to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo the deityrsquos garden (Genesis

215) According to the Genesis account when the man and woman

eat from the tree of knowledge God expels the humans from Edenand assigns the cherubim other traditional members of the divine

council to ldquokeeprdquo the garden (Genesis 324) Tis move may suggest

that in biblical thought ldquokeepingrdquo the garden is a task reserved for

members of the divine host As an immortal subordinate assigned an

important council task man however eventually appears in the Gen-

esis account as a being very much like the council deities mentioned

in Psalm 82 who receive the decree of death

I have said Ye are gods and all of you are children of the

most High

But ye shall die like men and fall like one of the princes

(Psalm 826ndash7)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou

shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thoushalt surely die (Genesis 217)

69 Dexter E Callender Jr Adam in Myth and History Ancient Israelite Perspectiveson the Primal Human (Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 2000) 212 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2749

292 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Tis portrayal of kingship appears in the birth legend of Sargon

wherein the monarch declaresAkki the waterscooper placed me as his gardenerWhen I was a gardener Ishtar was in love with meTe kingship I exercised during x + 5 years

Tese lines from the tale of Sargon the gardener whom the goddess Ishtarloved seem to provide an especially significant parallel with the biblical view presented in the story of Eden In the words of Nicholas Wyatt ldquotheman in his garden is a symbolic allusion to the king in his sanctuaryrdquo

One of the important connections between humanityrsquos enthrone-ment in the garden and later biblical traditions includes the anointingof an Israelite king in 1 Kings 128ndash40 at the Gihon Spring a rivernamed Gihon was one of the four rivers that flowed out of Eden andround the land of Cush (Genesis 213) Significantly the only otherexplicit reference to the Garden of Eden in the Hebrew Bible appears

in a context that addresses the link between kingship and divinity (seeEzekiel 282ndash13)

Concerning the attestation of biblical rituals that may preserveactual religious rites wherein Israelite kings assumed divinity Wyattargues that

the rituals which transform the status of the earthly kingremoving him from ldquomerely humanrdquo status to that of a sacralfigure to be couched in the form of a narrative about a godcarries with it the hint that the king himself is to be seen astransformed into a god Te enthronement of the king isthus his apotheosis

63 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoInterpreting the Creation and Fall Story in Genesis 2ndash3rdquo Zeit-schrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 931 (1981) 15 64 John van Seters has argued according to the Documentary Hypothesis that the

story of divine kingship in J derives from Babylonian influences and is therefore latepostexilic If P is in part a reaction to the J account then it is difficult to accept vanSetersrsquos dating see John van Seters ldquoTe Creation of Man and the Creation of the KingrdquoZeitschrif uumlr die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaf 1013 (1989) 333ndash41 65 Nicholas Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinity Some Mythical and Ritual Aspects of WestSemitic Kingshiprdquo Ugarit-Forschungen 31 (1999) 857

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 293

In his exploration of biblical deification Wyatt refers to Psalm 198ndash10

as a possible ritual text transforming the king into a divine beingTe teaching of Yahweh is perfectrestoring the breastTe testimony of Yahweh is certainmaking wise the headTe precepts of Yahweh are uprightrejoicing the heart

Te commandment of Yahweh is puremaking bright the eyesTe speech of Yahweh is ritually purestanding for everTe judgments of Yahweh are truthTey are righteous all togethermore desirable than goldthan much pure goldmore sweet than honeyor the refined combYour servant is indeed illumined by themand in their observance is there great gain

Concerning this possible reference to ritual anointing Wyatt argues

It is true that there is no narrative statement about unc-

tion here oil is not even mentioned But only thus can thesuccessive blessings on various parts of the kingrsquos body beexplained For comparison we should consider the unction ofpriests in Exod 294ndash9 19ndash21 4012ndash5 and Lev 810ndash2 22ndash4where various parts of the priestrsquos body are anointed with oiland blood undoubtedly with some liturgical commentary onthe action such is now narrated in these passages providing

a suitable performative utteranceIf correct Wyattrsquos assessment of Israelite deification proves importantfor an analysis of Adam as divine king in the book of Genesis

66 Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinityrdquo 874ndash75

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2949

294 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

In Genesis chapter 2 Godrsquos initial creative act must be the creation

of man for as a divine king raised ldquofrom the dustrdquo man was specifi-cally formed to assist deity in the creation process God appears as agardener who causes to grow ldquoevery tree that is pleasant to the sightand good for foodrdquo (Genesis 29) Te account declares that the Lordplaced the man in the garden to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo his newly createdoasis (Genesis 215) As a gardener the Lord plants Eden as a gardenerthe Lord mixes the soil to form both man and beast As a gardener the

Lord creates man in his image to perform the work of a God Follow-ing his creation man assumes the role of divine gardenerFrom an ancient Near Eastern perspective the view of Adam as

divine gardener suggests that biblical authors viewed humanity asan earthly extension of the divine council According to the Edenaccount man was immortal (Genesis 217) man had received fromdeity the sacred ldquobreath of liferdquo (Genesis 27) man had been com-missioned to perform the work of a godmdashthat is to till and tend the

divine garden Terefore as an immortal gardener man was alreadyldquolike the godsrdquo prior to partaking of the forbidden fruit

In Mesopotamian myths for example the work of gardening wasassigned to lesser members of the divine council Hence the story ofAtrahasis opens with the following portrayal

When gods were man

Tey did forced labor they bore drudgeryGreat indeed was the drudgery of the godsTe forced labor was heavy the misery too muchTe seven() great Anunna-gods were burdeningTe Igigi-gods with forced labor

Like the account in Genesis the lesser gods of the divine council inAtrahasis were gardeners who did the laborious task of caring for the

canals trees and waterways that sustained the higher gods of the67 For additional examples of Yahweh portrayed in the role of gardener see Num-

bers 246 Psalm 10416 Isaiah 4414 68 Altrahasis II39 1ndash6 translation in Benjamin R Foster Beore the Muses An Anthol-ogy o Akkadian Literature (Bethesda MD CDL 1993) 1159

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 295

assembly Hence Adam as an immortal being clearly reflects the

position of the Igigi in Mesopotamian thought Te questions pre-sented to Job by Eliphaz regarding the primal human seem to share

this notion

Are you the firstborn of the human race

Were you brought forth before the hills

Have you listened in the council of God (Job 157ndash8 NRSV)

As Dexter Callender has observed concerning these questionsldquoTe allusion to the primal human in Job does not give us explicit

details concerning his incorporation into the sacred world It is clear

however that the idea is present in the reference that the primal human

lsquolistenedrsquo in the council of Godrdquo As a member of Godrsquos council man

held a stewardship to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo the deityrsquos garden (Genesis

215) According to the Genesis account when the man and woman

eat from the tree of knowledge God expels the humans from Edenand assigns the cherubim other traditional members of the divine

council to ldquokeeprdquo the garden (Genesis 324) Tis move may suggest

that in biblical thought ldquokeepingrdquo the garden is a task reserved for

members of the divine host As an immortal subordinate assigned an

important council task man however eventually appears in the Gen-

esis account as a being very much like the council deities mentioned

in Psalm 82 who receive the decree of death

I have said Ye are gods and all of you are children of the

most High

But ye shall die like men and fall like one of the princes

(Psalm 826ndash7)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou

shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thoushalt surely die (Genesis 217)

69 Dexter E Callender Jr Adam in Myth and History Ancient Israelite Perspectiveson the Primal Human (Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 2000) 212 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 293

In his exploration of biblical deification Wyatt refers to Psalm 198ndash10

as a possible ritual text transforming the king into a divine beingTe teaching of Yahweh is perfectrestoring the breastTe testimony of Yahweh is certainmaking wise the headTe precepts of Yahweh are uprightrejoicing the heart

Te commandment of Yahweh is puremaking bright the eyesTe speech of Yahweh is ritually purestanding for everTe judgments of Yahweh are truthTey are righteous all togethermore desirable than goldthan much pure goldmore sweet than honeyor the refined combYour servant is indeed illumined by themand in their observance is there great gain

Concerning this possible reference to ritual anointing Wyatt argues

It is true that there is no narrative statement about unc-

tion here oil is not even mentioned But only thus can thesuccessive blessings on various parts of the kingrsquos body beexplained For comparison we should consider the unction ofpriests in Exod 294ndash9 19ndash21 4012ndash5 and Lev 810ndash2 22ndash4where various parts of the priestrsquos body are anointed with oiland blood undoubtedly with some liturgical commentary onthe action such is now narrated in these passages providing

a suitable performative utteranceIf correct Wyattrsquos assessment of Israelite deification proves importantfor an analysis of Adam as divine king in the book of Genesis

66 Wyatt ldquoDegrees of Divinityrdquo 874ndash75

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2949

294 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

In Genesis chapter 2 Godrsquos initial creative act must be the creation

of man for as a divine king raised ldquofrom the dustrdquo man was specifi-cally formed to assist deity in the creation process God appears as agardener who causes to grow ldquoevery tree that is pleasant to the sightand good for foodrdquo (Genesis 29) Te account declares that the Lordplaced the man in the garden to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo his newly createdoasis (Genesis 215) As a gardener the Lord plants Eden as a gardenerthe Lord mixes the soil to form both man and beast As a gardener the

Lord creates man in his image to perform the work of a God Follow-ing his creation man assumes the role of divine gardenerFrom an ancient Near Eastern perspective the view of Adam as

divine gardener suggests that biblical authors viewed humanity asan earthly extension of the divine council According to the Edenaccount man was immortal (Genesis 217) man had received fromdeity the sacred ldquobreath of liferdquo (Genesis 27) man had been com-missioned to perform the work of a godmdashthat is to till and tend the

divine garden Terefore as an immortal gardener man was alreadyldquolike the godsrdquo prior to partaking of the forbidden fruit

In Mesopotamian myths for example the work of gardening wasassigned to lesser members of the divine council Hence the story ofAtrahasis opens with the following portrayal

When gods were man

Tey did forced labor they bore drudgeryGreat indeed was the drudgery of the godsTe forced labor was heavy the misery too muchTe seven() great Anunna-gods were burdeningTe Igigi-gods with forced labor

Like the account in Genesis the lesser gods of the divine council inAtrahasis were gardeners who did the laborious task of caring for the

canals trees and waterways that sustained the higher gods of the67 For additional examples of Yahweh portrayed in the role of gardener see Num-

bers 246 Psalm 10416 Isaiah 4414 68 Altrahasis II39 1ndash6 translation in Benjamin R Foster Beore the Muses An Anthol-ogy o Akkadian Literature (Bethesda MD CDL 1993) 1159

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 295

assembly Hence Adam as an immortal being clearly reflects the

position of the Igigi in Mesopotamian thought Te questions pre-sented to Job by Eliphaz regarding the primal human seem to share

this notion

Are you the firstborn of the human race

Were you brought forth before the hills

Have you listened in the council of God (Job 157ndash8 NRSV)

As Dexter Callender has observed concerning these questionsldquoTe allusion to the primal human in Job does not give us explicit

details concerning his incorporation into the sacred world It is clear

however that the idea is present in the reference that the primal human

lsquolistenedrsquo in the council of Godrdquo As a member of Godrsquos council man

held a stewardship to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo the deityrsquos garden (Genesis

215) According to the Genesis account when the man and woman

eat from the tree of knowledge God expels the humans from Edenand assigns the cherubim other traditional members of the divine

council to ldquokeeprdquo the garden (Genesis 324) Tis move may suggest

that in biblical thought ldquokeepingrdquo the garden is a task reserved for

members of the divine host As an immortal subordinate assigned an

important council task man however eventually appears in the Gen-

esis account as a being very much like the council deities mentioned

in Psalm 82 who receive the decree of death

I have said Ye are gods and all of you are children of the

most High

But ye shall die like men and fall like one of the princes

(Psalm 826ndash7)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou

shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thoushalt surely die (Genesis 217)

69 Dexter E Callender Jr Adam in Myth and History Ancient Israelite Perspectiveson the Primal Human (Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 2000) 212 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 2949

294 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

In Genesis chapter 2 Godrsquos initial creative act must be the creation

of man for as a divine king raised ldquofrom the dustrdquo man was specifi-cally formed to assist deity in the creation process God appears as agardener who causes to grow ldquoevery tree that is pleasant to the sightand good for foodrdquo (Genesis 29) Te account declares that the Lordplaced the man in the garden to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo his newly createdoasis (Genesis 215) As a gardener the Lord plants Eden as a gardenerthe Lord mixes the soil to form both man and beast As a gardener the

Lord creates man in his image to perform the work of a God Follow-ing his creation man assumes the role of divine gardenerFrom an ancient Near Eastern perspective the view of Adam as

divine gardener suggests that biblical authors viewed humanity asan earthly extension of the divine council According to the Edenaccount man was immortal (Genesis 217) man had received fromdeity the sacred ldquobreath of liferdquo (Genesis 27) man had been com-missioned to perform the work of a godmdashthat is to till and tend the

divine garden Terefore as an immortal gardener man was alreadyldquolike the godsrdquo prior to partaking of the forbidden fruit

In Mesopotamian myths for example the work of gardening wasassigned to lesser members of the divine council Hence the story ofAtrahasis opens with the following portrayal

When gods were man

Tey did forced labor they bore drudgeryGreat indeed was the drudgery of the godsTe forced labor was heavy the misery too muchTe seven() great Anunna-gods were burdeningTe Igigi-gods with forced labor

Like the account in Genesis the lesser gods of the divine council inAtrahasis were gardeners who did the laborious task of caring for the

canals trees and waterways that sustained the higher gods of the67 For additional examples of Yahweh portrayed in the role of gardener see Num-

bers 246 Psalm 10416 Isaiah 4414 68 Altrahasis II39 1ndash6 translation in Benjamin R Foster Beore the Muses An Anthol-ogy o Akkadian Literature (Bethesda MD CDL 1993) 1159

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 295

assembly Hence Adam as an immortal being clearly reflects the

position of the Igigi in Mesopotamian thought Te questions pre-sented to Job by Eliphaz regarding the primal human seem to share

this notion

Are you the firstborn of the human race

Were you brought forth before the hills

Have you listened in the council of God (Job 157ndash8 NRSV)

As Dexter Callender has observed concerning these questionsldquoTe allusion to the primal human in Job does not give us explicit

details concerning his incorporation into the sacred world It is clear

however that the idea is present in the reference that the primal human

lsquolistenedrsquo in the council of Godrdquo As a member of Godrsquos council man

held a stewardship to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo the deityrsquos garden (Genesis

215) According to the Genesis account when the man and woman

eat from the tree of knowledge God expels the humans from Edenand assigns the cherubim other traditional members of the divine

council to ldquokeeprdquo the garden (Genesis 324) Tis move may suggest

that in biblical thought ldquokeepingrdquo the garden is a task reserved for

members of the divine host As an immortal subordinate assigned an

important council task man however eventually appears in the Gen-

esis account as a being very much like the council deities mentioned

in Psalm 82 who receive the decree of death

I have said Ye are gods and all of you are children of the

most High

But ye shall die like men and fall like one of the princes

(Psalm 826ndash7)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou

shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thoushalt surely die (Genesis 217)

69 Dexter E Callender Jr Adam in Myth and History Ancient Israelite Perspectiveson the Primal Human (Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 2000) 212 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 295

assembly Hence Adam as an immortal being clearly reflects the

position of the Igigi in Mesopotamian thought Te questions pre-sented to Job by Eliphaz regarding the primal human seem to share

this notion

Are you the firstborn of the human race

Were you brought forth before the hills

Have you listened in the council of God (Job 157ndash8 NRSV)

As Dexter Callender has observed concerning these questionsldquoTe allusion to the primal human in Job does not give us explicit

details concerning his incorporation into the sacred world It is clear

however that the idea is present in the reference that the primal human

lsquolistenedrsquo in the council of Godrdquo As a member of Godrsquos council man

held a stewardship to ldquodressrdquo and ldquokeeprdquo the deityrsquos garden (Genesis

215) According to the Genesis account when the man and woman

eat from the tree of knowledge God expels the humans from Edenand assigns the cherubim other traditional members of the divine

council to ldquokeeprdquo the garden (Genesis 324) Tis move may suggest

that in biblical thought ldquokeepingrdquo the garden is a task reserved for

members of the divine host As an immortal subordinate assigned an

important council task man however eventually appears in the Gen-

esis account as a being very much like the council deities mentioned

in Psalm 82 who receive the decree of death

I have said Ye are gods and all of you are children of the

most High

But ye shall die like men and fall like one of the princes

(Psalm 826ndash7)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou

shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thoushalt surely die (Genesis 217)

69 Dexter E Callender Jr Adam in Myth and History Ancient Israelite Perspectiveson the Primal Human (Winona Lake IN Eisenbrauns 2000) 212 emphasis deleted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3149

296 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Humanity and the Sons of God

Genesis chapter 2 portrays the first man as an earthly extension ofthe divine council and Genesis chapter 6 presents a theomorphic viewof humanity through the story of the ldquoSons of Godrdquo In his critiqueHeiser draws attention to the fact that ldquoit is well known among Semi-tists and scholars of the Hebrew Biblerdquo that the biblical phrase Sons o

God has ldquocertifiable linguistic counterparts in Ugaritic texts referringto a council of gods under El and that the meaning of [this phrase] in

the Hebrew Bible points to divine beingsrdquo (p 226) As is the case withother Semitic languages the word ldquosonrdquo or ben in Hebrew can denotea ldquofellow of a group class[ or] guildrdquo1048624 Terefore the ldquoSons of Godrdquo inthe Old estament refers to the lesser gods of the divine council Teseare the beings who according to the description provided in Job 387ldquosang togetherrdquo and ldquoshouted for joyrdquo when God created the worldSince their discovery in 1928 the religious texts of ancient Ugarit have

made biblical scholars increasingly aware of the original meaning ofthe designation ldquoSons of Godrdquo as a title for the members of the divinecouncil Te expression appears for example in reference to the dei-ties addressed by the Canaanite god Baal in KU 14 iii 13ndash14

Valiant Baal re[plie]dthe Charioteer of the Clouds respondedldquoTe Beloved came up and insulted me

he arose and spat upon mein the midst of the ass[emb]ly of the sons of El [bn ilm]rdquo1048580

In the Bible the first reference to these members of Godrsquos councilappears in Genesis 6

Te sons of God saw that [the daughters of humans] werefair and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose

the Nephilim were on the earth in those daysmdashand also70 Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner Te Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon o

the Old estament (Leiden Brill 2005) 1138 71 For an English translation see Nicholas Wyatt Religious exts rom Ugarit TeWords o Ilimilku and His Colleagues (Sheffield UK Sheffield 1998) 95ndash96

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 297

aerwardmdashwhen the sons of God went in to the daughters of

humans who bore children to them Tese were the heroesthat were of old warriors of renown (Genesis 62ndash4 NRSV)

Genesis 62ndash4 illustrates that from an Israelite perspective thegods of the council were sexual beings just as they were throughoutthe ancient Near East In Genesis 6 Yahweh reacts to the ldquowicked-nessrdquo of his council members with anger and destruction (vv 5ndash7)Significantly for Latter-day Saints Joseph Smith creates a direct link

between humanity and the council designation ldquosons of Godrdquo throughthe Prophetrsquos addition to the story preserved in Genesis 6

And also aer that they had heard him they came upbefore him saying Behold we are the sons of God have wenot taken unto ourselves the daughters of men And are wenot eating and drinking and marrying and giving in mar-riage And our wives bear unto us children and the same are

mighty men which are like unto men of old men of greatrenown And they hearkened not unto the words of Noah(Moses 821)

While the Prophetrsquos revision directly associates the title ldquosons ofGodrdquo with humanity the biblical version presents an Israelite folktalein which gods from the heavenly council participate in sexual rela-tions with human beings Since according to the myth the sexual

union between humanity and the members of the divine council spe-cifically results in the production of offspring this folktale providesstrong evidence supporting the claim that Israelites traditionallybelieved that a direct ldquospeciesrdquo link existed between humanity and thegods With its reference to human divine sex and warriors of greatrenown the council story featured in Genesis 6 may have influencedthe development of the Samson story from the book of Judges Likethe story presented in Genesis 6 Samsonrsquos birth narrative may pre-serve an ancient Israelite traditional belief that humans could producephysical offspring with the gods

In the book of Judges the story of Samson begins with an accountin which ldquothe angel of the Lord appearedrdquo to Samsonrsquos barren mother

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3349

298 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

(Judges 133ndash6) In his critique Heiser draws attention to the fact that

the word angel or mal lt āk in the Bible is ldquoa purely functional term andnot a species termrdquo (p 241) Terefore this heavenly messenger inJudges 13 is not an angel in the traditional way interpreted by Westernreaders but rather a divine messenger sent from the heavenly realmIt is only aer this ldquoman of Godrdquo ascended to heaven in a fiery flamethat Manoah recognized that he had seen a god (Judges 1322) In hisanalysis of the account Brettler states that

when Manoahrsquos wife speaks to her husband she notes (v 6)ldquoTe man of God has come to merdquo the idiom [ldquocome tordquo]is also used in clear sexual contexts so this may also be trans-lated ldquoTe man of God slept with merdquo Trough this doubleentendre put in the mouth of the clever wife of Manoah adouble entendre that her dim-witted husband is too stupid tounderstand the audience is told of the true father of the ldquoboy

to be bornrdquo983044Brettlerrsquos readingmdashwhich is also given by biblical scholars AdeleReinhartz and Susan Ackermanmdashis sustained by comparing Judges13 to other biblical stories concerning barren women For examplein 1 Samuel Hannah conceives aer offering her prayer albeit spe-cifically following the statement Elkanah knew his wife Hannah andthe Lord remembered her (1 Samuel 119 JPS) Accordingly Brettler

argues that ldquothe parentage of the child [Samson] explains his super-human abilitiesrdquo With his incredible strength Samson is very muchlike ldquothe heroes that were of old warriors of renownrdquo depicted in Gen-esis 64 NRSV If this reading of the Samson story is correct Judges 13provides further evidence supporting the Israelite view of an intimatelink between humanity and the members of the heavenly assembly

72 Marc Z Brettler Te Book o Judges (London Routledge 2002) 45

73 See Adele Reinhartz ldquoSamsonrsquos Mother An Unnamed Protagonistrdquo Journal orthe Study o the Old estament 55 (September 1992) 25ndash37 repr in A Feminist Compan-ion to Judges ed Athalya Brenner (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 1993) 157ndash70and Susan Ackerman Warrior Dancer Seductress Queen Women in Judges and BiblicalIsrael (New York Doubleday 1998) 74 Brett ler Book o Judges 46

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 299

Capable of producing offspring with members of the divine council

humanity wasmdashas the Psalmist proclaimsmdashonly a little less than thegods (Psalm 85)

Prophets as Divine Council Members

Among the issues that sustain Petersonrsquos claim that Old esta-ment authors viewed humans as theomorphic are biblical referencesto prophetic interaction with the council Due to the administrative

role assumed by the council the Old estament frequently depictsbiblical prophets interacting with the council and receiving commis-sions from God to function as his representatives Peterson doeswell therefore to draw attention to this phenomenon in his analysissince the fact that prophets functioned as part of the council stronglysupports Petersonrsquos claim that ldquoa blurring of the distinction betweenmortal human beings and angels [and] between mortal human

beings and godsrdquo appears in biblical and other ancient references tothe council Te book of Amos declares that ldquoGod will do noth-ing but he revealeth his secret [socircd ] unto his servants the prophetsrdquo(Amos 37) Tough translated as ldquosecretrdquo in the King James Versionof the Bible the noun socircd in this instance refers to Godrsquos divinecouncil ldquoGenerally speaking the word socircd translated both lsquocoun-cilrsquo and lsquocounselrsquo is used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to a group or tothat which transpires within a given group When used to signify agroup it is used with reference both to humankind (eg Ezek 139)and to the divine realm (eg Ps 898)rdquo Jeremiah referred to a trueprophet as one who had participated in Godrsquos socircd through the acts ofseeing and hearing (Jeremiah 2318) By participating in the council

75 See for example Edwin C Kingsbury ldquoTe Prophets and the Council of Yah-wehrdquo Journal o Biblical Literature 833 (1964) 279ndash86 Martti Nissinen ldquoProphets andthe Divine Councilrdquo in Kein Land uumlr sich allein 4ndash19

76 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 509 77 For an introduction to this Old estament tradition in relationship to the Bookof Mormon see John W Welch ldquoTe Calling of a Prophetrdquo in Te Book o Mormon FirstNephi the Doctrinal Foundation ed Monte S Nyman and Charles D ate Jr (Provo UBYU Religious Studies Center 1988) 35ndash54 78 Callender Adam in Myth and History 144

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3549

300 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

prophets become mal lt ākim or ldquoangelsrdquo Literally a mal lt āk was one

who was sentmdashthat is a messenger In many Old estament passagesdivine messengers appear indistinguishable from human beings (seeespecially Genesis 191ndash22 3224ndash31 Judges 133ndash23) Te use of theterm mal lt āk for both human and divine messengers ldquoresults in somepassages where it is unclear which of the two is intended if no furtherdetails are providedrdquo Terefore in becoming members of Godrsquoscouncil who see and hear as they stand in the assembly Old esta-ment prophets were sent as messengers and mediators for the coun-cil (see Jeremiah 2318)1048624 Tis biblical tradition features importantNear Eastern counterparts ldquoIt is typical for gods in the ancient NearEastrdquo notes Samuel A Meier ldquoto have at their disposal specific lower-ranking deities who do their bidding in running errands and relayingmessagesrdquo1048580 In the Bible prophets serve as these ldquolower-ranking dei-tiesrdquo Tis point is not lost in Petersonrsquos analysis ldquoHebrew traditionrdquohe writes ldquocould make human beings serving in the role of prophets

the equivalent at least temporarily of Canaanite godsrdquo983044 As Petersonnotes an important description of this commission occurs in Isaiahchapter 6

In his story of prophetic commission Isaiah described the mem-bers of Godrsquos council as seraphim who praised the ldquoLord of hostsrdquoseated upon the heavenly throne (Isaiah 61ndash3) Trough a purifica-tory ritual Isaiah became a member of this heavenly council and

therefore responded to Godrsquos question ldquowhom shall I send and whowill go for usrdquo with the statement ldquohere am I send merdquo (v 8) Inthe ancient Near East mouth-cleansing rituals like the one featured inIsaiahrsquos story held considerable significance In Mesopotamian ritualprayers for example mouth purification symbolized total and com-plete purity Biblical scholar Moshe Weinfeld drew attention to the

79 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel Irdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 87

80 See David E Bokovoy and John A vedtnes estaments Links between the Booko Mormon and the Hebrew Bible (ooele U Heritage 2003) 30ndash35 81 Samuel A Meier ldquoAngel of Yahwehrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 96 82 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 505 83 See Victor Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lips and Teir Purification in Light ofAkkadian Sourcesrdquo Hebrew Union College Annual 60 (1989) 54

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 301

analogy between Isaiahrsquos experience and the mis-pi ritual performed

in ldquoAn Old Babylonian Prayer of the Divination Priestrdquo first publishedin 1968 by A Goetze ldquoO Šamaš I am placing in my mouth pure cedar(resin) I wiped (akpur ) my mouth with cedar (resin) Being(now) clean to the assembly of the gods I shall draw nearrdquo

Concerning this relationship between Isaiah 6 and this Babylo-nian text Weinfeld explained ldquoLike Isaiah whose mouth has to bepurged in order that he may participate in the divine council the

Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth heis ready to draw near to the divine assemblyrdquo Trough the mouth-cleansing ritual Isaiah had become a divine member of the heavenlycouncil Studies have shown that in its presentation of the theomor-phic prophet the entire chapter draws upon ideas traditionally asso-ciated with Mesopotamian idolatry and deification As Victor Huro-witz has noted

A large portion of the [Mesopotamian] sources raise[s]the possibility that the washing of the mouth has indepen-dent significance as a characteristic granting or symbolizingspecial divine or quasi-divine status to the person or object sodesignated Te pure mouth enables the person or object tostand before the gods or to enter the divine realm or symbol-izes a divine status

Te pattern witnessed in Isaiah 6 reflects the general trend for councilstories in the ancient Near East witnessed in texts like Enuma Elish and Abraham 3 For Latter-day Saints Isaiahrsquos story therefore pro- vides an impressive type of Jesus Christ who volunteered in the pre-mortal council to serve as the Savior of the world with the declaration

84 Moshe Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literaturerdquo Vetusestamentum 272 (1977) 180ndash81

85 Weinfeld ldquoAncient Near Eastern Patternsrdquo 180ndash81 86 See for example Gregory Y Glazov Te Bridling o the ongue and the Openingo the Mouth in Biblical Prophecy (Sheffield Sheffield Academic Press 2001) 111ndash63 87 Hurowitz ldquoIsaiahrsquos Impure Lipsrdquo 54 88 See David E Bokovoy ldquoTe Calling of Isaiahrdquo in Covenants Prophecies andHymns o the Old estament (Salt Lake City Deseret Book 2001) 128ndash39

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3749

302 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

ldquohere am I send merdquo (Abraham 327) With his divine status Isaiah

could respond to the question God directed toward his council ldquowhowill go for usrdquo with the response ldquohere am I send merdquoTe story of prophetic commission presented in Isaiah 6 illustrates

the biblical view that the council wasmdashat least in partmdashcomprisedof divine human beings ldquoTe members of this socircƒ [council] aroundYahwehrdquo explains Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquoare kept clearly on the termi-nological periphery and finally their designation as qedoshim [ldquoholybeingsrdquo] even opens up the possibility that human beings belong tothis socircƒ (cf Job 158 Ps 898[7] though this involves primarily theprophets (1 K 2219ndash22 Isa 6 401ndash8 Jer 231822 Am 37)rdquo Inreality Psalm 25 professes that any righteous being could receive thisdistinction ldquoTe secret [socircƒ] of the Lord is with them that fear himand he will shew them his covenantrdquo (Psalm 2514)1048624

For Latter-day Saints the Old estament perspective that proph-ets became members of the divine council also appears in modern

revelation Doctrine and Covenants 10719 for example reflects thisOld estament notion of becoming a member of Godrsquos heavenly coun-cil Tis revelation refers to the blessings given to those who enter intothe highest priesthood order as the ldquoprivilege of receiving the myster-ies of the kingdom of heaven [having] the heavens opened untothem to commune with the general assembly and church of the First-born and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father

and Jesus the mediator of the new covenantrdquo According to modern89 Heinz-Josef Fabry ldquosocircƒ rdquo in Te Teological Dictionary o the Old estament

ed G Johannes Botterweck Helmer Ringgren and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand RapidsMI Eerdmans 2004) 10174 Hebrew transliteration simplified 90 Given the propensity within biblical tradition to view prophets as members ofthe divine council Latter-day Saints may wish to interpret the story of Lehirsquos encoun-ter with the heavenly host as a prophetic call narrative in which the Book of Mormonprophet becomes a member of the heavenly host Following his interaction with the coun-cil mediator who in proper council protocol ldquostood beforerdquo him Lehi could perform the

very same act identified with the ldquonumberless concourses of angelsrdquo (1 Nephi 18) Basedupon an analogy with Old estament traditions in verse 14 Lehi had become one of theseangels or messengers praising God (see 1 Nephi 114) In what may represent a deliberateattempt to highlight the analogy Nephi returns in his narrative to the same verb that firstdescribed the action of the council ldquoand aer this manner was the language of my fatherin the praising of his Godrdquo (1 Nephi 115)

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 303

revelation the Saints of God have an opportunity to become perma-

nent participatory members of the heavenly assembly Te connectionis made clear through the discussion in Doctrine and Covenants 76concerning those who inherit a terrestrial glory ldquoLast of all these allare they who will not be gathered with the saints to be caught upunto the church of the Firstborn and received into the cloudrdquo (DampC76102) From these statements it appears that two levels of councilmembership existmdashan initial level in which premortal beings referredto as ldquoGodsrdquo participate in the assembly and a second higher levelin which mortals such as Isaiah prove themselves worthy for both anexalted status and permanent membership

From a biblical perspective the word saint that appears in Doc-trine and Covenants 76102 describing those who receive a celestialglory carries a connotation that reflects the Israelite view that (divine)humans comprise members of the divine council As Simon Parkerexplains

ldquoSaintsrdquo or ldquoholy onesrdquo translates the Hebrew qedoshim themasculine plural of the adjective qadosh ldquoholyrdquo Qedoshim [Saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that iswidely attested throughout the ancient Near East under othernames (Sons of the gods council etc)1048580

In the Old estament ldquosaintsrdquo is a title given to the deities of the divinecouncil ldquoWho among the gods is like the Lordrdquo declares the Psalmistldquoa God feared in the council [socircƒ] of the saints [qedoshim] great andawesome above all that are around himrdquo (Psalm 896ndash7 Hebrew vv 7ndash8)983044 Te same mutability between the human and divine world appearsin Jewish literature from the time of Christ Te Dead Sea Scrolls forexample contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenlybeings ldquoTere is then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy onesand the earthly community at least in some of the Scrollsrdquo

91 Simon B Parker ldquoSaintsrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons 1355ndash56 Hebrewtransliteration simplified 92 Authorrsquos translation from the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 93 John J Collins ldquoSaints of the Most Highrdquo in Dictionary o Deities and Demons1360

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 3949

304 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Jesusrsquos Use of Psalm 82

As Peterson suggests these observations prove essential for ananalysis of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in John 10 As heirs to the traditionsof biblical Israel Jewish factions at the time of Christ featured a strongreligious propensity toward blurring the demarcation between humanand divine In his study Peterson effectively illustrates this fact throughhis analysis of deification in Second emple Judaism and early Chris-tianity Tis religious continuity between biblical Israel and Judeo-

Christian sects provides the basis for Petersonrsquos thesis concerning Jesusrsquosuse of Psalm 82 in John 10 ldquoTe Latter-day Saint claim that God andhumankind are akin seems a promising basis upon which to resolve theapparent disagreement between the reference of Psalm 826 to heavenlygods and the reference of John 1034 to mortal human beingsrdquo

Given the fact that the Hebrew Bible clearly presents humans asdivine beings who canmdashas attested through the examples of Adam

the deified dead and biblical prophetsmdashfunction as official membersof Godrsquos council Petersonrsquos argument carries considerable weight IfLatter-day Saint theology is correct in its assertion that some membersof the council were punished for their rebellion prior to the creationof the world then Jesus may very well have interpreted Psalm 82 as areflection of this event In reality Petersonrsquos interpretation receives very little challenge from Heiserrsquos critique ldquoBy the time of Jesusrsquos min-istryrdquo writes Heiser ldquoJewish writers committed to monotheism evenupon pain of death could accept that there was a council of [elohim]in Psalm 82 (cf the Qumran data) and that there was a second powerin heaven who lsquowas Yahweh but wasnrsquot Yahweh the Fatherrsquo rdquo (p 260)Accordingly Heiser argues that ldquothe [elohim] of Psalm 82 were nothuman and that Jesus was in fact asserting his own unique ontologicaloneness with the Fatherrdquo (p 263) In his assessment Heiser maintainsthat Jesusrsquos statement ldquoto whom the word of God camerdquo refers to the

elohim or gods of the divine council who as a result of their rebellionwould die like mortals Heiserrsquos critique therefore assumes that inciting Psalm 82 Jesus ldquoreminds his enemies that their scriptures say

94 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 553

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4049

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 305

there are other [elohim] who are divine sonsrdquo (p 264) Tis claim how-

ever does little to refute Petersonrsquos basic argument ldquoit does not seemthat Jesusrsquo citation of a metaphorical use of the term god as appliedto human beings would go very far toward justifying his ascriptionto himself of literal divinityrdquo For both Peterson and Heiser Jesusrsquosresponse relies upon a literal rendering of elohim as gods Te dif-ference between the two studies lies in Heiserrsquos confusion concern-ing Yahweh as a being species-unique and humanity functioning as

divine members of the assembly

Deification at the ime of Christ

Heiserrsquos interpretations of Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 may on somelevels be correct Nonetheless his reading would not negate the factthat the Bible presents human beings as members of Godrsquos councilHeiser goes to considerable lengths to illustrate that in contrast to

Petersonrsquos observation that Jesusrsquos enemies literally accuse Jesus ofmaking himself ldquoa godrdquo the Greek phrase in John 10 can serve asan accusation that Jesus was making himself out to be God How-ever given the possible validity of Heiserrsquos own argument that Jesusintended his response to remind his accusers that their sacred textsstate that other gods exist it seems that Petersonrsquos suggestionmdashbyHeiserrsquos own premisemdashis in fact a stronger interpretation In accept-ing Heiserrsquos basic argument it appears that in addition to remindinghis enemies that Psalm 82 refers to other elohim who are divine sonsJesus in all likelihood drew upon the well-established tradition thathumans are gods in formulating his calculated response

Influenced by the strong biblical precedence for interpreting hu-manity as intrinsically theomorphic the Jewish community at Qum-ran held the theological stance that the members of their religious so-ciety functioned as participants of the divine council ldquoTe members

of the [Qumran] community were ipso acto companions to the hostsof heavenrdquo writes John J Collins ldquoand so living an angelic life even

95 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 480 96 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 472ndash73

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4149

306 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

on earthrdquo In what appears to many scholars as a statement expressed

by an exalted human being a fragment from the War Scroll (4Q491 11)declares ldquoI am counted among the gods and my dwelling is in the holy

congregationrdquo With statements such as these circulating throughout

first-century Judaism no wonder Jesus could invoke the words ldquoYe are

godsrdquo in defense of his own divinity In reality expressions concerning

the biblical and early Jewish belief regarding the connection between

humanity and the council (many of which are explored in greater detail

in Petersonrsquos essay) provide an important backdrop for understandingJesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 Given the persistence of the biblical view re-

garding theomorphic humans witnessed in a variety of texts from the

Dead Sea Scrolls readers should take seriously the proposal that Jesus

defended his own divinity by drawing attention to the divinity of oth-

ers ldquoIs it not written in your law I said Ye are godsrdquo (John 1034)

For a Jewish audience familiar with the expressions articulated in the

writings from Qumran Psalm 82 was a text that could be specificallylinked with ideas concerning the exaltation of humanity In the text

11Q Melchizedek Melchizedek appears as the deity who passes judg-

ment against the gods in Psalm 82

And the day [of atonem]ent is the end of the tenth jubilee in

which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God] and

for the men of the lot of Melchizedek [And on the heights]he will decla[re in their] favour according to their lots for it

is the time of the laquoyear of graceraquo for Melchizedek to exa[lt in

the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgment

as is written about him in the songs of David who said Ps

97 John J Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angels in the Dead SeaScrollsrdquo in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls ed John J Collins and Robert A Kugler

(Grand Rapids MI Eerdmans 2000) 23ndash24 98 As translated in Florentino Garciacutea Martiacutenez Te Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated TeQumran exts in English trans Wilfred G E Watson (Leiden Brill 1996) 118 for ananalysis of the issue see Morton Smith ldquoAscent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QM1048673rdquoin Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls Te New York University Conerencein Memory o Yigael Yadin ed Lawrence H Schiffman (Sheffield JSO 1990) 181ndash99

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4249

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 307

821 laquoElohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God] in the

midst of the gods he judgesraquoSince the text refers to ldquothe sons of Godrdquo and the ldquomen of the lot

of Melchizedekrdquo interpreters should take seriously the possibility thatthis Dead Sea Scroll passage refers to an exalted human Melchizedekmdashaer the order of 4Q491 11mdashresponsible for the judgment invoked inPsalm 82 At minimum 11Q Melchizedek provides strong evidencefor an early Jewish trend toward linking Psalm 82 with human beings

Even John Collins (who contrary to this proposal suggests that there isno indication that the Melchizedek of the Melchizedek Scroll was evera mortal man) states

In the view of the midrash the Most High God is El Elohim is a lesser deity an angel if you prefer But the striking thingabout this passage is that the term Elohim which is usuallyunderstood to refer to the Most High in the biblical psalm

now refers to a lesser heavenly being Tere are at least twodivine powers in heaven even if one of them is clearly subor-dinate to the other104858010486241048624

A survey of a Jewish midrashic use of Psalm 82 demonstrates thatthe connection between humanity and Psalm 82 more than likelyattested in 11Q Melchizedek is in fact well established in early Jewishtexts Tis midrashic approach to Psalm 82 which links Israel with thegods of the council carries important implications for understandingJohn 10

Scholars have observed that Jewish traditions regarding the chil-dren of Israel at Mount Sinai provide a clear conceptual backgroundfor interpreting Jesusrsquos use of Psalm 82 in Johnrsquos Gospel

If it were possible to do away with the Angel of Death I would

But the decree has long ago been decreed R Jose says It wasupon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount

99 As translated in Garciacutea Martiacutenez Dead Sea Scrolls ranslated 140 brackets inoriginal 100 Collins ldquoPowers in Heaven God Gods and Angelsrdquo 19

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4349

308 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

Sinai on the condition that the Angel of Death should have no

power over them For it is said ldquoI said Ye are godlike beingsrdquoetc (Ps 826) But you corrupted your conduct ldquoSurely ye

shall die like menrdquo [Ps 827]104858010486241048580

Tis use of Psalm 826ndash7 in the second-century midrash illustrates one

of the ways Jewish theologians reinterpreted this biblical text When

at Mount Sinai Israel ldquostood before the Lordrdquo the Israelites became the

elohim or ldquogodsrdquo mentioned in Psalm 82 Te identification of Israel as

gods appears in a variety of early Jewish texts

You stood at Mount Sinai and said All that the Lord hath spo-

ken will we do and obey (Exod 247) (whereupon) ldquoI said

Ye are godlike beingsrdquo (Ps 826) but when you said to the

(golden) calf Tis is thy god O Israel (Exod 324) I said to

you ldquoNevertheless ye shall die like men (Ps 827)10485801048624983044

As Jerome H Neyrey has observed concerning this tradition

Te basic lines of the midrashic understanding of Ps 826ndash7

then are clear When Israel at Sinai received Godrsquos orah and

obeyed this led to genuine holiness which resulted in death-

lessness hence Israel could be called god because deathless

But when disobedient and sinful Israel deserved the wages of

sin that is death hence Israel could be called man10485801048624

According to Neyrey Jesusrsquos reference to gods as those to whom the

word o God came presupposes the use of Psalm 82 as a reference to

Israel at Sinai in Jewish midrash Tis interpretation well justified

in Jewish tradition directly associates the elohim of Psalm 82 with

humanity

101 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael ractate Ba˙odesh 9 trans Jacob Lauterbach (Phila-delphia Jewish Publication Society of America 1933) 2271ndash72 102 Sire A annaitic Commentary on the Book o Deuteronomy Piska 320 transReuven Hammer (New Haven Yale University Press 1986) 329 103 Jerome H Neyrey SJ ldquo lsquoI Said You Are Godsrsquo Psalm 826 and John 10rdquo Journalo Biblical Literature 1084 (1989) 656

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4449

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 309

In his critique Heiser effectively illustrates that in their original

context the elohim referred to in Psalm 82 were not human judgesHowever he overstates the evidence when he argues that ldquoif there wasa campaign to allegedly correct ancient texts and their polytheistic views the postexilic Jewish community either did not get the messageor ignored itrdquo (p 231) With its push toward radical monotheism Sec-ond emple Judaism was clearly struggling with the references to mul-tiple deities in texts such as Psalm 82 Heiserrsquos claim fails to addressthe changes that even he acknowledges to have occurred in texts suchas Deuteronomy 32 where ldquoalmost certainly the unintelligible read-ing of the [Masoretic ext] represents a lsquocorrectionrsquo of the original text(whereby God presides over other gods) to make it conform to thelater standard of pure monotheism Tere are no other godsrdquo10485801048624 Tisreligious conundrum is also apparent in the later Aramaic revisions ofdivine council passages including Psalm 82

In contrast to the biblical version of Psalm 82 which as Heiser

shows refers to God standing in the midst of literal deities the ar-gum for Psalm 82 reads

1 A psalm by Asaph As for God his Shekinah dwells inthe assembly of the righteous who are mighty in the Law he judges among the judges of truth2 How long O you wicked will you judge falsely and show

partiality to the wicked For ever3 Judge the poor and the orphan vindicate the afflicted andthe poor4 Rescue the poor and weak deliver them from the handsof the wicked5 Tey do not know how to do good nor do they under-stand the Law they walk about in darkness therefore the feetof the bases of the earth are shaken

6 I said ldquoYou are reckoned as like the angels and like theangels of the height all of you

104 Bernard M Levinson ldquoDeuteronomyrdquo in Te Jewish Study Bible ed Adele Berlinand Marc Z Brettler (Oxford Oxford University Press 2004) 441

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4549

310 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

7 but you shall surely die like the sons of men and fall like

one of the princesrdquo8 Arise O L983151983154983140 judge all the inhabitants of the earth foryou shall take possession of all the nations10485801048624

Tis Aramaic revision of Psalm 82 stripped the Hebrew psalmof its original henotheistic ideology10485801048624 Instead of presenting God asholding council with the other deities of the universe the argumsubstitutes the Aramaic word dayyanin (ldquojudgesrdquo) for the Hebrew

word elohim (ldquogodsrdquo) Based upon the judicial setting for Psalm 82the authors of the argum presumably felt comfortable with this tex-tual switch because of their misreading of the Covenant Collection inExodus which as Heiserrsquos critique illustrates uses the Hebrew wordelohim in a judicial context (Exodus 216) As Peterson notes howeverldquoExodus 216 and 228ndash9 provide very weak support (if indeed theyprovide any support at all) for the notion that lt elohim can ever denote

merely human judgesrdquo10485801048624 Subsequent studies concerning these bibli-cal passages have only sustained Petersonrsquos position David P Wrighthas recently shown that like the rest of the Covenant CollectionExodus 216 ultimately derives from the Babylonian Laws of Ham-murabi10485801048624 Terefore the expression lt el ha-elohim in Exodus 216and 227 directly reflects the Akkadian phrase mahar ilim (sect23 sect120sect266) Tis connection strongly suggests that the laws in the CovenantCollection that feature the phrase lt el ha-elohim use the term elohim asa reflection of the Akkadian word ilim both of which literally meanldquoGodrdquo In their interpretation of these passages however the Aramaicrevisers specifically switched the Hebrew word elohim for the Ara-maic term dayyanim

105 David M Stec trans Te argum o Psalms (Collegeville MN Liturgical Press2004) 160 emphasis removed 106 Te term henotheism refers to a philosophy that professes worship of a single

deity while acknowledging the existence of other gods for a consideration of ancientldquomonotheismrdquo see Paula Fredriksen ldquoGods and the One God In Antiquity All Mono-theists Were Polytheistsrdquo Bible Review 191 (2003) 12 49 107 Peterson ldquo lsquoYe Are Godsrsquo rdquo 479 Hebrew transliteration simplified 108 See David P Wright ldquoTe Laws of Hammurabi as a Source for the Covenant Col-lection (Exodus 2023ndash2319)rdquo Maarav 10 (2003) 11ndash87

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4649

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 311

his master will bring him to the judges and he will bring him

to the door or to the doorposts and his master will pierce hisear with an awl and he will be a slave to him enslaved forever(argum Neofiti on Exodus 216)10485801048624

Tis later Jewish interpretation of the Covenant Collection allowedreaders of Psalm 82 to interpret the biblical text which presents Godrsquos judgment over the deities of the council as a passage in which Godrenders judgment against human beings Te same theological move

to purely ldquohumanizerdquo the divine council appears in Neofitirsquos revisionof Genesis 62 which changes the Hebrew title ldquosons of Godrdquo into theAramaic expression ldquosons of the judgesrdquo

And the sons of the judges saw that the daughters o the sons oman were beautiful in appearance and they took wives for them-selves from among whomsoever they chose (Genesis 62)104858010485801048624

Tese Aramaic texts therefore provide important evidence for thehistorical transition toward radical monotheism in later Judaism Tehenotheistic ideology endorsed by Israelite authors eventually provedunacceptable to later religious interpreters who viewed the Bible asan authoritative religious collection As illustrated in the argumimlater Jewish interpreters oen found creative ways to rework henothe-istic texts into agreement with their radical monotheistic stance Nodoubt the precedent for viewing humanity as an earthly extension ofthe divine council in Israelite tradition facilitated these efforts Elo-him could easily be reinterpreted to represent human beings in sucha climate Ultimately however these changes had a long-lasting effectupon the way biblical references to the divine council would subse-quently be interpreted

Second emple Judaism was clearly struggling to reconcile itsmove toward monotheism with its henotheistic past Hence the anger

109 Te same switch however appears in Pseudo-Jonathan Onkelos and NeofitiExodus 227 8 27 For an English translation of Neofiti see Martin McNamara transargum Neofiti 1 Exodus and argum Pseudo-Jonathan Exodus (Collegeville MNLiturgical Press 1994) 91 110 For an English translation of the argum see McNamara argum Neofiti 1 71

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4749

312 bull 983144983141 FARMS R983141983158983145983141983159 983089983097983089 (983090983088983088983095)

expressed by Jesusrsquos enemies regarding his claim for divinity in John

10 may have in part been influenced by this religious paradox In con-trast to certain Jewish sects in the first century the Samaritans forexample appear to have held fast to a view concerning the prophetMosesrsquos deification

Moses is for the Samaritans the aheb ldquoRestorerrdquo the expectedMessiah-like eschatological figure who will bring about a goldenage and will pray for the guilty and save them It is among the

Samaritans alone that the title ldquoman of Godrdquo receives promi-nence as applied to Moses and indeed the Samaritan depictionof Moses is highly reminiscent of the New estamentrsquos descrip-tion of Jesus as the first begotten being materialized fromhis pre-existent bodiless state Moses is a second God Godrsquos vice-regent upon earth ( Memar Marqah 12) whose very nameincludes the title lt Elohim ldquoGodrdquo ( Memar Marqah 12)104858010485801048580

Not all Palestinian religious sects in the first century were ascomfortable with deification as the Samaritans and the community atQumran Te Jewish historian Josephus for example appears to haveintentionally tried to disassociate Moses from this tradition

In the very passages (3317 320) where Josephus refers toMoses as inspiring and ranking higher than his own naturehe is careful to refer to him as a man Moreover he is careful

to omit Godrsquos statements that Moses was to be to Aaron asGod (Exod 416) and that God was making him as God toPharaoh (Exod 71) He is careful to dispel the view held bysome (395ndash96) that when Moses tarried on Mount Sinai forforty days it was because he had been taken back to divinityIf he refers to Moses as a ldquoman of Godrdquo (3180) it is not toassert Mosesrsquo divinity but rather to refute those enemies of

the Jews who had charged them with slighting the divinitywhom they themselves professed to venerate (3179)10485801048580983044

111 Louis H Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo Jewish Quarterly Review 823ndash4(1992) 326 n 91 112 Feldman ldquoJosephusrsquo Portrait of Mosesrdquo 323ndash24 Greek translations omitted

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4849

H983141983145983155983141983154 M983151983154983149983151983150983145983155983149rsquo983155 U983155983141 983151983142 P983155983137983148983149 983096983090 (B983151983147983151983158983151983161) bull 313

In this intense religious climate Jesusrsquos defense of his own divinity

using a divine council text which as illustrated could in some circlesbe linked with human beings met with obvious controversy

Conclusion

Te biblical view of the divine council of deities has assumed afundamental role in biblical scholarship extual and archaeologicaldiscoveries made in recent years carry important implications for the

way Bible-believing Christians understand their own theology in rela-tion to Israelite beliefs As Latter-day Saints we owe a debt of gratitudeto Michael Heiser for his important contributions in furthering thisimportant discussion Even in his critique of the LDS use of Psalm 82and John 10 Heiser raises important issues worthy of careful consid-eration Ultimately no matter which opinions regarding these textshold sway clearly the Latter-day Saint position regarding humanityand the divine council of deities is much more biblical-like than many

have supposed

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949

7242019 Response to Michael Heiser Critique of LDS Divine Council - David Bokovoy

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullresponse-to-michael-heiser-critique-of-lds-divine-council-david-bokovoy 4949