The Divine Council.

[Naomi25]

Just wondering, has anyone heard of Michael Heiser or read his books? "Unseen Realm", "Supernatural"..? He covers the Divine Council, the Nephilim, the rebellion at Babel, that sort of thing.
I've been reading some of his stuff and have found it quite interesting. Just wondering if there are any others here and what they think!

 

[DNB]

Just wondering, has anyone heard of Michael Heiser or read his books? "Unseen Realm", "Supernatural"..? He covers the Divine Council, the Nephilim, the rebellion at Babel, that sort of thing.
I've been reading some of his stuff and have found it quite interesting. Just wondering if there are any others here and what they think!

Hi Naomi, I have, but just a little bit, and only on his manuscript textual criticism studies. I like him in this field.
But, I have heard him a little on the areas that you are asking about, and personally, I find him out there. Of which, I find that anyone that delves into that subject more than what is Biblically warranted, is out there. In other words, the Bible has no more than a few isolated verses on the subject matter, how is it possible to speak more than a couple of sentences on the issue without entering into the realm of either speculation, or complete conjecture?
I, personally, strongly warn people just to stay away from that area, for if God wanted anyone to know more about these subject matters, he would've inspired the authors of his written Word, to divulge these things to us. And, as you are aware, he just didn't.
The only documents, I believe, that carry more information about such esoteric entities, would be extra-biblical works i.e. Nag Hamadi or Dead Sea manuscripts, that is, the pseudepigraphical works, not the canonical.

 

[mjrhealth]

Just wondering, has anyone heard of Michael Heiser or read his books? "Unseen Realm", "Supernatural"..? He covers the Divine Council, the Nephilim, the rebellion at Babel, that sort of thing.
I've been reading some of his stuff and have found it quite interesting. Just wondering if there are any others here and what they think!

Hi @Naomi25 , I watch lots of programs about what was there before the flood. lots and lots of interesting info coming to light that science can no longer hide, and read some book, the epic of Gilgamesh is intriguing, as are all the many flood stories that prove that the flood was no myth. We just have to be careful, as @DNB said seems there is lots God didnt want or need us to know. Anyone wit ha bit fs sense can see the bible is missing lots of details about the beginning. God loves us to seek, it is why He gave us a brain, just dont let it cause your faith to come into question.

God nless

 

[Naomi25]

Hi Naomi, I have, but just a little bit, and only on his manuscript textual criticism studies. I like him in this field.
But, I have heard him a little on the areas that you are asking about, and personally, I find him out there. Of which, I find that anyone that delves into that subject more than what is Biblically warranted, is out there. In other words, the Bible has no more than a few isolated verses on the subject matter, how is it possible to speak more than a couple of sentences on the issue without entering into the realm of either speculation, or complete conjecture?
I, personally, strongly warn people just to stay away from that area, for if God wanted anyone to know more about these subject matters, he would've inspired the authors of his written Word, to divulge these things to us. And, as you are aware, he just didn't.
The only documents, I believe, that carry more information about such esoteric entities, would be extra-biblical works i.e. Nag Hamadi or Dead Sea manuscripts, that is, the pseudepigraphical works, not the canonical.

Thanks for your input! I've listened to some of his other 'fringe' stuff, and yes, he does cover some real 'out there' topics. However, I have noted that when he moves outside of those areas he does preface his speculations with the warning that it IS just speculation. It's speculation based on things he either finds credible or not, but I've heard him say numerous times that things can be interesting to speculate on, but unless its found in scripture that's all it remains...speculation. In fact, he's quite harsh on other topics, such as eschatology and the different schools of thought within it, because he feels too many of them make leaps of intuition based on presuppositions that the text doesn't strictly allow.
In terms of the Divine Council, I actually think I have to side with him. While there is not a big chunk of scripture that goes into depth speaking of it or explaining it, there appears to be enough references of it sprinkled throughout the bible, the OT in particular, that it just shouldn't be dismissed.
As for his other stuff, the ideas about the Nephilim and the rebellion at Babel...I don't know. It's not a hill I'd plant my flag on and die. But again, he presents enough scriptural evidence that you come away thinking "there is more here than what I've originally been taught". I think too often in this modern world we have people who want to dismiss things that seem "too weird" in the text, and if it's just one verse, how important could it be? We don't like to think of spiritual 'woo-woo' stuff or out there stuff that makes us look like weirdo's. But the fact is that we believe in and worship a God who is spirit, and has a spiritual court around him. And we must acknowledge that that reality is probably more real that our own! In fact, there is a good chance that the ancient people's had a better understanding of some of this and the idea of 'science and reason' hadn't infected their world view. They truly understood what Paul meant when he said that we don't fight against flesh and blood.

Anyway, it's something to think about. But fear not, I'm not the sort to be swayed by impressive arguments that stand on their own logic. Unless a person can back something up with scripture and sound exegesis that goes with their thinking, I move on!

 

[Naomi25]

Hi @Naomi25 , I watch lots of programs about what was there before the flood. lots and lots of interesting info coming to light that science can no longer hide, and read some book, the epic of Gilgamesh is intriguing, as are all the many flood stories that prove that the flood was no myth. We just have to be careful, as @DNB said seems there is lots God didnt want or need us to know. Anyone wit ha bit fs sense can see the bible is missing lots of details about the beginning. God loves us to seek, it is why He gave us a brain, just dont let it cause your faith to come into question.

God nless

Goodness, no! Why would it cause me to question my faith!? I don't think it fundamentally changes a single thing about God and his plan of salvation. It just seems like it fleshes it all in a little more.
Actually, Michael Heiser touches on the Gilgamesh tale. But more, he simply points to biblical passages that highlight certain things. Like...when the Israelites were coming into Caanan, and then wandering in the wilderness and fighting all those different tribes etc, why are so many of them describes as 'sons of the Anakim' or 'Sons of Anak', who, 'come from the Nephilim'...who are 'greater and taller than we are'. God demands that they be killed. Then we are told:

And Joshua came at that time and cut off the Anakim from the hill country, from Hebron, from Debir, from Anab, and from all the hill country of Judah, and from all the hill country of Israel. Joshua devoted them to destruction with their cities. There was none of the Anakim left in the land of the people of Israel. Only in Gaza, in Gath, and in Ashdod did some remain. -Joshua 11:21–22

Strangely enough, when David comes onto the scene, we see him fighting in Gath particularly, but again and again scripture mentions him fighting those who were "decedents of the giants".


As you can see....this in no way leads a person away from their faith....it is simply an interesting exercise in connecting some OT dots that perhaps you had not made before. Does it mean anything in particular? I'm not sure. Maybe it does mean that the 'Nephilim' were half angelic/men...that might explain why they were referenced as 'unclean', as Hebrews didn't particularly like 'mixed' things. Whatever the case, God seemed to want them gone, and the bible catalogues the wickedness of the peoples in the land. That tells me God is both in control and just...just as I knew before.

 

[mjrhealth]

The problem is what men see and what they write can be quiet different, can you imagine John trying to describe tanks and planes in a prophecy when hes never seeing one... So much knowledge so little wisdom. thats teh problem. But is is fun digging

 

[DNB]

It's speculation based on things he either finds credible or not, but I've heard him say numerous times that things can be interesting to speculate on, but unless its found in scripture that's all it remains...speculation. In fact, he's quite harsh on other topics, such as eschatology and the different schools of thought within it, because he feels too many of them make leaps of intuition based on presuppositions that the text doesn't strictly allow.
In terms of the Divine Council, I actually think I have to side with him. While there is not a big chunk of scripture that goes into depth speaking of it or explaining it, there appears to be enough references of it sprinkled throughout the bible, the OT in particular, that it just shouldn't be dismissed.

Anyway, it's something to think about. But fear not, I'm not the sort to be swayed by impressive arguments that stand on their own logic. Unless a person can back something up with scripture and sound exegesis that goes with their thinking, I move on!

Great Naomi, it sounds like you have a rather sober view on the matter then, and that you're not prone to be drawn too far in, without warrant. But do proceed with the utmost scrutiny, caution and reservation...

...but, to be entirely honest Naomi, I cannot see any benefit in this exercise whatsoever? What difference will it make to your faith or edification to discover more about such sparse and esoteric facts? Will it affect any of your current doctrinal beliefs, ...how so, when there's not enough information to allow one to be dogmatic about a new principle, or to allow it to override or influence an existing one?

In other words, there is so much other information in the Bible that is critical to one's salvation, and apologetical and evangelical efforts, that who has time for such mystical or 'frivolous' investigation?
As, for instance, are you able to astutely defend your position on the existence of God, or the Atonement, or the saints preservation or not, ...?

Best of luck Naomi in whatever your Biblical endeavours are, I would only say choose what is best for your own edification, and that which may help others.
Thanks!

 

[Naomi25]

Great Naomi, it sounds like you have a rather sober view on the matter then, and that you're not prone to be drawn too far in, without warrant. But do proceed with the utmost scrutiny, caution and reservation...

...but, to be entirely honest Naomi, I cannot see any benefit in this exercise whatsoever? What difference will it make to your faith or edification to discover more about such sparse and esoteric facts? Will it affect any of your current doctrinal beliefs, ...how so, when there's not enough information to allow one to be dogmatic about a new principle, or to allow it to override or influence an existing one?

In other words, there is so much other information in the Bible that is critical to one's salvation, and apologetical and evangelical efforts, that who has time for such mystical or 'frivolous' investigation?
As, for instance, are you able to astutely defend your position on the existence of God, or the Atonement, or the saints preservation or not, ...?

Best of luck Naomi in whatever your Biblical endeavours are, I would only say choose what is best for your own edification, and that which may help others.
Thanks!

Thank you for your caution, and I do assure I am aware of the need to be so. On the topic on why investigating such things would be a waste of time or not...well, I would put forth a few ideas. Firstly I would suggest that regardless of whether or not this stuff hinges the 'big' doctrines, it's still in holy scripture, and I'm not sure it's entirely up to us to dismiss any 'jot or tiddle' just because it seems strange or out of place to us. Secondly, 'heaven', that place that God primarily dwells (and you must understand that I'm not denying that God is everywhere, but that scripture teaches there is a 'place' where God's throne is, where angels and cherubim fall down and worship him 'on' that throne), and that place is in a realm we cannot see and have limited understanding of. But just because we cannot see it, hear it or touch it, doesn't mean it is not real. Indeed, it is the very place we are striving to go! To be in God's presence! If scripture wants to flesh out for us in better detail the hierarchy of that place, and how we are to understand the rebellion that took place there and how that spilled forth onto earth, I'm not sure it's entirely bad for us to scratch the surface of it. As long as we hold staunchly to what the bible says alone on the subject and do not wander off onto speculations and fancies, I can't see it being bad.

 

[DNB]

Thank you for your caution, and I do assure I am aware of the need to be so. On the topic on why investigating such things would be a waste of time or not...well, I would put forth a few ideas. Firstly I would suggest that regardless of whether or not this stuff hinges the 'big' doctrines, it's still in holy scripture, and I'm not sure it's entirely up to us to dismiss any 'jot or tiddle' just because it seems strange or out of place to us. Secondly, 'heaven', that place that God primarily dwells (and you must understand that I'm not denying that God is everywhere, but that scripture teaches there is a 'place' where God's throne is, where angels and cherubim fall down and worship him 'on' that throne), and that place is in a realm we cannot see and have limited understanding of. But just because we cannot see it, hear it or touch it, doesn't mean it is not real. Indeed, it is the very place we are striving to go! To be in God's presence! If scripture wants to flesh out for us in better detail the hierarchy of that place, and how we are to understand the rebellion that took place there and how that spilled forth onto earth, I'm not sure it's entirely bad for us to scratch the surface of it. As long as we hold staunchly to what the bible says alone on the subject and do not wander off onto speculations and fancies, I can't see it being bad.

As usual, very well said Naomi, ...with the proper measure (as much as has been revealed, warrants as much effort to be invested).
Good luck, and God bless either way!

 

[marks]

It's an interesting thing to look into, in my opinion, but only using what is in the Bible. I know a lot of people who are into this go to non-Biblical sources, which I do not.

There is though the question of why even include such sparse information as there is.

I think of the Macaiah's prophecy, describing this divine council, and I ask myself why did God include this? My thinking is that God wants us to know that He involves His creation in the running of His creation.

God, as Creator, can do anything He wants. He could have just stuck the thought in the prophet's minds to encourage Ahab to go to war that he would die. God could have simply struck Ahab dead. Instead He allowed a spirit to come up with the idea, and then go and implement it.

Just like God tells us we have not because we ask not, and we ask and receive not because we ask amiss. He gives place for us to participate, and wants us to participate in the right way.

Much love!

 

[Naomi25]

It's an interesting thing to look into, in my opinion, but only using what is in the Bible. I know a lot of people who are into this go to non-Biblical sources, which I do not.

There is though the question of why even include such sparse information as there is.

I think of the Macaiah's prophecy, describing this divine council, and I ask myself why did God include this? My thinking is that God wants us to know that He involves His creation in the running of His creation.

God, as Creator, can do anything He wants. He could have just stuck the thought in the prophet's minds to encourage Ahab to go to war that he would die. God could have simply struck Ahab dead. Instead He allowed a spirit to come up with the idea, and then go and implement it.

Just like God tells us we have not because we ask not, and we ask and receive not because we ask amiss. He gives place for us to participate, and wants us to participate in the right way.

Much love!

Hi marks! I think you are right, and from what I can tell from Heiser's work, he would agree with you as well. He suggests the Divine Council are more like...God's heavenly family. He poses the idea that just as God made Adam and Eve to dwell WITH him in fellowship and be, in a real sense, family, so he also has a heavenly one. He desires both families to work together and ultimately dwell together; thus we see in the new "heavens and earth" that heaven and earth come together and God dwells 'with his people'. In effect - Gods plan comes to fuition; his family is finally together and working as they should.
Whether that idea is entirely accurate or not, it's certainly nice. And, well, we do know that we ARE adopted into God's family...so...maybe! And it's so much nicer knowing God WANTS us, rather than he needs us, don't you think?

 

[brakelite]

Without being able to offer screeds of tangible biblical proof, I would venture my understanding of the council... The one witnessed to in Job. I firmly believe that there are other populated worlds in his creation other than Earth.
KJV Hebrews 1
2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds...
KJV Hebrews 11
3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

When Satan was challenged regarding his attendance at this council, it appeared to have a direct relation to dominion... Kingship... And rule, for in giving his reason for attendance Satan said...
KJV Job 2
2 And the LORD said unto Satan, From whence comest thou? And Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it...

Like a dog who has marked his territory, Satan is here claiming rule of the Earth which the Lord doors not actually dispute, and is in harmony with the rest of scripture which informs us that Satan took that dominion away from Adam. Thus Adam, if he had retained his integrity instead of sinning, he would have been at that council as having lawful dominion here.
My conclusion then is that those in attendance at that council were the heads of the various worlds that were not fallen after the similitude of our one. Otherwise perhaps Satan would have been claiming them as his territory as well.

 

[Giuliano]

Just wondering, has anyone heard of Michael Heiser or read his books? "Unseen Realm", "Supernatural"..? He covers the Divine Council, the Nephilim, the rebellion at Babel, that sort of thing.
I've been reading some of his stuff and have found it quite interesting. Just wondering if there are any others here and what they think!

I haven't heard of him, but there are a few odd passages in the Bible that should make us wonder what is going on.

For example, first we read that God said He would wipe out all mankind. Then we read that He saw Noah was righteous and spared him and his family. What was going on? I can give my opinions and people are free to decide for themselves if they make any sense.

I believe there are 70 Guardian Angels of the nations. God does not do anything without knowing everything they know. Indeed we could say "God" is a Oneness which includes them. So the idea of whether mankind should be wiped up arose. What should be done?

I think God consulted with all the 70 angels, and collectively they came up with a solution. I also believe each species of animal has its own Guardian Angel. Man is unique in that each person has his own Guardian Angel while animals share one. The Guardian Angels of the animals were involved in that discussion too. That can be seen later when the covenant with Noah is made. The covenant is made with the animals too.

Then we see the earth divided among the nations. Each nation was supposed to dwell in its own area. Each nation was supposed to develop its own unique culture or personality. The humans on earth did not do it. They chose to stay together at Babel in defiance of God's plan which had been made for man. What to be done? Well, the Bible says, God "came down to see" what was going on. It would be foolish to read that "literally" in a way that means God has poor vision and needs to be up close to things to know what's going on. Let us not be so naive.

The Jewish tradition it means God came down to hold a council with the 70 angels. It was held at Babel the way a court sometimes goes to the scene of a crime to gather evidence. God did not issue the decree on His own without consulting with the 70 angels of the nations. It was His pleasure to allow them to debate and then to vote on the matter. The decision reached was to confound or to confuse their languages. I think if properly understood, that does not contradict the Scripture that says God is not the author of confusion. I think it was the collective decision of the 70 angels to confuse their languages, and God approved that decision.

What makes some passages hard to understand is that when we read "God", it can mean different things. It could mean the "One God" or it could mean Him along with some angels or with all of them.

 

[Giuliano]

It's an interesting thing to look into, in my opinion, but only using what is in the Bible. I know a lot of people who are into this go to non-Biblical sources, which I do not.

There is though the question of why even include such sparse information as there is.

I think of the Macaiah's prophecy, describing this divine council, and I ask myself why did God include this? My thinking is that God wants us to know that He involves His creation in the running of His creation.

God, as Creator, can do anything He wants. He could have just stuck the thought in the prophet's minds to encourage Ahab to go to war that he would die. God could have simply struck Ahab dead. Instead He allowed a spirit to come up with the idea, and then go and implement it.

Just like God tells us we have not because we ask not, and we ask and receive not because we ask amiss. He gives place for us to participate, and wants us to participate in the right way.

Much love!

One rabbinical tradition says that the "lying spirit" was Naboth.

It makes sense to me. I don't know if it will make sense to other people. Naboth was still wanting justice for one thing. I don't see it as revenge but rather as wanting to prevent that kind of injustice being repeated by Ahab. Lies were used when Ahab stole Naboth's vineyard. Ahab closed his eyes to the lies of Jezebel and the people she bribed -- how convenient for him -- he got what he wanted and he could say he didn't do anything wrong. He didn't lie about Naboth. Ahab liked lies when they benefited him and he could claim to be guiltless. That is a terrible crime in a ruler since he's encouraging people under him to lie. How appropriate then that God allowed a "lie" to be used bring Ahab down. It's almost as if the decree of Heaven was, "You like lies, Ahab? Here's one for you."

Proverbs 26:27 Whoso diggeth a pit shall fall therein: and he that rolleth a stone, it will return upon him.

Did God lie? Or did God only allow a lie to be told to Ahab because Ahab asked for lies to be told?

 

[Nancy]

Just wondering, has anyone heard of Michael Heiser or read his books? "Unseen Realm", "Supernatural"..? He covers the Divine Council, the Nephilim, the rebellion at Babel, that sort of thing.
I've been reading some of his stuff and have found it quite interesting. Just wondering if there are any others here and what they think!

Just looked at some of His books, he also has a podcast. These things interest me as we are always being attacked Spiritually.

 

[Naomi25]

Without being able to offer screeds of tangible biblical proof, I would venture my understanding of the council... The one witnessed to in Job. I firmly believe that there are other populated worlds in his creation other than Earth.
KJV Hebrews 1
2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds...
KJV Hebrews 11
3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

When Satan was challenged regarding his attendance at this council, it appeared to have a direct relation to dominion... Kingship... And rule, for in giving his reason for attendance Satan said...
KJV Job 2
2 And the LORD said unto Satan, From whence comest thou? And Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it...

Like a dog who has marked his territory, Satan is here claiming rule of the Earth which the Lord doors not actually dispute, and is in harmony with the rest of scripture which informs us that Satan took that dominion away from Adam. Thus Adam, if he had retained his integrity instead of sinning, he would have been at that council as having lawful dominion here.
My conclusion then is that those in attendance at that council were the heads of the various worlds that were not fallen after the similitude of our one. Otherwise perhaps Satan would have been claiming them as his territory as well.

I have not heard of the 'other worlds' idea before. May I ask what makes you think that its actual 'worlds' rather than, perhaps, different...ah...dimensions. We could say, for example, that heaven is not necessarily a place somewhere up in the sky, but another world separate from ours that we cannot see or perceive. If that makes sense. We could also say then, that Hades, or sheol, is also another 'world'. Just a thought, and wondering what you think on it!

In terms of what I think Michael Heiser thinks (since I suppose that is where I am in a sense 'arguing' from, whether or not it is accurate), he would say that the 'Council Members', or at least some of them, were assigned over the different nations at the Tower of Babel incident. God, having been defied by man once again, washed his hands of them, decided he would pull from a barren couple his own miraculously conceived peoples, and handed off the rest of mankind to be shepherded by his Council Members. These 'watchers', as they were apparently called, were to care for them, as they were still image bearers of God, and call them to godly living. Instead, they enjoyed being worshiped and it is in this event, rather than the Genesis account that we see the majority of heaven 'fall'. Of course we still see Satan, the ultimate rebel, defy God and cause the downfall of man in that devastating event. But nowhere in Genesis does it state that Satan took a third of the angels with him. In fact, Heiser says, the only time in scripture that 1/3 of the 'stars' is mentioned is Rev 12, which is clearly talking about the birth of Christ...which happened a little after the Eden event!
Anyway, Heiser points to this verse:

When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance,
when he divided mankind,
he fixed the borders of the peoples
according to the number of the sons of God. -Deuteronomy 32:8

And then also points to Daniel, where he was praying, and God sends and angel with an answer, but the angel was delayed because of 'the Prince of Persia', and had to wait until Michael came and fought the Prince. Basically, the idea is that the nations have these 'Princes' who used to be Council Members. He goes into several more verses that flesh out the idea. He also uses Mesopotamian texts to prop up the other side of it, which is interesting. He says he's most careful never to use extra-biblical texts to 'fill in gaps' in scripture, but they can be useful when they provide, as it were, the 'other side of the story' from the 'gentile' side of things. When the two seem to match, the idea holds strength. For example, the Mesopotamian people used to bury little statues in the foundations of their houses for luck and strength. Statues of their 'gods'...statues called 'watchers'. Watcher is the name given to 'holy ones'...angels...in several scriptures.

Anyway....that's how he argues it all. It seems fairly convincing and it's certainly interesting. I'm not completely sold on it, I'm chewing on it at present. I'm not sure it's really something one must ever come down on solidly, as I can't see it impacting my walk or faith. But I do like a new idea to ponder on now and then!

 

[Naomi25]

I haven't heard of him, but there are a few odd passages in the Bible that should make us wonder what is going on.

For example, first we read that God said He would wipe out all mankind. Then we read that He saw Noah was righteous and spared him and his family. What was going on? I can give my opinions and people are free to decide for themselves if they make any sense.

I believe there are 70 Guardian Angels of the nations. God does not do anything without knowing everything they know. Indeed we could say "God" is a Oneness which includes them. So the idea of whether mankind should be wiped up arose. What should be done?

I think God consulted with all the 70 angels, and collectively they came up with a solution. I also believe each species of animal has its own Guardian Angel. Man is unique in that each person has his own Guardian Angel while animals share one. The Guardian Angels of the animals were involved in that discussion too. That can be seen later when the covenant with Noah is made. The covenant is made with the animals too.

Then we see the earth divided among the nations. Each nation was supposed to dwell in its own area. Each nation was supposed to develop its own unique culture or personality. The humans on earth did not do it. They chose to stay together at Babel in defiance of God's plan which had been made for man. What to be done? Well, the Bible says, God "came down to see" what was going on. It would be foolish to read that "literally" in a way that means God has poor vision and needs to be up close to things to know what's going on. Let us not be so naive.

The Jewish tradition it means God came down to hold a council with the 70 angels. It was held at Babel the way a court sometimes goes to the scene of a crime to gather evidence. God did not issue the decree on His own without consulting with the 70 angels of the nations. It was His pleasure to allow them to debate and then to vote on the matter. The decision reached was to confound or to confuse their languages. I think if properly understood, that does not contradict the Scripture that says God is not the author of confusion. I think it was the collective decision of the 70 angels to confuse their languages, and God approved that decision.

What makes some passages hard to understand is that when we read "God", it can mean different things. It could mean the "One God" or it could mean Him along with some angels or with all of them.

I think, yes, God obviously doesn't need council or help, but it's clear that at times he chooses to operate with his Council in this way:

And Micaiah said, “Therefore hear the word of the LORD: I saw the LORD sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing beside him on his right hand and on his left; and the LORD said, ‘Who will entice Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead?’ And one said one thing, and another said another. Then a spirit came forward and stood before the LORD, saying, ‘I will entice him.’ And the LORD said to him, ‘By what means?’ And he said, ‘I will go out, and will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’ And he said, ‘You are to entice him, and you shall succeed; go out and do so.’ -1 Kings 22:19–22

And, while I honestly cannot answer you in regards to people or animals having guardian angels, although there is that Verse in Ps 91 that states that God will 'command his angels concerning you, to guard you'. So, maybe.

As far as the term 'God', well, I think you are right, in a way. The bible clearly delineates that there is but one YHWY. But when it comes to the word elohim, which we normally take to me 'god'....it actually seems to mean any spiritual being. One example:

God ( Elohim) has taken his place in the divine council;
in the midst of the gods (elohim) he holds judgment:
“How long will you judge unjustly
and show partiality to the wicked? Selah
Give justice to the weak and the fatherless;
maintain the right of the afflicted and the destitute.
Rescue the weak and the needy;
deliver them from the hand of the wicked.”
They have neither knowledge nor understanding,
they walk about in darkness;
all the foundations of the earth are shaken.
I said, “You are gods,
sons of the Most High, all of you;
nevertheless, like men you shall die,
and fall like any prince.” -Psalm 82:1–7


Here God is clearly judging those who are lesser then him, yet still termed 'elohim'. They have failed in their duty to rule and judge justly. And, because of that and despite their being 'sons of the Most High' (there's that distinction), they will die like men for their rebellion against God. And there are other occasions in scripture that show that angels, demons and human spirits are all called, at some point, 'elohim', giving credibility to the idea that that term is but one that means 'spiritual being'. But of course, there is but one spiritual being that is YHWY, and there is none like him or can be compared to him.

 

[Naomi25]

Just looked at some of His books, he also has a podcast. These things interest me as we are always being attacked Spiritually.

The man is seriously prolific....he had several podcasts, I think, and a Youtube show. It's all pretty interesting stuff. I'm actually pretty careful when it comes to all this stuff, I'm not the sort to jump in the deep end. And I have to say that thus far I've been impressed with how...careful...he is in building his biblical cases for these things. If he's speculating he's always happy to say he is, and it's hard to fault his scholarly exegesis. I mean, he's still just a guy and therefore liable to mistakes, so I'm still taking it in slowly and cautiously, as we should any new idea, but I can't see anything yet that would outright disqualify his teaching. I might end up disagreeing with it, but thus far I can't do so on any biblical grounds, if that makes sense.

 

[brakelite]

I have not heard of the 'other worlds' idea before. May I ask what makes you think that its actual 'worlds' rather than, perhaps, different...ah...dimensions. We could say, for example, that heaven is not necessarily a place somewhere up in the sky, but another world separate from ours that we cannot see or perceive. If that makes sense. We could also say then, that Hades, or sheol, is also another 'world'. Just a thought, and wondering what you think on it!

In terms of what I think Michael Heiser thinks (since I suppose that is where I am in a sense 'arguing' from, whether or not it is accurate), he would say that the 'Council Members', or at least some of them, were assigned over the different nations at the Tower of Babel incident. God, having been defied by man once again, washed his hands of them, decided he would pull from a barren couple his own miraculously conceived peoples, and handed off the rest of mankind to be shepherded by his Council Members. These 'watchers', as they were apparently called, were to care for them, as they were still image bearers of God, and call them to godly living. Instead, they enjoyed being worshiped and it is in this event, rather than the Genesis account that we see the majority of heaven 'fall'. Of course we still see Satan, the ultimate rebel, defy God and cause the downfall of man in that devastating event. But nowhere in Genesis does it state that Satan took a third of the angels with him. In fact, Heiser says, the only time in scripture that 1/3 of the 'stars' is mentioned is Rev 12, which is clearly talking about the birth of Christ...which happened a little after the Eden event!
Anyway, Heiser points to this verse:

When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance,
when he divided mankind,
he fixed the borders of the peoples
according to the number of the sons of God. -Deuteronomy 32:8

And then also points to Daniel, where he was praying, and God sends and angel with an answer, but the angel was delayed because of 'the Prince of Persia', and had to wait until Michael came and fought the Prince. Basically, the idea is that the nations have these 'Princes' who used to be Council Members. He goes into several more verses that flesh out the idea. He also uses Mesopotamian texts to prop up the other side of it, which is interesting. He says he's most careful never to use extra-biblical texts to 'fill in gaps' in scripture, but they can be useful when they provide, as it were, the 'other side of the story' from the 'gentile' side of things. When the two seem to match, the idea holds strength. For example, the Mesopotamian people used to bury little statues in the foundations of their houses for luck and strength. Statues of their 'gods'...statues called 'watchers'. Watcher is the name given to 'holy ones'...angels...in several scriptures.

Anyway....that's how he argues it all. It seems fairly convincing and it's certainly interesting. I'm not completely sold on it, I'm chewing on it at present. I'm not sure it's really something one must ever come down on solidly, as I can't see it impacting my walk or faith. But I do like a new idea to ponder on now and then!

I look up into the night sky and see just the minutest portion of a vast universe millions of light years from one side to the other, and still expanding. Do I see other dimensions? No. I see stars, galaxies, systems that all speak of life, purpose, and power. And I see this world becoming the capital of the whole shebang when the new Jerusalem descends and series upon it with the throne of God in its midst. What grace!! That God would choose the only fallen world in all creation and the only race of redeemed people in all creation to be the citizens of His Universal HQ!!
also, what I see when Satan had access to the throne room and the council in heaven during the time of Job, clearly was prior to that time when Satan and the fallen angels were cast down to the earth. Is that event taking place not at Christ's birth or shortly after, but after Calvary. Remember, as Lucifer, the devil would have had many friends and admirers among even those angels who did not sidr with him... But their views and understanding of him would have taken a drastic turn toward true enlightenment after Calvary. From that time access would be denied... Not just because of angelic understanding of his true motives, but because Jesus had won back dominion of the earth on behalf of man... Thus Satan was no longer Prince

 

[Naomi25]

I look up into the night sky and see just the minutest portion of a vast universe millions of light years from one side to the other, and still expanding. Do I see other dimensions? No. I see stars, galaxies, systems that all speak of life, purpose, and power. And I see this world becoming the capital of the whole shebang when the new Jerusalem descends and series upon it with the throne of God in its midst. What grace!! That God would choose the only fallen world in all creation and the only race of redeemed people in all creation to be the citizens of His Universal HQ!!
also, what I see when Satan had access to the throne room and the council in heaven during the time of Job, clearly was prior to that time when Satan and the fallen angels were cast down to the earth. Is that event taking place not at Christ's birth or shortly after, but after Calvary. Remember, as Lucifer, the devil would have had many friends and admirers among even those angels who did not sidr with him... But their views and understanding of him would have taken a drastic turn toward true enlightenment after Calvary. From that time access would be denied... Not just because of angelic understanding of his true motives, but because Jesus had won back dominion of the earth on behalf of man... Thus Satan was no longer Prince

You should speak to my son, he'd fancy that idea SO much! He too cannot fathom that there is soo many stars and planets out there, only for them to be barren. And who knows, you may both be right. For myself, I cannot wait for the new creation and the possibility that we might get to go out and explore the incredible 'heavens' that God has created. We only have eternity to explore, right? Why stop at Canada, or Bangladesh?
I've even heard one Pastor speculate that even if there is not life out there now, there may be in the new creation. The part in scripture that teaches that we get to 'rule'. I mean...if we're all Christians, who do we 'rule' over? I've often wondered that myself.