How sound is Dr. Heiser? Does he go off in reckless and unwarranted ways that need to be taken into consideration when reading his works? Any info would be appreciated.
He's very hit-n-miss. He's kind of a niche scholar. And OT scholar by training who takes an interest in the paranormal. Has written some useful things debunking ufology.
On the flip side, his hobbyhorse is "the divine council", Nephilim as human/angel hybrids. Not somebody you'd turn to as a theological guide, but helpful on some individual issues.
Does that mean his understanding of the rock passage is incorrect, because he does tie to the Divine Council idea? I find his rock explanation interesting, and even the Divine Council, but I'm very hesitant to agree because it sounds so different from what has been taught. Any how, thanks for your response, always enjoy your posts...at least the one's I'm able to understand.
I don't think the overall interpretation depends on the Divine Council motif. Rather, it's the pagan associations of the area. Baal-worship. Pan-worship. Plus the fact that it's very rocky. The connotations of the real landscape combined with the heathen connotations of the area contribute to a symbolic landscape, and Christ's statement trades on that.
I've never heard of Heiser until just now. I wonder if any of the church fathers approached it this way. BTW when it comes to exegesis, is there a tension between the literal words and the idea of body language, something we can't bring to the interpretation?
It's based on familiarity with the local terrain combined with the heathen history/reputation of the area. I don't think that's in tension with the wording. That provides context.
Unless church fathers had local knowledge of the area, I wouldn't expect that interpretation to occur to them.
Good background in here. I'd want to verify all of that, but it coheres with other stuff I've read about it.
ReplyDeleteHello John,
DeleteHow do you view the rock of Matthew 16:18? What do you think it refers to?
How sound is Dr. Heiser? Does he go off in reckless and unwarranted ways that need to be taken into consideration when reading his works? Any info would be appreciated.
ReplyDeleteHe's very hit-n-miss. He's kind of a niche scholar. And OT scholar by training who takes an interest in the paranormal. Has written some useful things debunking ufology.
DeleteOn the flip side, his hobbyhorse is "the divine council", Nephilim as human/angel hybrids. Not somebody you'd turn to as a theological guide, but helpful on some individual issues.
Does that mean his understanding of the rock passage is incorrect, because he does tie to the Divine Council idea? I find his rock explanation interesting, and even the Divine Council, but I'm very hesitant to agree because it sounds so different from what has been taught. Any how, thanks for your response, always enjoy your posts...at least the one's I'm able to understand.
DeleteI don't think the overall interpretation depends on the Divine Council motif. Rather, it's the pagan associations of the area. Baal-worship. Pan-worship. Plus the fact that it's very rocky. The connotations of the real landscape combined with the heathen connotations of the area contribute to a symbolic landscape, and Christ's statement trades on that.
DeleteI've never heard of Heiser until just now. I wonder if any of the church fathers approached it this way. BTW when it comes to exegesis, is there a tension between the literal words and the idea of body language, something we can't bring to the interpretation?
ReplyDeleteIt's based on familiarity with the local terrain combined with the heathen history/reputation of the area. I don't think that's in tension with the wording. That provides context.
DeleteUnless church fathers had local knowledge of the area, I wouldn't expect that interpretation to occur to them.
I sent a friend the link in this post, and he sent me this link back.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dv8ZTJR77pU&t=2s
Both videos are about the same passage.
Delete