1. 'B'nai Elohim' does indeed mean "Sons of God" because it's referring to Yahweh who is single in Being but plural in person. "Elohim" was a title not a name like "god" and could be used to refer to multiple gods.
2. The fact that some of ancient Israel did worship other gods alongside or instead of YHWH does not mean that they were supposed to or that there was some progression from polytheism to monotheism. The Bible is really clear that there was polytheism even in Genesis forward, from many people, including Abram's extended family, but not Abram himself.
She correctly shows that many people disagree that with what the passage means. Her opinion is definitely from a non-believer. So how about after reading Cathy Cooper's take on the passage, whose conclusion I don't come agree with and is linked below:
Debunking Christianity: What Happened When Humpty Dumpty Met the Sons of Gods
Watch and listen to Dr Hank Hanegraaf answer the question and other relevant questions.
So, basically, he's just saying don't worry about it because you don't want to deal with the ramifications?
ReplyDeleteOr likewise, I suppose he could be saying it can't be true, because the ramifications cannot be true.
I'm not sure which would be worse though.
If you would like to argue about how it could be true, go ahead and try it.
ReplyDeleteThe guest blogger at debunkingchristianity.com did that already. Neither you or the other guy even remotely addressed the post, but at least the other guy laid bare some of his cognitive problems. .
ReplyDeleteClosest That I have ever seen you be honest about how bad a post is at Debunking Christianity,
ReplyDeleteClosest That I have ever seen you be honest about how bad a post is at Debunking Christianity,
ReplyDeleteIn English, please?
This was the first time I've ever seen you be honest about how bad a post at Debunking Christianity is.
ReplyDeleteI'm confused. Ryan is talking about the guy in the video, not the blogger at Debunking Christianity. I am a Christian, and the video is shockingly inconsistent, as the blogger at DC clearly pointed out. If what the video says is true, then Jesus could not be the son of god!--and I believe that he is!!
ReplyDeleteBTW--is English not your first language, because what Ryan said was pretty straight forward and was directed at the video you posted, and not the poster at DC.