Daniel McClellan, who used to post here and on CARM as maklelan, has his own site. I thought people might like to read this article he has posted:

http://danielomcclellan.wordpress.co...h-god-of-edom/

McClellan is MORMON scholar, folks. And the material he produces often is in support of Mormon beliefs. When you get into polytheism and abandon traditional Christianity in favor of an anything goes scholarship called liberal biblical criticism, what does one end up with? An Edomite idol?

Liberal theological scholarship almost always rejects key tenets of Christianity, rejects supernaturalism and divine intervention in history. It obviously rejects sola scriptura. So what is left? Gods and goddesses of paganism? Agnosticism? Atheism?

Maklelan (Daniel O. McClellan) has written extensively in support of Mormonism's polytheistic theology. However, Heiser, a Christian (with whom I do not necessarily agree in all areas) has taken him on here:

http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBi...t-deuteronomy/

I believe Heiser has proven his point - you can't take isolated texts or even pagan texts, to prove that the Jews/Hebrews were all polytheist. The word "elohim" can mean God, it can also mean angels (which is what I tend to see in many of the Bible verses about a "divine council,"), a departed spirit, etc. In fact, it can be used for any supernatural being.

Mormons like to pull out the type of scholarship that McClellan produces to prove their polytheism - but in the end, Heiser has proven that such scholarship is terribly limited, and can be biased. My opinion is that Mormon scholarship is always flawed, since it begins with a Mormon theological premise then attempt to prove it! This is obvious when one examines supposed scholarly articles written by Mormon "researchers" that support, for instance, the existence of Nephites, Lamanites, etc. - grasping for evidence in the indigenous tribes of Mexico or South America who actually lived out their cultures many years before the supposed Nephite immigration. There is no Mormon archaeology, only pretense.