Pre-Existence is Biblical! : A Response to splendorofthechurch.com
By Bro. Nathan
In this article we will adress a badly written article from the filipino Catholic Apologetic page “The Splendor of the Church” where the author makes badly written reviews and arguments on the doctrine of the Pre-existence, i.e Pre-mortal life. Pre-mortal life teaches that as Christ did before he was born, man too pre-existed as spiritual beings living in the presence of God and Jesus Christ. the arguments contained in the article will be followed by my responses.
The Creation of Mankind
“...Question:Is the Premortal Life teaching true?Answer:No because we have to remember that God created man (Gen 1:26-27), it did not say that we have “premortal life” since by existence that we are already mortal beings. So, we did not exist nor our spirit prior to the time of creation.”
This is an example of appealing to ignorance and something that we call Solo Scriptura. as a Catholic, would you appeal to such forms of arguments using the Bible? i know you would not but this is one example of it. exegesis is not a instrument used in this article and there is no meaningful analysis given to the text. it is just there, being assumed that it is not written in this verse that is limiting only to one statement of the Bible. it’s quite absurd. now back to Gen. 1:26-27. in here, it is assumed that God made both man’s physical and spiritual wellbeing but it is not. passages in the Bible show connection between Israelite belief of the underworld and man’s spirit in the Genesis creation narrative. Gen. 2:7 says that God breathed into man’s nostrils and became a living soul. when the Psalmist praises God as the mighty creator, he said :
“ My substance was not hid from thee, When I was made in secret, And curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth.” (Ps. 139:15) KJV
With it, the depths of the earth is where man’s life force was taken from. as the Hebrew word for earth used in Ps. 139:15 אֶרֶץ (erets) as in reference to its deepest part, the Hebrew word אֲדָמָה (adamah) is often used in the Bible as in reference to Sheol, the realm of the dead. e.g Abel’s spirit cries from אֲדָמָה (Gen. 4:10) and that Korah and his properties were swallowed by the אֲדָמָה (Num. 16:30-32; 26:10); and that the sleeping dead will rise up from אֲדָמָה (Dan. 12:2). it is the place it is man’s body that God created and that God breathed into man’s nostrils for man to have life. man being as “mortal beings” does not follow up his conclusion that we did not pre-exist prior to the time of creation. Kevin Barney on his paper provides the following on the word “spirit” in the Hebrew language (רוּחַ - ruach) and pre-existence on how these two have distinct existences just like the way in the afterlife does, he writes :
“ It should be obvious enough that a concept of preexistence can only flourish where there is a belief in a soul or spirit that is able to have an existence apart from one’s physical body. And here we run into our first difficulty, because most scholars perceive the ancient Hebrews as believing that the soul (nephesh, often simply meaning “person”) or spirit (ruach, “breath”; the invisible, life-giving force) and the body did not have separate existences, but existed together only as a psychosomatic whole. According to this view, the common dualistic understanding of a body and a spirit capable of existence apart from the body derived largely from Persian and Greek influence. To the extent that this is true, it is a wrench for positing a very early belief in preexistence. We should note, however, that it would also be an issue for Evangelicals, for although they see the soul as being created by God while the fetus is in utero, they surely believe (as do Mormons) that the spirit will have an existence apart from the body upon death. Now, whether the scholars are correct in this monistic (i.e., that the body and soul are one and inseparable) understanding9 of early Old Testament views of the soul is a question largely beyond the scope of this paper.104 For purposes of this paper I will simply point out that, from great antiquity, persons were indeed believed to have a continued existence apart from the body after death. We see this reflected in a handful of Hebrew references to the rephaim, the “shades” who dwell in Sheol, the abode of the dead, after they die, a concrete example of which is the deceased Samuel, whom the Witch of Endor consulted on behalf of Saul (1 Samuel 28). In second millennium B.C. Ugaritic texts the counterpart of the rephaim are dead but divinized kings and heroes. The word is used in Biblical Hebrew in two seemingly very different senses. In the first sense, it alludes to the dead dwelling in Sheol, in an existence reminiscent of the shades we encounter in the 10th book of Homer’s Odyssey. In the Bible the word is not limited to the elite, but apparently encompasses all the dead. We see this usage in Psalm 88:10, where rephaim is used in parallelism with the dead (metim). The same parallelism appears in Isaiah 26:14 and 19. Additional scriptural allusions to the rephaim are Proverbs 2:18, Job 26:5, and possibly 2 Chronicles 16:12, reading rephaim for ropheim “physicians.” A fifth-century B.C. Phoenician inscription attests that the rephaim are those whom the living join in dying, and a Punic-Latin bilingual text renders “the divine Rephaim” with the Latin for “the sacred shades,” that is, the (divinized) dead. Intriguingly, Isaiah 14:9 seems to retain something of the original Ugaritic usage attested at Ras Shamra, putting rephaim in parallel with kings: Sheol beneath is stirred up To meet you when you come, It rouses the Rephaim to greet you, It raises from their thrones All the kings of the nations. The word rephaim was more commonly used in the Hebrew Bible in the second sense, to refer to the (living) giants and mighty men. Apparently, the original concept of the rephaim as the deceased, divinized kings and heroes was lost over time, and the meaning of the word was bifurcated. As deceased heroes and monarchs, the rephaim were preserved in the understanding of rephaim as living giants and warriors, and as a description of the dead elites the word rephaim was broadened to include the dead in general.11 Now, the rephaim seem to be somewhat less than what would ultimately become thought of as immortal human souls, and there no doubt was development in the concept over time. But the basic idea of a continuity of existence apart from the body is present from even the earliest periods of biblical history.12 Bracketing for the time being the biblical evidence, which we shall consider below, the first unambiguous references to preexistence of the soul in Judaeo-Christian sources (such as the Apocrypha, Josephus, Philo, Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, Rabbinic literature, Gnostic Christian texts and Patristic literature) appear beginning in the Second Temple period. A sampling of some of the more important examples follows:1. Wisdom of Solomon. This first century B.C. text, which exhibits platonic influence (as Holding notes), portrays Solomon as offering the following prayer: “As a child I was by nature well endowed, and a good soul fell to my lot; or rather, being good, I entered an undefiled body.” (8:19-20)132. Josephus on the Essenes. Josephus (first century A.D.), in a passage possibly reflecting Greek influences, reports that the Essenes, who denigrated the body, believed that “the soul is immortal and imperishable. Emanating from the finest ether, these souls become entangled, as it were, in the prison house of the body, to which they are dragged down by a sort of natural spell.” (Jewish War, 2.8.11)143. Philo of Alexandria. Philo (first century A.D.), who interpreted the Bible allegorically, saw in the three Hebrew terms ruach, nephesh and neshamah a confirmation of Plato’s tripartite view of the soul (the rational, the spiritual and the seat of desire). The rational part is preexistent and immortal. (De Opificiis Mundi 1:648) As a divine being, the soul aspires to be freed from its bodily fetters and to return to the heavenly spheres whence it came. Presumably Philo believed that the spirit is condemned to be imprisoned for a certain time in the body in expiation of some sin committed in its former state.154. Jubilees. This second century B.C. work portrays God as creating everything during the six days of creation, including “all of the spirits of his creatures which are in heaven and on earth.”165. First Enoch. Enoch speaks of an assembly of the holy and righteous ones in heaven under the wings of the Lord of the spirits, with the Elect (the Messiah) in their midst. (39:4-7; 40:5; 41:12).17 (First Enoch is a conglomeration of texts ranging from pre-Maccabean times to just before the Christian era; this section is perhaps early first century B.C.).6. Second Enoch. This text (perhaps first century A.D.) reflecting Jewish ideas states that “all the souls are prepared for eternity, before the composition of the earth.” (23:5)187. Third Enoch. The whole of Chapter 43 presumes the preexistence of souls.19 (This work contains old traditions going back to the Maccabean era, but the work itself dates to perhaps the fifth or sixth centuries A.D.)8. Testament (Assumption) of Moses. In this first century A.D. text Moses says: “But he did design and devise me, who (was) prepared from the beginning of the world, to be the mediator of his covenant.” (1:14)209. Testament of Abraham. In this work (about A.D. 100), Michael, the Lord’s commander-in-chief, tells Abraham at the end of his life that “the day has drawn near on which you are to depart from the body and once again go to the Lord.” (Rec. A 15:7)2110. Prayer of Joseph. Origen quotes this fragment from a first century A.D. pseudepigraphal work in his Commentary on John (2:25) to support his view that John the Baptist was an angel who became incarnate to bear witness to Jesus: “I, Jacob, who is speaking to you, am also Israel, an angel of God and a ruling spirit. Abraham and Isaac were created before any work. But, I, Jacob, who men call Jacob but whose name is Israel am he who God called Israel which means, a man seeing God, because I am the firstborn of every living thing to whom God gives life.”2211. 4 Ezra. Preexistence is assumed throughout this work (about A.D. 100), as in 4:33-42, a section stating that the souls who yearn for their reward must wait until all souls come to earth.2312. Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch. This early second century A.D. text states “And it will happen at that time that those treasuries will be opened in which the number of the souls of the righteous were kept, and they will go out and the multitudes of the souls will appear together, in one assemblage, of one mind. And the first ones will enjoy themselves and the last ones will not be sad.” (30:2-3)2413. Bereshith Rabba, 8, represents God as taking counsel with the souls of the righteous before he created the earth.2514. Tanhuma, 3, states that all souls which were to enter human bodies were formed during the six days of creation and were in the Garden of Eden.15. Hagigah, 12b, has it that before their descent to earth the souls are kept in the seventh heaven (but Sifre 143b says in the storehouse).16. Abodah Zarah, 5a, says that the Messiah will come when all the souls in the guph [i.e., the superterrestrial abode of spirits] have passed through the earthly life.17. Sanhedrin, 90a, indicates it is not settled whether the soul comes to earth at the time of conception or after the embryo has taken form.18. Gospel of Thomas, Saying 4, dating to perhaps the early second century A.D.: “Jesus said: The man old in his days will not hesitate to ask an infant of seven days concerning the place of life, and he will live.”26 The idea is that an uncircumcised baby has retained an impression of the “place of life.”19. Gospel of the Egyptians, 50:12-14, portrays Adam as a premortal great one who associated with the “holy men of the great light,” “men of the Father.”2720. Second Treatise of the Great Seth, 50:1-24, portrays the heavenly Seth as having proposed the gathering of a council of premortal souls, then spelling out a plan “to the whole multitude of the multitudinous assembly” which was received with rejoicing by “the whole house of the Father of Truth.”2821. Origen. Among the early Church Fathers, the most notable proponent of the preexistence of souls was Origen (A.D. 182-251). Origen taught that the souls of man had a separate, conscious, personal existence in a previous state, and are sent to this world on account of sin, condemned to be born in a material body.29 The justice of God demands that “all rational creatures [be] of one nature, and it is only on this ground that the justice of God in all his dealings with them can be defended, namely, when each contains within himself the reasons why he has been placed in this or in that rank of life.” (De Principiis 3.5.4)Notes for the above :7 “Soul” is sometimes used in Mormon discourse to mean the whole man, both spirit and body (based on D&C 88:15). In this paper I use the words “soul” and “spirit” synonymously. 8 R. Moore, “Pre-existence,” in Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, ed. James Hastings (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1919), 10:236. 9 Interestingly, this monistic understanding of the body would appear to be similar to the position held by modern Jehovah’s Witnesses that there is no eternal soul apart from the body. 10 For further information, see Ellis R. Brotzman, “Man and the Meaning of [Nephesh],” Bibliotheca Sacra 145 (October-December 1988): 400-9; E. W. Marter, “The Hebrew Concept of ‘Soul’ in Pre-Exilic Writings,” Andrews University Seminary Studies 2 (1964): 97-108; Daniel Lys, “The Israelite Soul According to the LXX,” VetusTestamentum 16 (April 1966): 181-228; W. David Stacey, “Paul and the ‘Soul,’” Expository Times 66 (June 1955): 274-77. 11 The information in this paragraph derives from Mark S. Smith, “Rephaim,” in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, ed. David Noel Freedman (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 5:676-78. 12 See further Philip S. Johnston, Shades of Sheol: Death and Afterlife in the Old Testament (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity, 2002). Holding offers a brief but positive review of this book at http://www.tektonics.org/shades.html.13 The translation is from the Revised Standard Version (RSV). 14 S. Kent Brown, “Souls, Preexistence of,” in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, ed. David Noel Freedman (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 6:161. 15 Kaufman Kohler, Isaac Broyde and Ludwig Blau, “Soul” in JewishEncyclopedia.com (for the url, see the bibliography). Note that against Philo the Rabbis held that the body is not the prison of the soul but, on the contrary, its medium of development and improvement. 16 O. S. Wintermute, “Jubilees,” in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, ed. James H. Charlesworth (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1983), 2:55. 17 E. Isaac, “1 (Ethiopic Apocalypse of) Enoch,” in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, 1:30-31 18 F. I. Andersen, “2 (Slavonic Apocalypse of) Enoch,” in Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, 1:140. 19 P. Alexander, “3 (Hebrew Apocalypse of) Enoch,” in Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, 1:293-94. 20 J. Priest, “Testament of Moses,” in Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, 1:927. 21 E. P. Sanders, “Testament of Abraham,” in Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, 1:891. 22 J. Z. Smith, “Prayer of Joseph,” in Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, 2:713. 23 B. M. Metzger, “The Fourth Book of Ezra,” in Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, 1:531. 24 A. F. J. Klijn, “2 (Syriac Apocalypse of) Baruch,” in Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, 1:631. 25 The representative sampling given here of rabbinic statements derives from Moore, “Pre-existence,” 234. These texts date from the Amoraic period (A.D. 220-500)
Jews also have beliefs in Pre-existence, as Hayyim Schauss reviews various Jewish beliefs on this doctrine, he said :
“ Belief in Prenatal Existence . . . In Talmudic times (the first centuries of the Common Era) the belief was current among Jews that man’s soul was independent of his body, existing eternally in the past and in the future. Only for a short, limited time is it placed in the body of a certain human being. All the souls of the world preexist in heaven in a kind of a spiritual reservoir, and at first have no desire to enter the human bodies on earth. They do it only by force. God decrees that a certain soul shall enter a certain body, and God also decrees the moment when the sol shall leave the body.In this realm of belief, the vanishing mortal body plays an insignificant role in comparison with the pure and eternal soul. Accordingly, man attains the highest stage in his spiritual life not after the full growth of his body, but before he is projected in the form of a human being into the light of the world. In his prenatal existence in his mother’s womb, a light burns over his head, and he sees from one end of the world to the other. He sees there much more than a human being is capable of seeing during the course of his entire life.According to this belief, a special angel is appointed to supervise the souls. He receives an order from God to place a certain soul in a certain child at the time of its conception. At first the pure soul recoils from entering the foul body. It yields only to the force of God’s decree. The angel brings the soul into the womb and joins it with the embryo. He places it under the good care of two angels who place the burning light over his head.The next morning the supervising angel pays a visit to the soul and takes it for a promenade through Paradise. There he shows it the saints in their fully glory seated on golden thrones with crowns on their heads. He asks it: “Do you know to whom that soul belonged? The soul answers, “No,” and the angel says, “The saint whom you see in such glory was also created, like you, in his mother’s womb. This is true of all the other saints whom you see here. They were pious and kept the commandments of God. If you will do the same, after your death you will share in this great glory. Otherwise, after death, you will descend to a place which I shall show you later.”In the evening, the angel takes the soul for a visit into the Gehenna to show it how the angels of destruction torment the wicked souls and flog them with whips of fire. The wicked ones groan and cry, “Ah!” and “Woe! But no one sympathizes with them. The angel says to the soul: “Do you know that these were created like you, in their mothers’ wombs, and came forth afterwards into the world? But they did not observe God’s commandments. Therefore this terrible shame has come upon them. And now you should know, my son, that you are also destined to come forth into the world and to die afterward. Be not wicked, therefore, but righteous and you will have a share in the world to come.”Thus the prenatal man goes about under the guardianship and tutelage of the angel. In the morning he visits Paradise, in the evening, Gehenna, and in between, the angel shows him every nook and corner that his foot will tread, every place where he will dwell, the place where he will die, and the place where he will be buried. In the evening he brings him back into his mother’s womb.When the moment arrives for the child to leave the mother’s womb, the same angel comes and tells him: “The time has arrived for you to emerge.” But the child is not willing to go out into the world. He does it under compulsion, and starts to cry. In the moment of coming forth from the womb, the angel strikes the child on the upper lip just under the nose, making a dent on that spot. Thereby the angel extinguishes the light and causes the child to forget all that he has seen and learned in the womb of his mother. That which the child learns thereafter is merely a recollection of the knowledge acquired during his prenatal life.Some scholars think that this Jewish belief is an echo of the platonic idea of man’s soul knowing everything before birth. Others assume that both the Jewish belief and the platonic ideas of the preexistence of man’s soul are derived from another common course—the mythology of ancient Egypt. Another group thinks that the common source of the belief in the preexistence of the souls is to be found in the religion of the ancient Persians. (Hayyim Schauss, The Lifetime of a Jew: Throughout the Ages of Jewish History [New York: Union of American Hebrew Congregations, 1950], 63-65)
Humans as Litreral Sons and Daughthers of God
“...Question:Is it written in the Bible that we lived in the presence of the Heavenly Father as his spirit children?Answer:No because it is the Triune God (known as the Holy Trinity) who existed before all creation and the creator (Mt 28:19-20, Psa 93:2). We humans are part of God’s creation (Gen 1) and remember that the creations including us existed later, so no reason for us to exist nor to live with God before the time of creation. It is wrong to say that we are his “spirit children” because we have body, soul, and spirit that is in each one of us (1 Thes 5:23). Well it is proper to say that we are the children of God (Gal 3:26), not “spirit children” since in us that we have also body and soul.”
Depend on how you categorize things up. it is not the spirit that was created by God but the body where the spirit is embodied thereof. man’s spirit and body have distinctive existences as being pointed out at the paper above. your conclusion that we cannot be God’s spirit children because of the reason that we also have a body, spirit, and soul is logically problematic. it is the spirit that has been with the Father in pre-mortal life, and not the father of the biological body also and these three, depends on the way you define it, have distinct fathers. if i have a body (a), my mortal biological father is the father of my body (A) but i also have a spirit (b) and Heavenly Father is the Father of my spirit (B). if Latter Day Saints say that we are spiritiual children of God (B), it is categorized under the spiritual being of man (b), and not the physical being of man (a). and the author of this article based on his reasoning, quite messed up the categorization of these components of a human being. you told that “b" cannot be from B for we have a, b, and c while we only refer to an Bb. as for soul however depends on how you define it in a particular context. soul (Heb. נֶפֶשׁ - nepesh) can mean the union of the spirit and the body i.e the wholeness of the human being as a whole as for the Genesis account of creation tells that when God made Adam’s body and breathed into it, he became a living soul (Gen. 2:7). the Bible also in other places refer to individuals as souls themselves and their humanity as a whole. נֶפֶשׁ (nepesh) was used to refer to people (Ex. 31:14; Ps. 16:9-10; Prov. 11:30; Ezek. 18:4; Acts 2:41; Rev. 18:13). it is the spirit that makes the body animate and concious and without it, a human body is dead (James 2:26). it is the spirit of man and Heavenly Father is the Father of spirits. as Paul said as he adresses the Hebrew saints about God and punishment, he said :
“Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?” (Heb. 12:9) KJV
Paul also said while in Athens :
“Forasmuch then as we are the offspring [γένος - genos] of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man’s device.” (Acts 17:29) KJV
The Greek word γένος (genos) was used here to refer to what is true divinity and the greek word can mean as “ancestral stock”, “descendant”, and “offspring”. because we humans and God are of the same γένος, and that is true divinity and thus as Paul argued that because gold, silver, and stone are not of our γένος, we should not worship such things. that shows that humans are of the same species of God, and that we are Heavenly Father’s literal spiritual children and that we have the potential to attain divinity. furthermore, scholarly Lexicons define the Greek word γένος as follows :
10.32 γένος, ους n: a non-immediate descendant (possibly involving a gap of several generations), either male or female - 'descendant, offspring.' ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ ῥίζα καὶ τὸ γένος Δαυίδ 'I am the root and descendant of David' Re 22.16. Here ῥίζα (10.33) and γένος are very similar in meaning, and it is often best to coalesce the two terms into a single expression, for example, 'I am a descendant of David' or 'I belong to the lineage of David.' (Louw, Nida : Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains, United Bible Societies [1996])
1629 γένος
• γένος, ους, τό (Hom.+; loanw. in rabb.) a noun expressive of relationship of various degrees and kinds.
1. ancestral stock, descendant ἐκ γένους ἀρχιερατικοῦ of high-priestly descent (s. Jos., Ant. 15, 40) Ac 4:6 (PTebt 291, 36 ἀπέδειξας σεαυτὸν γένους ὄντα ἱερατικοῦ, cp. 293, 14; 18; BGU 82, 7 al. pap). υἱοὶ γένους Ἀβραάμ 13:26 (s. Demetr.: 722 fgm. 2, 1 Jac.; Jos., Ant. 5, 113; Just., D. 23, 3 ἀπὸ γένους τοῦ ᾽Α); γ. Δαυίδ Rv 22:16; IEph 20:2; ITr 9:1; ISm 1:1. τοῦ γὰρ καὶ γένος ἐσμέν we, too, are descended from him Ac 17:28 (quoted fr. Arat., Phaenom. 5; perh. as early as Epimenides [RHarris, Exp. 8th ser. IV, 1912, 348-53; CBruston, RTQR 21, 1913, 533-35; DFrøvig, SymbOsl 15/16, ’36, 44ff; MZerwick, VD 20, ’40, 307-21; EPlaces, Ac 17:28: Biblica 43, ’62, 388-95]. Cp. also IG XIV, 641; 638 in Norden, Agn. Th. 194 n.; Cleanthes, Hymn to Zeus 4 [Stoic. I 537] ἐκ σοῦ γὰρ γένος …; Dio Chrys. 80 [30], 26 ἀπὸ τ. θεῶν τὸ τῶν ἀνθρώπων γένος; Ep. 44 of Apollonius of Tyana [Philostrat. I 354, 22] γένος ὄντες θεοῦ; Hierocles 25, 474, vs. 63 of the Carmen Aur.: θεῖον γένος ἐστὶ βροτοῖσιν), cp. Ac 17:29.—Also of an individual descendant, scion (Hom.; Soph., Ant. 1117 Bacchus is Διὸς γ.). Jesus is τὸ γένος Δαυίδ Rv 22:16 (cp. Epimenides [VI BC]: 457 fgm. 3 Jac., the saying of Musaeus: ἐγὼ γένος εἰμι Σελήνης; Quint. Smyrn. 1, 191 σεῖο θεοῦ γένος ἐστί). (BDAG : A Greek English Lexicon Of The New Testament And Other Early Christian Literature, Chicago University Press [2000])
844 γένος [pg 124]
γένος
is common in the papyri with reference to a species or class of things. Thus P Fay 2110 (A.D. 134) εἴτ᾽ ἐν γένεσιν εἴτ᾽ ἐν ἀργυρίῳ, “whether in kind or in money,” with reference to payments, ib. 9011 (A.D. 234) χ@ρῆ]σιν ἐγ γένι λαχανοσπέρμου ἀρτάβας τρ@ῖ]ς, “a loan in kind of three artabas of vegetable seed,” P Oxy VIII. 113413 (A.D. 421) περὶ ἄλλου τινὸς εἴδους ἢ γένους, “of any other sort or kind.” In P Grenf II. 4411 (A.D. 101) the word occurs in connexion with the transport of “goods,” and in P Oxy IV. 72720 (A.D. 154) an agent is authorized γένη διαπωλήσοντα ἃ ἐὰν δέον ᾖ τῇ αὐτοῦ πίστει, “to sell off produce as may be needful on his own authority”: cf. ib. I. 5416 (A.D. 201) εἰς τειμὴν γενῶν, “for the price of materials” for the repair of public buildings, and ib. 10116 (A. D. 142) where γένεσι = “crops.” Similarly P Amh II. 9115 (A.D. 159) οἷς ἐὰν αἱρῶμαι γένεσι πλὴν κνήκου, “with any crops I choose except cnecus” (Edd.). In P Oxy IX. 120220 (A.D. 217) κατ᾽ ἀκολουθείαν τῶν ἐτῶν καὶ τοῦ γένους, the word is used = “parentage”: cf. BGU I. 14026 (B.C. 119) τοῖς πρὸς @γ]ένους συνγενέσι, “to the legitimate parents.” With γένος = “offspring,” as in Ac 1728, cf. IG XIV. 641 (Thurii) καὶ γὰρ ἐγὼν ὑμῶν γένος ὄλβιον εὔχομαι εἶμεν … Ὄλβιε καὶ μακαριστέ, θεὸς δ᾽εσῃ ἀντὶ βροτοῖο, and 638 γῆς παῖς εἰμὶ καὶ οὐρανοῦ ἀστερόεντος, αὐτὰρ ἐμοὶ γένος οὐράνιον (both cited by Norden Agnostos Theos, p. 194). Ac 46 has a close parallel in P Tebt II. 29136 (A.D. 162) ἀ]pεd@ι]ξας σεαυτὸν γένους @ὄ]ντα ἱερατικοῦ. In OGIS 4705 (time of Augustus) a certain Theophron describes himself as priest διὰ γένου τῆς Ἀναΐτιδος Ἀρτέμιδος, “hereditary” priest. In ib. 51310 (iii/A.D.) γένους τῶν Ἐπι(λ)αϊδῶν, and 6354 (Palmyra, A.D. 178–9) οἱ ἐγ γένους Ζαβδιβωλείων, it answers to gens, a tribe or clan. For the common τῷ γένει in descriptions, cf. Syll 8522 (ii/B.C.) σῶμα ἀνδρεῖον ὧι ὄνομα Κύπριος τὸ γένος Κύπριον. In Vettius Valens, p. 8626, εἰς γένος εἰσελθών is used of a manumitted slave: cf. p. 10611. (Moulton, Miligan : Vocabulary of the Greek Testament, Hodder And Stoughon [1930]).
It is with no doubt that we are literal spiritual children of our Heavenly Father.
The Heavenly Council
“Question:The Mormons believed that in the premortal existence, we participated in a council with Heavenly Father’s other spirit children, presented his plan, and the premortal Jesus Christ covenated to be the savior. What can you say about this?Answer:That believe is heretical because the reality is that God sent his only begotten Son (Jesus Christ); that whosoever believe in him may have everlasting life (Jn 3:16, Heb 1), it did not say that “he presented the salvation plan to his spirit children”. No need for God to “have a council and present his plan” because he is all powerful and that’s the reason why he is omnipotent (Lk 1), omnipresent (Jer 23), and omniscience (Heb 4).”
Jesus being as the only begotten Son of God that God sent to the world does not even make any points against Heavenly Father presenting a plan to his children. there goes again some logical flaws with his arguments where no conclusion follows the premises which are all unsound. we can call this a non-sequitur, that is used thouroughly throughout the author’s article. God sending Jesus Christ as our Savior is a part of the plan of Salvation (Moses 4:2; Abraham 3:27). you should recall too that this plan is all about man’s redemption and exaltation (Alma 12:30; 24:14; 42:8; Moses 6:62) and for that, we need a Savior for we cannot overcome some problems without a Savior as for physical death and spiritual death (1 Cor. 15:22-23; Eph. 2:1-10; Heb. 9:22-28). that is part of the plan and the plan covers it. and as for a council, a council does not make any violations against God’s divine attributes. again, this is another example of a non-sequitur. God himself had a divine council as for Psalm 82 says :
“God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; He judgeth among the gods.” (Ps. 82:1) KJV
Protestant commentators comment on this Psalm :
“ Psalm 82: King of the Gods Psalm 82 places the modern reader in a very unfamiliar world. Modern thinkers hold to a monotheistic theology, meaning there is only one god and the gods of others simply do not exist. Ancient Israel did not have the same definition of monotheism. Indeed, for them not only did other gods exist, but these gods were active in the world.[1] This psalm gives us a window on the assembly of the gods, a place where the gods are gathered to make decisions about the world.[2] This council is part of the greater ancient Near Eastern mythology and would be a familiar image to ancient Israelites.[3] [1] A multitude of texts demonstrate this belief, e.g. Exod. 20:3-6; Deut. 4:15-20; josh. 24:14-15. In addition, many prophetic texts extol the people to love God alone and not go after other gods, e.g., Jer. 8:19; Hos. 11:2. In later texts, the theology seems to move more toward an exclusive monotheism; see. Isa. 41:21-24 . . . Verses 6-7 place the gods on equal footing with the humans. They have lost their immortality, hence their god status[4]. This ability for the God of Israel to demote the others speaks of the power of the king of the council. The king alone can control all of the other gods. This divine trial also demonstrates the fairness of Israel’s god. This god is not capricious, but sentences the other gods for their refusal to act in ways that reflect the values of God’s kingdom . . . [Psalm 89:5-8] set the state in the heavenly council. In vv.5 and 8, God is praised by the heavens for God’s faithfulness, and this certainly continues the theme of vv.1-4 while also broadening God’s faithfulness to the whole world. The questions in v.6 are rhetorical, just as in Isa. 40:18 and Pss. 18:31 and 77:13, followed by the declaration of God’s clear supremacy among the gods (v.7). God is not only the God of Israel but is the chief god of the council, and all others bow before the Lord. [2] See 1 Kgs. 22:19-23; Job 1:6-12; Zech. 1:7-17. [3] See Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic, pp. 177-90. [4] The Gilgamesh Epic is a story that concerns Gilgamesh’s quest for immortality that will make him a god, indicating the importance of immortality in ancient myth.” (Nancy Declaissé-Walford, Rolf A. Jacobson, and Beth Laneel Tanner, The Book of Psalms, New International Old Testament Commentary; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, [2014], 641, 642, 680)
Latter Day Saint scholar Stephen Smoot wrote on the Divine Council of Isaiah 40 :
“Another instance in the Hebrew Bible where we encounter a plurality in the text is the fortieth chapter of Isaiah: “Comfort [נחמו; naḥămû], O comfort [נחמו; naḥămû] my people, says your God [אלהיכם; ’ēlōhêykem]. Speak [דברו; dabĕrû] tenderly to Jerusalem, and cry [קראו; qîrĕ’û] to her that she has served her term, that her penalty is paid, that she has received from the Lord’s hand double for all her sins” (Isaiah 40:1–2). This passage employs the plural imperative suffix on the verbs throughout. Likewise, the subject ’ēlōhîm features the masculine plural possessive suffix. This, in conjunction with other evidence, has lead scholars to conclude the divine council is being addressed in this text.41 As summarized by J. J. M. Roberts, in this passage “God commissions the divine council to issue a message of consolation to the people of Israel, and the prophet, who overhears the voices of the council, clarifies the message …. [The] imperatives are all plural, addressed to the angelic members of God’s royal council.”42 (Notes : 41. Frank M. Cross Jr., “The Council of Yahweh in Second Isaiah,” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 12, no. 4 (Oct. 1953): 274–77; Christopher R. Seitz, “The Divine Council: Temporal Transition and New Prophecy in the Book of Isaiah,” Journal of Biblical Literature 109, no. 2 (1990): 229–47. 42. J. J. M. Roberts, “Isaiah,” in The HarperCollins Study Bible, 961.)
E.T Millen wrote :
“The meeting of the council is described in some detail in the vision of Micaiah in 1 Kgs 22:19-23. Ahab of Israel and Jehoshaphat of Judah, having received a favorable oracle from the four hundred prophets (22:5-6), summoned Micaiah (vv. 8-9), whose oracle (v. 17) differed quite drastically from that of the other prophets. The vision of the proceedings in the council reveals the reason for the discrepancy—Yahweh had commanded a false oracle from the prophets and one of his council members carried out his decree. The vision of Micaiah is introduced with an imperative and the announcement of his authority: šema’ debar-YHWH, “Hear the word of Yahweh” (v. 19). Like the messengers in the Ugaritic texts, the message to or from the council is accompanied by the explicit mention of the sender, tḥm DN, the semantic and literary equivalent of debar YHWH. Having stated the authority for the message he was to deliver, Micaiah proceeds with his vision: “I saw Yahweh enthroned upon his dais, and all the host of heaven (kol-ṣeba’ haššāmāyim) were standing about him (‘ōmēd ‘ālāw) on his right and on his left” (v. 19). The heavenly scene is clear: Yahweh, like ‘Ēl, is enthroned among the members of his council (cf. CTA 16.V.9-28; Ug. V.2I.2-4 [RS 24.252]). He then directly addresses his council: “Who will entice Ahab . . . ?” (mî yepatteh ‘et-‘aḥ’āb, v. 20; compare ‘Ēl’s question, “Who among the gods will drive off the illness . . .?,” my b’ilm ydy mrṣ, CTA 16.V.10-11, 14-15, 17-18, 20-21). Unlike the Ugaritic council, where the gods sit helplessly by, unable even to answer (‘in b’ilm ‘nyh, 16.V.12-13, 16, 19, 22), the members of Yahweh’s council discuss the matter among themselves: “One said one thing and another said another” (v. 20). When the matter has been decided among the members, one of them addresses the head of the assembly: “The spirit came forth and stood before Yahweh” (wayyēṣē’ hārūaḥ wayy’ămōd lipnē YHWH, v. 21). The volunteer from the council is designated as “the spirit” (hārūaḥ), a common designation of Yahweh’s messengers (cf. Pss 104:4; 18:11 [= 2 Sam 22:11]; 148:8; Job 30:22; Jub. 2:2; etc.). The “spirit” volunteers and is questioned by Yahweh as to his plan (v. 21). When he reveals that he will become “a lying spirit in the mouth of all the prophets,” Yahweh pronounces that he will succeed (v. 22). Finally, the messenger o the council is commissioned with imperatives, “Go forth and do so” (ṣē’ wa’ăśēh-kēn, v. 22), in the same manner that messengers in the Ugaritic myths were dispatched. Verse 23, the final part of the vision, recounts that the messenger has carried out his function—the decree of the assembly has been fulfilled. The parallels with the Ugaritic council are evident. The gods surround the high god, who is enthroned in their midst. They “stand” (‘md) before him and respond to his questions. Yahweh selects his messenger and commissions him to proceed, after guaranteeing the succession of the mission. The word and decision of the council are the same as the decree of Yahweh. The council only serves to reemphasize and execute his decision. Its members carry out his decree exactly as commissioned. (E.T. Millen, Jr., The Divine Council in Canaanite and Early Hebrew [Harvard Semitic Monographs 24; Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1980; repr., Leiden, Brill: Brill, n.d.], 205-6)
Jesus and Lucifer
With connection to the council being stated above, here’s another flawed argument by the author :
“Question:Another belief they have is that Lucifer is the another spirit son of God and rebelled against the plan. He and his followers became demons and were cast out of heaven and denied the privileges of receiving a physical body and experiencing mortality. Is this true?Answer:No. It never happened because it is Jesus who is the only-begotten Son of God (Jn 3:16), not Lucifer nor any of the angels (Heb 1:5). Yes, Lucifer and the angels who followed him became demons due to their disobedience to God (Is 14:12-15, Sir 10:13, Rv 12:7-12), but it is never happened that they ” denied the privilege to have physical body and will experience mortality” since by origin that theu were angels and angels are spirits in nature (Heb 1:14). Meaning that despite of being demons, still their nature of being spirits remains.”
This is a deliberate mistinterpretation of the text and the doctrine. “only begotten Son” does not mean that Jesus Christ is the lone spiritual Son of God but is the lone Son of God in flesh for Jesus is the only man who live on earth whose biological Father is God himself (Mk. 3:11; Lk. 1:32). as for Heb. 1:5, the context is all about the greatness of Jesus Christ over other heavenly beings and again, by using this premise, this does not follow up the argument that Satan cannot be a spiritual son of God for greatness does not mean being lone. for Lucifer’s and his demon’s casting, the author hastily generalized the Latter Day Saint narrative of the fall of Lucifer and demons. they are not casted because they denied the privelege to have a body but this is a consequence of their disobedience! it is a consequence of their pride and their desire to dethrone God and by rejecting Jesus Christ as the chosen Savior of mankind! that is not what Latter Day Saints beliefs as the author presents. furthermore, there are instances in the Bible that proves that Lucifer is also a spiritual son of God. Latter Day Saint scholar, Theologian, and Apologist, Robert Boylan, wrote the following on Job 1:6 on “the sons of God” (בְּנֵ֣י הָאֱלֹהִ֔ים - beney eloheym) and how Satan is one of them, he wrote :
“ In Job 1:6, we read the following:Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them.In this text, Satan is presented as being among the “Sons of God” (בני האלהים) This can be seen in the verb יצב (to take [their] stand/position”) and that Satan is said to be in their “midst,” that is, he belongs among their ranks, clearly demonstrating that the theology of Job holds to a “Satan” who has real, ontological existence, in contradistinction to some Christadelphian interpretation of the "Satan" texts in Job. When one examines the phrase, “among them” (KJV), one finds that the Hebrew is a phrase consisting of the prefixed preposition (בְּ) meaning “in/among” and (תָּוֶךְ). When one examines the other instances of this phrase in the Hebrew Bible, it denotes someone being a member of a group, not independent thereof (e.g., Exo 28:33; Lev 17:8, 10, 13; Num 1:47; 5:3; 15:26, 29, etc.); indeed, commentators such as David J.A. Clines states that the phrase regularly denotes membership of the group in question (See Clines, Job 1-20 [Word Biblical Commentary, 1989], 19). The bare term תָּוֶךְ also denotes membership, not independence, of the group in question (cf. Gen 23:10; 40:20; 2 Kgs 4:13).Furthermore, the "Satan" in Job 1:6, in Hebrew, is not just the bare term (שָׂטָן), meaning an "adversary," which, in and of itself, can denote anyone who opposes another, whether divine or not (e.g., the angel of the Lord is referred to as an adversary or שָׂטָן in Num 22:22), but is coupled with the definite article (השטן), “the satan,” which denotes the supernatural tempter (cf. Zech 3:2); one should compare this with similar Greek locutions in the LXX and NT such as such as ο σατανας (Sirach 21:27; Matt 12:26; Mark 3:26; 4:15; Luke 10:18; 11:18; 13:16; 22:31; John 13:27; Acts 5:3; 26:18; Rom 16:20; 1 cor 5:5; 7:5; 2 Cor 2:11; 11:14; 1 Thess 2:18; 2 Thess 2:9; 1 Tim 1:20; 5:15; Rev 2:9, 13, 24; 3:9; 12:9; 20:2, 7); ο διαβολος (Matt 4:1,5,8,11; 13:39; 25:41; Luke 4:2,3,6,13; 8:12; John 8:44; 13:2; Acts 10:38; Eph 4:27; 6:11; 1 Tim 3:6, 7; 2 Tim 2:26; Heb 2:14; James 4:7; 1 John 3:8, 10; Jude 1:9; Rev 2:10; 12:12; 20:10) and ο πειραζω (Matt 4:3; 1 Thess 3:5), all denoting the external, supernatural tempter in most of Christian theologies (some small groups denying a supernatural Satan notwithstanding).Why is this significant? One popular charge is that Latter-day Saints believe that Jesus and Satan are “brothers.” Left on its own, it is shocking and seen as blasphemous. However, leaving this on its own, with no explanation, is “yellow journalism.”In Latter-day Saint Christology Christ has existed for all eternity; many critics claim that LDS theology is reflective of Arianism or some other Christology, but that is a non sequitur. D&C 93:21 and other texts affirm that Christ has existed eternally. Notice the “high Christology” of the following two passages from uniquely LDS scriptural texts (more could be reproduced):And Amulek said unto him: Yea, he [Christ] is the very Eternal Father of heaven and of earth, and all things which in them are; he is the beginning and the end, the first and the last. (Alma 11:39)I am Alpha and Omega, Christ the Lord, yea, even I am he, the beginning and the end, the Redeemer of the world. (D&C 19:1)In LDS theology, properly stated (and not the caricature one finds in works such as The God Makers and other presentations thereof) states we all pre-existed as the spirit sons and daughters of God. In that sense, we are all brothers/sisters of Jesus. However, Job 1:6 proves, unless one is a Christadelphian or some other similar group, “the Satan” is one of the “sons of God,” that is, a member of the heavenly court, one of whom was Yahweh. Note Deut 32:7-9 from the NRSV, reflecting the Qumran reading (see this blog post reproducing what a recent scholarly commentary has to say about this important pericope):Remember the days of old, consider the years long past; ask your father, and he will inform you; your elders, and they will tell you. When the Most High apportioned the nations, when he divided humankind, he fixed the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of the gods; the Lord's own portion was his people, Jacob his allotted share.While much more could be said, it should be noted that, as with so many beliefs, it is Latter-day Saint theology, not Evangelical theology, that is supported by biblical exegesis.”
Conclusion
We pre-existed in Heavenly Father’s presence as His literal spiritual sons and daughters. He wants us to become more like Him so he presented us a plan; a plan that we might progress and attain what Heavenly Father has. He created the world through his beloved Son, Jesus Christ and He created our bodies and because Heavenly Father knows that we can stumble, He chose Jesus Christ to be our Savior to help us overcome challenges that we cannot overcome by ourselves. he saved us from our sins and from death, and gives us the strenght to face and overcome the challeges that we will have that is essential for our eternal progression. because of Heavenly Father’s plan, we had the privelege to have physical bodies, to experience life where we will experience sadness and happiness, and we had the privelege to become like Heavenly Father, and even his Son, Jesus Christ. this is what the restored Gospel of Jesus Christ teaches us and i want you to study it rightfully and not like what the author of the article from a Catholic apologetic page did.
--------------------------
Like and support our Facebook page and message us for your questions and get answers on : Facebook.com/ldswarriors2000
Visit our blog at : Ldswarriors2000.blogspot.com
Visit my Quora profile at : Quora.com/Nathan-Lerr
