Michael Heiser's Neo-Gnostic Heresies (Part 5)

[@JosiahTheSiah]

Dr Heiser did *hours* of teaching on gnosticism as a warning against such heresies. You have to do better than this strawman. Please try and approach his work with a mind willing to accept a challenge to the way you think. If you truly care about the truth, you can't be closed off to the possibility that you're getting it wrong. "Do not be conformed any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind."

[@truthwatchers3405]

Heiser also taught about the Ugaritic pagan texts, which he synchronized into his interpretation of the Bible. What do you think he did with Gnosticism? In fact, Gnosticism is defined as synchronizing paganism into the Bible, which is what Heiser has done. Edwin Yamauchi stated, “No single source can satisfactorily explain all the facets of a syncretistic religion like Gnosticism which has no historic founder. We must adopt a polyphyletic rather than a monophyletic model of origins.” (Edwin M Yamauchi, “The Descent of Ishtar, the Fall of Sophia, and the Jewish Roots of Gnosticism,” Tyndale Bulletin, 29 (1978), p. 169) How about a few quotes to show comparisons of Heiser and Gnsoticism. Heiser explains his worldview: "The aftermath of the Babel incident shows that Yahweh expected that council beings use their own free decision making capacity. In Deuteronomy 4:19-20 and 32:8-9, Yahweh divided and assigned the nations to lesser gods (Heiser, “Sons of God”). Yahweh delegated authority-He rejected the nations as His own people and took Israel as His portion. While Yahweh is ultimately sovereign, He does not unilaterally govern the other nations. He leaves that to subordinates, who should rule according to His will. When they don’t, they are judged. This is precisely the point of Psa 82, where Yahweh judges the gods of his council who are responsible for corrupt rule over the nations of the earth." (Michael Heiser, “The Divine Council and Biblical Theology,” p. 4; www.thedivinecouncil.com/DivineCouncilLBD.pdf) Gnosticism likewise taught: “Seven Archangels stand before the throne. Sabaoth is the eighth, and he has authority, and so there are seventy-two figures in all. From this chariot the seventy-two gods took shape, so that they might rule over the languages of the seventy-two nations.” (The Nag Hammadi Scriptures: The International Edition (ed. Marvin Meyer), Harper One (New York, NY: 2007), p. 207) The number 72 comes from the Table of Nations in Genesis chapter 10 in the Septuagint which has 72 instead of 70 nations. This is what Heiser taught only using the number 70 from the Masoretic Text, though he inconsistently claimed the Septuagint was authoritative so he could teach his view from Deuteronomy 32:8. Or how about Heiser defining the word "elohim" (God/gods) as "disembodied." He wrote, “Humans are also not by nature disembodied. The word elohim is a ‘place of residence’ term. Our home is the world of embodiment; elohim by nature inhabit the spiritual world.” (The Unseen Realm, p. 29) Ever question where this definition came from since there is not a single Hebrew Lexicon that provides such a definition? Oddly, we find it in hermeticism. "There are two kinds of beings, the embodied and unembodied, in whom there is the mortal and the divine spirit." The Way of Hermes: New Translation of The Corpus Hermeticum and the Definitions of Hermes Trismegistus to Asclepius, (Tran. by Clement Salaman, Dorine Van Oven, William D. Wharton, and Jean-Pierre Mahe), Inner Traditions International, 2000, p. 32) Note the parallelism making the "embodied" equal to the "mortal" and the "unembodied" equal to the "divine spirit." Sound like Heiser was teaching Gnosticism.

[@JosiahTheSiah]

I've tried to start so many replies to this brother, but honestly you are so muddled in your thinking on this. You obviously haven't taken the time to understand what Heiser was actually teaching. He doesn't "syncronize Ugaritic texts into his interpretation of the Bible." That is bonkers. And he doesn't say that "elohim means disembodied." He even says that elohim can (and do) take on physical form. Basically you've reached a hasty conclusion, and then compared apples to oranges, and then set up a straw man with all that faulty research. That's three fallacies for the price of one. Given your hasty conclusion, I will surmise that you have not taken the time to understand him. I understand that beating up straw men can be therapeutic, but there comes a time when enough is enough, and you need to own up to the fact that you haven't done your homework properly. I say this in the love of Christ and as a brother: Michael Heiser is not the devil you make him out to be, and you need to repent of this character assassination.

[@juenmmonterrey7767]

@@JosiahTheSiah HAHAH HE CHEKED MATED YOU AND YOU RESPOND LIKE THAT!! LOUSY...

[@JosiahTheSiah]

@@juenmmonterrey7767 I don't have the time nor energy to correct every single bad take from Heath on this, so you'll have to be content to scoff at my truncated thoughts instead of scoffing at a full essay. Anyone who reads Unseen Realm with a modicum of critical thinking will be able to tell Heath has the wrong end of the stick.

[@JosiahTheSiah]

@@juenmmonterrey7767 But you were scoffing, please continue.

[@bradsmalley7168]

Wow dude. Since you clearly have such poor reading compression, I can't imagine trying to slog through a book you wrote yourself. Love how many times you said some version of "I don't know what else he's trying to say here". That's the takeaway. Best not to try to sound like an authority on something you don't understand.

[@AdamMcGrath]

I've only just come across your channel, brother but I'm already impressed with what I've heard. I've struggled with Heiser myself, but I've never heard anyone discuss him critically yet. This might sound like a stupid question, but do you believe that Heiser was born-again and fell into gnostic theology unintentionally or do you think that he was a genuine heretic/wolf in sheep's clothing?

[@JosiahTheSiah]

Michael Heiser was not gnostic or neo-gnostic. Mr Henning takes such leaps of logic as to render his work fictional, admittedly doesn't understand Mike's work, and commits a nice big fallacy of association here while he's at it. It would be like if I said, "gnostics drank water, and Heath Henning drinks water, so Heath is a gnostic." I would direct you to Dr Heiser's hours of teaching on gnosticism to hear what he actually believed, and why his beliefs line up with historic, orthodox Christianity-not gnosticism.

[@AdamMcGrath]

@JosiahTheSiah I was asking Heath himself the question to see what his reply was. I appreciate your reply, but I was hoping to see if Heath responded himself before I make any further comment because his answer should be interesting!

[@erinsmart8422]

@@AdamMcGrathhe probably has no answer 😂 bc this vid is click bait 😂 what specifically did you “struggle” with about heisers work?

[@AdamMcGrath]

@erinsmart8422 When I say struggle, I only mean that I find some of Heiser's conclusions to be a bit of a stretch, especially on Psalm 82 and the Divine Council issue, however I don't consider him a gnostic or a heretic. I wanted to see if Heath would answer my question but I guess he isn't going to boohoo...If Heiser IS preaching gnosticism, then I highly doubt it would be on purpose. U say that this is clickbait lol, but it's a pretty obscure topic and I doubt that millions out there care enough about the topic enough to click. Are u pro-Heiser or anti-Heath??? I know nothing about Heath, is he just trying to be controversial in your opinion? What are your views (and would u like to share them)? Wishing u a blessed day too!

[@JosiahTheSiah]

@@AdamMcGrath I personally don't think Heath is trying to be controversial. I do think he's being divisive, but he's doing so because he believes Heiser was heretical. And this belief stems from a lack of understanding of 1) what Heiser said, 2) what Heiser meant & explained about what he said, and 3) the aims and methods of Biblical theology in general. I say Biblical theology as a contrast to Classical theology. What does the Bible say and how was it understood by the target audiences of the various books of the Bible-that must be our pursuit, if we are to take the Bible as authoritative. I watched all of Heath's videos on this topic and I kept going, "Heiser didn't say what you're saying he said," or "No, that doesn't logically follow." Maybe if I had ample time I might mount a full response because this guy just builds up his strawman arguments only to tear them down and claim victory over the dastardly straw-men.

[@erinsmart8422]

Don’t know much about much yeah?

[@kimmasuen4107]

I just started listening and the very first accusation you make couldn't be less true. Prove it and show us exactly where he says that! Please do better. You either have poor reading comprehension or you're just spreading lies!

[@truthwatchers3405]

What is the first accusation you want quotes about?