NJK, thank you for sharing your thoughts. I enjoyed studying with you.

No problem, Mountain Man. Same here. Your contributions have been very helpful.

Are those 'sons of God' angels in Job for sure, or are they possibly human beings from other places? I wouldn't jump on either. We just don't know. If God wanted us to call angels His sons, I am almost sure He would have said so.

Harold, Ellen was convinced the "sons of God" in Job 38:7 were angels. What do you think?

Seems to me from the following SOP statements that it was EGW understood that it was pointedly when the Sabbath was instituted, after Creation was complete, that this “rejoicing” took place. If that was the case then Adam and Eve where already created, and thus could have been the “sons of God” (cf. Gen 6:2).

















see also:



-Also was this Earth the very first world that God created, if not then “sons of God” in other worlds could have been rejoicing here for this Creation?

It exegetically is in this preponderant SOP light that EGW’s application of Job 38:7 in GC 511.2 should be understood:



Seems to me that this is harmonized if it is seen here that it is the “morning stars” who are the angels and “the sons of God,” which could also potentially be humans in other worlds, were not pointedly being spoken of here. GC 511 also speaks of a completed creation. I.e., when these foundation were laid (and not “being laid”). So, again, Adam and Eve would have been created by then and thus pointedly fulfilled the secondary “sons of God” portion in this particular SOP application.

Also, as in PP 65.3 (‘plan of redemption rejoicing’ which also could include humans in other unfallen worlds), this use in GC 511 may have been only thematically related to this text by her and not substantively. Though not quite a “proof text”, she, as she does many times in her writings, (indeed as I understand her quoting of praises in Rev 4 & 5 for the last ascension vision), only used it to thematically illustrate a point. The point in GC 511 was that ‘angels existed before man, so, at least, that is how they were also present at the completion of Creation.’

So I see that the “sons of God” in Job 1 & 2 are referring to other created humans, as also the (post-Sabbath institution) one in Job 38:7, which could also have included Adam and Eve.

(Although I do not agree with Bohr’s view on the 24 elders, I think he makes a good, related exposition on this issue in this sermon (esp. 16:10ff; 24:51ff =(God instituted the Sabbath only after He rested on it. E.g., PP 47.3)).)

Although I see no requirement that they be the same, I also see no requirement that in Job 38 it means angels. Specifically, it says "and" the sons of God which could be a redundant thought or it could be separate ones. I would agree that morning stars probably are angels. While I agree with most of what NKJ said above, I would not use the word "humans" but say created beings from other worlds.

As NJK stated, they are coming to present themselves. The question must be asked why, and why only 24 of many angels, what was this meeting for, why did satan think that was an appropriate time to come. It would be my thought that they are somehow held accountable for those under them. Which could be angels if they have such a hierarchy but could also be those who are leaders over the worlds. One way you could read it is that God sees satan and says, who invited you here. He responds that he was the leader of the earth and therefore has a right to their meeting. Which God then asks about Job who does not follow satan's leading. Which satan then admits he does not have full control over the earth, but that God is unduly protecting Job.

The 24 elders of revelation appear to have some honor or responsibility different from others. No reason to not consider they could be connected with those of Job.

In passing defence of my chosen use of “humans” vs. the more ‘knowledge/certainty cautionary’: “created beings”, from what I read in the Bible/SOP, I only see other created beings, just as in our for, existing outside of the Heavenly Realm. In Heaven, there are indeed several types of creations: Mighty Angels (7 - see esp. Note #11 & #12 in this post)) = Cherubim, Angels, Seraphim, (perhaps, literally, the 4 Living Creatures who in non-symbolic reality may actually be 4 of the 7 Mighty Angels/Cherubim = Ezek 1:3, 5ff = 10:15), etc. However in the other created worlds, which are indeed like ours, I can only see a necessity for humans like us. I.e., all of God’s created beings are so particularly created because of an actual function that they have, and not merely for “creative physical diversity” reasons (e.g., as in a George Lucas’ Star Wars world). That is e.g., why the Seraphim have 6 wings (Isa 6:2), since, besides the 2 that they needed to fly; the other 4 were used to easily, continually cover uncovered body parts i.e., head and feet. As only Mighty Angels are able to accede into the immediate presence of God, i.e., within the glow of the “unapproachable light, it seems to me that Seraphims are so “outfitted” so that they can continually cover themselves to, at times, also be within this immediate presence, perhaps as physically present worshipping and witnessing representatives of/for the rest of the angels. Indeed in the same way that God covered Moses with His hand so that the glory of His face/front side would not consume Moses (Exod 33:17-18, 20-23).

It relatedly is interesting to see that the Hebrew word “Seraphim” (Strong’s #08314b) comes from the Hebrew word for “to burn” (#08313). So they evidently are “subject to burn” by being in this immediate presence of God, i.e., if they should ever be “uncovered”, which is most likely to occur with their face and feet, hence the special covering wings for these.

So I the only needed difference I see with us and other created “beings” outside of Heaven itself, is that we sinned, and thus variously degenerated, and they did not and thus are perfect versions of us. Which is why/how I see that the term “sons of God” can be inclusive of all of those created humans. And as seen in the quite possible separation/distinction with “morning stars” (indeed = “angels”; cf. Rev 12:4 & 9), Job 38:7 could be referring to only these two actual classes of created beings: ‘Heavenly ones’ and ‘humans.’

Ellen refers to "angels" and "heavenly beings" in the context of Job 38:7. She wrote:


Her application of Job 38:7 to angels, who existed before the creation of mankind, is too clear to be misunderstood. Neither the "morning stars" nor "all the sons of God" can refer to mankind. Nor does it make sense to call Adam and Eve "all the sons of God." Perhaps the son and daughter of God, but certainly not "all the sons of God." However, it could be that "all of the sons of God" refers to beings on other planets.

Yes, that's what I was saying.

NJK, wasn't there something about human beings being created, which were different from all other prior creation being created, in the likeness of God?