So many say the bible is pure to Monotheism, So why is Tartaroo from Greek Polytheistism in the NT

@neologist,

Granted, I should meet my burden on the Psalms.., and as a Post note, I will direct you to an Article I wrote to which covers this subject, and then briefly go over it here.:

http://thejackelscolumn.wordpress.com/2014/01/17/yahweh-a-volcano-fire-god-of-war-chapter-2/

This Chapter in itself covers much of what I wrote in my post in question, and that includes Sin's connections to El Shaddai, the Hyksos and so forth. But to summarize:

1. Lest begin by noting Psalms as most likely the Hymns of El:
http://www.theology.edu/ugarbib.htm

Abstract summary from my article:

the Psalms are considered likely the hymns of El coupled with the following evidence concerning the dead sea scrolls , Deuteronomy 32, and further citations from the Psalms in which demonstrate Yahweh as not the God head of the divine court, but rather as one of the sons of EL bidding for the high seat as noted in the Ugarit Canaanite text in the following Sources:

Quote:

The Israelites in history and tradition Niels Peter Lemche – 1998 – 246 “Maybe also the Ugaritic passage KTU 1.1:IV:14-15 should be included in the discussion: sm . bny . yw . ilt, translated by Mark S. Smith in Simon B. Parker, ed., Ugaritic Narrative Poetry (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997), 89 “of the son of god, Yahweh.”
Thus translated as: “son of EL” as this Ugarit Canaanite text (KTU 1.1IV 14) shows: sm . bny . yw . ilt: “The name of the son of god, Yahweh.”

This purposes major change in our understanding the Canaanite culture, and the origins of Yahweh as this is further supported directly in the Psalms itself:

Quote:

Psalm 82:1:
“Ascribe to Yahweh, O sons of EL, ascribe to Yahweh glory and strength.”

Psalm 89:6:
“For who in the skies can be compared to Yahweh, who among the sons of EL is like Yahweh“

Psalm 82:
.
A psalm of Asaph.
1 God presides in the great assembly; he gives judgment among the gods: 2 How long will you defend the unjust and show partiality to the wicked? Selah
3 Defend the cause of the weak and fatherless; maintain the rights of the poor and oppressed. 4 Rescue the weak and needy;
deliver them from the hand of the wicked. 5 They know nothing, they understand nothing.
.
They walk about in darkness; all the foundations of the earth are shaken. 6 I said,You are gods;
you are all sons of the Most High. 7 But you will die like mere men; you will fall like every other ruler. 8 Rise up, O God, judge the earth, for all the nations are your inheritance.

Furthermore, the sons of EL are referenced as gods, the sons of EL and not angels or even monotheistic in reference to Yahweh what-so-ever. This follows further into the inheritance to which shouldn’t be there if we at all understand what an inheritance is. Meaning that in order to inherit something, it must be given to you by another. Usually by a Parent or Family member after they had passed away. This is pretty hard evidence that Yahweh is not EL Shaddai, but rather his son bidding for his seat as the Most High of the divine court. The evidence for this has been further collaborated in Deuteronomy as we can see when we compare the Dead Sea Scrolls with Deuteronomy 32:

From the dead sea scrolls:

Quote:

“When El Elyon gave to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of men, he fixed the bounds of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God (El). For Yahweh’s portion is his people, Jacob his allotted inheritance.”

This was of course as mentioned above as having been edited to what is currently found in Deuteronomy 32 : 8-9:

Quote:

“When the Most High (EL ELyon) divided their inheritance to the nations,
When He separated the sons of men, He set the boundaries of the peoples According to the number of the children of EL. For the LORD’s portion is His people; Jacob is the place of His inheritance.”

It is further notable that "Israel" is theophory, and in such time periods such theophory in regards to a place or city was in regards to their Patron deities. There is only one deity in the region named "El", and we know that there was no differences between the Israelites and the Canaanites as in modern academia they are regarded as that same people. You are in fact dealing with the Canaanite Pantheon here. The attempt to usurp the Pantheon and Equate Yahweh with El (El Shaddai) is profound, and the summary of the above narrative is Yahweh essentially jockeying to take the high seat in the divine court while threatening to destroy the sons of El and the divine court to where he alone is the judge, jury, court, and the remaining and only God. Further still, and how we do know Yahweh was equated with El is that Yahweh had taken on EL's wife Asherah

Quote:

"Yahweh ... and his Asherah"
"Yahweh of Samaria and his Asherah"
"Yahweh of Teman and his Asherah."
Sources:
1. Hadley 2000, pp. 122–136
2. Bonanno, Anthony (1986). Archaeology and Fertility Cult in the Ancient Mediterranean: Papers Presented at the First International Conference on Archaeology of the Ancient Mediterranean, University of Malta, 2–5 September 1985. John Benjamins Publishing. p. 238. ISBN 9789060322888. Retrieved 10 March 2014.
3. Professor William G. Dever, "Did God Have a Wife? Archaeology and Folk Religion in Ancient Israel", Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2005 ISBN 978-0802863942

This is typical of what happens in the process of war and usurping other gods and pantheons into the persona of another. Just like how Asharah's epithets in Proverbs gets usurped into Yahweh's persona and the Tree of Life. This being a whole new discussion of course.

Thus we have in Exodus 6:2-3:

Quote:

Exodus 6:2 2 God also said to Moses, “I am the LORD.
Exodus 6:3 3 I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac and to Jacob as God Almighty,[a] but by my name the LORD I did not make myself fully known to them. (Hebrew El-Shaddai)

yahwists equating Yahweh to El Shaddai (EL).. Abraham would not know who Yahweh was, especially when Yahweh was a new comer some time after 1560BC, a lower god of the desert, or nomadic tribes of the shasu.

2 Replies

@TheJackal,

Sorry if I truncate your posts. I am a man of few words:

TheJackal wrote:

Thus we have in Exodus 6:2-3:

Quote:
Exodus 6:2 2 God also said to Moses, “I am the LORD.
Exodus 6:3 3 I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac and to Jacob as God Almighty,[a] but by my name the LORD I did not make myself fully known to them. (Hebrew El-Shaddai)

Don't take this to mean that Abraham did not know the name Jehovah. He could never have attempted the sacrifice of Isaac if he did not have faith in the promise Jehovah made in Genesis 12:3

Quote:

. . .all the families of the ground will certainly be blessed by means of you.”

TheJackal wrote:

yahwists equating Yahweh to El Shaddai (EL).. Abraham would not know who Yahweh was, especially when Yahweh was a new comer some time after 1560BC, a lower god of the desert, or nomadic tribes of the shasu.

Abraham was a descendant of Shem and a contemporary of Melchizidek. He no doubt had full knowledge of Jehovah well enough for him to leave his comfortable life in the city of Ur.

I take my information from the scriptures Paul referred to as "all scripture is inspired" (2 Timothy 3:16) What you see as the convoluted wanderings of Semitic tribes, I see as the outworking of Jehovah's purpose to restore his creation to its condition before the fall.

2 Replies

@neologist,

1.

Quote:

Don't take this to mean that Abraham did not know the name Jehovah. He could never have attempted the sacrifice of Isaac if he did not have faith in the promise Jehovah made in Genesis 12:3

I hate to break it to you, but there is no indication or academic evidence showing Abraham ever knew "Jehovah" to which is by all accounts not even a proper name. And Genesis, is unfortunately also comprised entirely of pagan mythology to which also notes it's own polytheistic roots and references to the divine court and 70 sons of EL

Quote:

26 Then God said, Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.

And of course:

Quote:

Gen 6:2 bənê hāʼĕlōhîm (בְנֵי־הָֽאֱלֹהִים) the sons of Elohim
When man began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of man were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose. Then the Lord said, "My Spirit shall not abide in man forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 years." The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown.
—Genesis 6:1-4

These are not the sons of men, they are the Son's of EL, those who came into the daughters of man. The Yahwists actually did a pretty poor job of hiding the polytheistic roots as much of it remains unscathed.. To point further:

Quote:

Claus Westermann claims that the text of Genesis 6 is based on an Ugaritic urtext.[11] In Ugaritic, a cognate phrase is bn 'il.[12] This may occur in the Ugaritic Baal Cycle.[13]

KTU² 1.40 demonstrates the use of bn il to mean "sons of gods".[14]
KTU² 1.65 (which may be a scribal exercise) uses bn il three times in

succession: il bn il / dr bn il / mphrt bn il "El, the sons of gods, the circle of the sons of gods / the totality of the sons of gods."[12]
The phrase bn ilm ("sons of the gods") is also attested in Ugaritic texts,[15][16][17][18][19] as is the phrase phr bn ilm ("assembly of the sons of the gods").[20]
Elsewhere in the Ugarit corpus it is suggested that the bn ilm were the 70 sons of Asherah and El, who were the titulary deities of the people of the known world, and their "hieros gamos" marriage with the daughters of men gave rise to their rulers.[21] There is evidence in 2 Samuel 7 that this may have been the case also in Israel.[22]

15. Jesús-Luis Cunchillos, Juan-Pablo Vita, A concordance of Ugaritic words 2003 p389
16. Jesús-Luis Cunchillos, Juan-Pablo Vita, The texts of the Ugaritic data bank 2003 p82
17. Marvin H. Pope El in the Ugaritic texts 1955 p49
18. Rahmouni, A. Divine epithets in the Ugaritic alphabetic texts 2008 p91
19. Young G. D. Concordance of Ugaritic 1956 Page 13
20. G. Johannes Botterweck, Helmer Ringgren Theological dictionary of the Old Testament 2000 p130
21. Parker, Simon B. (2000). "Ugaritic Literature and the Bible". Near Eastern Archaeology 63 (4): 228–31. doi:10.2307/3210794. JSTOR 3210794.
22. Cooke, Gerald (1961). "The Israelite King As Son of God". Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 73 (2): 202–25. doi:10.1515/zatw.1961.73.2.202.

The Most accurate giving the evidence would be the sons of Asherah and EL. It's also arguable that these 70 sons were converted into the narrative of Jacob as the 70 members of his family. :

Quote:

With the two sons who had been born to Joseph in Egypt, the members of Jacob's family, which went to Egypt, were seventy in all.

Also known as the son's of Israel in where Israel has been noted prior as a replacement for "EL".. This to which is most likely as Genesis also discusses the 70 Nations of inheritance, and this all boils down to going back and referencing the Psalms and the Deuteronomy. And thus far the best criticism I've seen is the argument that "one must not assume Israelites were polytheistic".., this of course would require woeful ignorance of the mass body of evidence that they were, even at the height of Yahweh being associated as the primary God of Judah. It wasn't till the 2nd Isaiah did any sort or Monotheism, or strict Yahwism have any real foothold or influence. And even then they remained polytheistic as a culture despite the cult of Yahweh that went on to usurp the Canaanite Pantheon into the persona and epithets of Yahweh.

0 Replies

@neologist,

2.

Quote:

Abraham was a descendant of Shem and a contemporary of Melchizidek. He no doubt had full knowledge of Jehovah well enough for him to leave his comfortable life in the city of Ur.

Please provide academic citation showing Abraham knowing who "Jehovah" was. A name that didn't even exist in that time period in any text.. And you might like to read "Traces Of The Moon God SIN Among The Early Israelites"

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/3264069?uid=3739952&uid=2134&uid=379000883&uid=2&uid=379000873&uid=70&uid=3&uid=3739256&uid=60&purchase-type=article&accessType=none&sid=21102529333967&showMyJstorPss=false&seq=1&showAccess=false

As far as we know, Ur was the epicenter of the worship of Sin, and there is no trace of the existence of "Jehovah" there. And the citation notes that Abraham's father, or grandfather likely worship the Moon GOd. And like I pointed out, Sin and El Shaddai are regarded in the academic arena as the same deity as both El Shaddai and Sin are attested to Amurru. Hence what makes you think he would be uncomfortable leaving Ur and going to the City of Shaddai in where he customarily makes El Shaddai is Elohim? Especially when the two names are attested to the same deity?

There is another major problem with your argument, this in being that Sarai: The wife of Abram is associated by name to the Moon GOD Sin. In Hebrew her name means "princess," but if her name is based on the Akkadian language, and it means "queen" to which is the name of the female goddess Sharratu, consort of Ur's chief deity, the moon-god Nanna (Sin). According to Abram's testimony in Genesis 20:12, Sarai was a daughter of Terah by a different wife. According to the archaeological record, by 3000 BC the people of Mesopotamia worshipped some four thousand deities (Archaeology of the Old Testament, page 66-67). Ur was the ancient world's religious center for worship of the moon god, Nanna (also called Sin by Abraham's time)... And it gets better because Terah's name may be related to the Hebrew word for moon (yerah). And like Abraham leaving Ur, Terah left the center of moon-god worship in Ur to settle in Haran, another important center of the cult of the moon-god in where this god is known as Ba'al Harran. Oh yes, the Asiatic Deity of the Hyksos foriegn rulers of Egypt.. It's quite interesting out that circle comes about "full moon"..

Though it is suggestive that Sin and EL were once separate deities, one a mountain god and the other a moon god.. But somewhere after the Eruption of Therah, or 1600 BC, there had seem to come to be a marriage between moon and mountain god worship in where you get Mt. Sinai, the moon mountain being attested to EL Shaddai (EL), the mountain god of the Canaanite Pantheon depicted in volcanic imagery of fire, thunder, lightning, storm, and many of the epithets of the various GOD's of Mesopotamia. It explains the Psalms, Exodus, the Deuteronomy, Daniel, and even why Revelations are all in volcanic imagery..., moon mountain Imagery, the shining mountain of earthquake, fire, smoke, sulfur, and storm.

1 Reply

@TheJackal,

I think the problem you two are going to have here is neither of you have respect for the authority of each others sources.

Regardless, perhaps Exodus 6:3 would serve as a middle ground

Quote:

and I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty; but by my name יהוה I was not known to them.

1 Reply

@Smileyrius,

Exodus 6:2-3 really isn't a middle ground, and I do respect the sources I present because the sources show that Yahweh had been equated to EL, as most academic sources I can find now agree.. There are a several more citations on the matter, and exodus marks the beginning of Yahwism, and thus naturally we expect to find them to equate Yahweh with the god head of the Canaanite Pantheon. Regardless, we do know today that Yahweh had been a son of EL.., and I can't just ignore the evidence and simply choose "the middle ground". Hence, I am more interested in what the evidence shows and the facts Smile

... Mostly because I find this subject and other ancient religions and cultures fascinating.. They are a very important part of our history.

2 Replies

@TheJackal,

It wasn't until Exodus that Jehovah began to reveal to the Jews the true understanding of his name. As he declared in ch 3, vs 14, "I shall prove to be what I shall prove to be". This clearly elevates Jehovah above any god. He is the one who causes to become and he himself will take any act or assume any role necessary to accomplish his purpose. His acts in the course of freeing the Jews from slavery gave them a new perspective of his promises.

Like no other god, the word of the true God is a guarantee. His purpose for the earth is a certainty.

On the subject of other divine beings, there is much more to be said. But the center of the discussion revolves on the fact that these are his creations.

Proverbs chapter 8 is a good read. It establishes the role of God's first born, his "Master Worker" in the order of creation.

1 Reply

@neologist,

Since you're quoting statements about proof, what evidence do you have to support your god hypothesis? I've been trying to get Herod/Harold/Herald (whatever) to explain it, but he's dodging. I've been reading you for a while now, and I think you're more likely to engage with intellectual honesty. You seem to have a more mature ability to agree to disagree and to discuss things more objectively than s/he.

1 Reply

@TheJackal,

I would assert that ignoring evidence is something we all must do, and I would be concerned by anyone who accepted every evidence provided for every assertion made. Evidence is purely data that you use to support an assertion. The degree to which it convinces you is down to you. Sometimes you will have to ignore some pretty convincing evidence provided for one assertion if it contradicts evidence for which you are more convinced of, albeit sometimes we are more sentimentally attached to rather than convinced by certain assertions. This is not a trait exclusive to theists. We all build our world view in this way.

An example is the assertion that YH equates to Yahweh, the god of the Hebrews and not Yam the Levantine sea god

Quote:

From KTU II:IV:13-14
tgr.il.bnh.tr [ ] wyn.lt[p]n il dp[id...][32] [J yp 'r] Sm bny yw 'ilt
My son [shall not be called] by the name of Yw, o goddess, [Jfc ym smh (?)] [but Ym shall be his name!]

Academics have many interpretations of the Ugaritic Cuneiform. You however have studied the evidence you are presented with, and you select the interpretation that convinces you the most. So long as one has a degree of intelligence, that is how we all come to our interpretation of the world around us. I will almost certainly interpret some of it with heinous inaccuracy, but I am convinced most by the most recent version of my world view, which will always be challenged and altered where new evidence is presented.

Interestingly, when academics have made such claims as the Ark of the covenant was a drum, or that Noah's Ark was shaped like a donut, such is the reason that I never automatically equate Academic claim to be intrinsic with sense, or indeed interpretation of evidence to equate to facts.

I do however find it fascinating looking into the tales that are borrowed unto many different cultures and each ones interpretation of them, that is something we share my friend.

1 Reply

@Smileyrius,

Rather than edit, I will clarify, ignore might not be the word I am intending in this context, I'll ponder it and find a better word as soon as my brain kicks in

1 Reply

@Smileyrius,

I think "put aside" would be a better term. All evidence should be examined, kinda like a thousand piece Jigsaw for which you have ten thousand pieces. We each piece it together the best we can.

1 Reply

@Smileyrius,

When you have evidence from multiple sources and to which piles up, one cannot honestly put it aside and ignore it.. Especially when such evidence is contemporary and in some cases predates the latter narrative. The evidence in this case is substantial, substantial enough to overturn the previous theological consensus. And it has done so in the mainstream where in only those who have invested interest in the latter narrative continue to reject and ignore the evidence.., and largely done so through what is known as apologetics..

This becomes problematic as cross referencing sources collaborate. And it's arguable that when various sources collaborate like this, it is highly unlikely to be the latter narrative. It's not even very well hidden in the Bible narrative... We even know the story of Adam stems from the story of Adapa as just another example. We equally know enough to know that Yahweh and EL are not the same deities, but rather deities of the same Pantheon in where Yahweh suddenly appears sometime after 1560 BC in lower Canaan as a son of EL.

1 Reply

@TheJackal,

The similarities in the stories of ancient civilisations you attribute to paralleled myths, I attribute to shared legends. Similar to our discussion on Tartarus, regardless of interpretation and attribution, all stories have an origin. I have no doubt that all of the early civilisations share many legends and tales.

Regardless, if you would indulge me, could share with me more data on the source of Yahweh in the Pantheon. I have been searching for sources but the webs tell me so far that the only Canaanite reference to Yahweh was on the Mesha Stele, which refers to him as the God of the Israelites.
Frank Moore Cross also shared further details in his book "Canaanite myth and Hebrew epic: essays in the history of the religion of Israel" depict that the name Yahweh may exist as an ending of some Amorite male names
While I display a clear search fu inadequacy, I ask your assistance.

1 Reply

@Smileyrius,

Excuse my ignorance, I looked back over the thread and you have provided your sources, I'll take a view and go study some.

1 Reply

@Smileyrius,

I will bring forth further citations in the next day or so when I get some time off from work. Atm I have about 30 mins before I have to go, but to further demonstrate that EL and Yahweh are two separate deities, and that Yahweh had come to assimilate EL, and El's epithets, this is a pretty good read:

http://contradictionsinthebible.com/are-yahweh-and-el-the-same-god/

Now I have already cited where in Psalms it is noted that Yahweh was among the 70 son's of EL on the divine council, and where El divides the Nations among his divine son's..., this in where Yahweh's portion is Israel. Hence likely why Yahweh is associated as the God of Judah.. However, there is more I was not aware of as I cite the above article:

Quote:

Other biblical passages reaffirm this archaic view of Yahweh as a god in El’s council. Psalm 82:1 speaks of the “assembly of El,” Psalm 29:1 enjoins “the sons of El” to worship Yahweh, and Psalm 89:6-7 lists Yahweh among El’s divine council..

And as far as we know, the only divine council known to exist in Canaan was El's pantheon. All the red flags are showing that this is a classical case of a cult usurping another into the persona of their deity, and in this case Yahwists usurping EL into the persona of Yahweh... This and among the epithets of many of the other Gods of the Canaanite pantheon to which includes Ba'al and Asherah. Even the struggle Yahweh has with Ba'al is very reminiscent of the Struggle between Ba'al and Yam who battle to determine who is the El Elyon, who takes the seat of the Most High.. However in this case, Yahweh usurps Ba'al's epithets to which was common practice among the various cults and competing religions in ancient Mesopotamia.

Another Citation that backs up and collaborates that Yahweh as a Son of El receiving Israel as an inheritance from EL is found in "The New Jerome Biblical Commentary, page 108":

Abstract:

Quote:

“For “sons of Israel” read “sons of God” with the LXX and QL. The idea is that Elyon, high God of the Canaanite pantheon, assigned each of the 70 nations of the world [Gen 10] to one of the 70 deities of the pantheon and that Israel had the good fortune to be assigned to Yahweh.”

This essentially stating exactly what I inferred to regarding the 70 nations mentioned in Genesis 10.. There are also other sections of the bible in which note these divisions among the sons of EL, and thus for example we find conflict between Yahweh's inheritance and Chemosh's among the people.., a conflict and right of possession

Quote:

“Now, then, Yahweh, the God of Israel, dispossessed the Amorites before His people Israel; and should you possess their land? Do you not hold what CHEMOSH YOUR GOD GIVES YOU TO POSSESS? So we will hold on to everything that Yahweh our God has given us to possess” [Judges 11:23-25].

And here is a nice list of El's sons to which include Yahweh and Chermosh:

http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-hebrew/1999-January/001237.html

I would also suggest reading this citation on Henotheism in the bible:

http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/ngier/henotheism.htm

Abstract:

Quote:

The final editors of the Hebrew canon were fervent monotheists, but a remnant of the polytheistic basis of the pre-Mosaic religion can still be detected. Albrecht Alt has shown that divine titles such as 'El Bet' el (Gen. 31:13; 35:7); 'El 'Olam (Gen. 21:33); and 'El Ro'i (Gen. 16:13); 'El 'Elyon (Gen. 14:18); and 'El Saddai (Gen. 17:1); all later taken to be one God (Yahweh) after Moses, were all originally separate gods worshipped by the early Hebrews.3 The Catholic scholar Bruce Vawter concurs with Alt. According to Vawter, none of the available English translations does justice to the original Hebrew of Genesis 31:13, which quite simply reads "I am the god Bethel" ('El Bet'el), who was a member of the Canaanite pantheon along with the rest of the above.4 The original meaning is therefore quite different from the traditional understanding: this god at Bethel is not the universal Lord who appeared at Bethel but just one god among many – a local deity of a specific place.

There is no indication that the Israelites were ever a separate culture from the Canaanites, and the conflict of polytheism and Monotheism to Yahweh appears to be entirely an internal conflict in where Yahwists usurped and equated EL and his sons to that of Yahweh. Yahweh as a son of EL is literally plastered all over the bible:

Quote:

“For who in the skies can rank with the LORD [Yahweh]? Who is like the LORD [Yahweh] among the SONS OF GOD (EL)?” [New American Catholic Bible].

“For who in the skies can be compared to Jehovah? Who can resemble Jehovah among the SONS OF GOD.” [New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures].

“For who in the heavens shall be compared unto the Lord [Yahweh]? And who shall be likened to the Lord [Yahweh] among THE SONS OF GOD?” [Greek Septuagint Bible].

Furthermore, it's even notable that the archangels are named in theophory of the Canaanite god head EL..

MEHUJAEL
METHUSHAEL
MAHALEL.

Others include:

RACHEL
ISHMAEL
UZZIEL [Moses’ uncle]
Elzapphan [Moses’ cousin]

None of which are theophory of Yahweh. In fact, nobody was named after "Yahweh" that I know of. It doesn't help either that all the sources of Yahweh in the bible are from (J), the yahwistic to which are known to be in many cases editions and edits of the source (E)..

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/11305-names-of-god

This again is a clear red flag of Yahwism usurping EL and the Canaanite Pantheon into a monotheistic devotion to Yahweh. To put bluntly, the God of the Bible is not Yahweh, but rather EL, the God Head of the Canaanite Pantheon to whom is attested to "El Shaddai, El ELyon, and even SIN" ..

0 Replies

@TheJackal,

I appreciate your work, you present a lot of information to digest, but I like to study so given a decent amount of time I will work through it. I might be helpful to share my early reservations.

You use the name "yhwh" in reference to "yw" or more commonly known as "yam" the sea god, despite secular evidence showing that the two words stem from different roots. From what I see, Interpretation and conjecture appear to be the foundation of the equation of the two, reverse engineered from other concepts

With the Hebrew use of the word El, it is rendered by Strong's to be translated as God, gods, Mighty, mighty ones, powerful or strong. Elo·him′ is used in the Scriptures for instance with reference to Yahweh himself, to angels, to idol gods (singular and plural), and to men. Based on the etymology, the root El appearing in so many Bible names is only to be expected. What of Canaan's father, Noah, and his Grandfather Lamech? what did they call God? considering his heritage, where do you suppose the root of his exegesis came from?

Unrelated to your data, The Hebrew God YHWH was vastly contrary in nature to any known Canaanite deity. Divination, astrology, and magic were widely practised in Ugarit. Signs and omens were sought not only in the heavenly bodies but also in deformed fetuses and the viscera of slaughtered animals

Jacqueline Gachet wrote:

It was believed that the god to whom a ritually sacrificed animal was offered identified with it and that the god’s spirit fused with the animal’s spirit,” comments historian. As a result, by reading the signs visible on these organs, it was possible to have clear access to the spirit of divinities who were able to give either a positive or a negative answer to a question on future events or on the course of action to take in a specific situation.” (Le pays d’Ougarit autour de 1200 av.J.C.)

The God of the Hebrews detested such practices according to Deuteronomy 18:9-14. Other practices detested by the God of the Hebrews that were commonplace to the Canaanites include but are not restricted to bestiality, blood letting and ritual lacerations, fertility rites which included the boiling of children in milk and more

Aside from wordplay, when you look at characteristics, the god of the Hebrews was a long way removed from Canaanite deities. A quote from Cyrus Gordon (archeologist) “The ethical and moral heights reached in the Bible are [not] to be found in Ugarit,”
Speaking on similarities between Ugarit and Hebrew writings

The Encyclopedia of Religion wrote:

“The reason for this similarity of form and content is cultural: notwithstanding the significant geographical and temporal differences between Ugarit and Israel, they were part of a larger cultural entity that shared a common poetic and religious vocabulary.”

All this aside, I am aware that I have been wrong many a time before, I do not assert that you are wrong here my friend. merely that according to my understanding of life, the universe and the history of everything, I have not seen anything here to shatter my world view yet. I will probably spend the next few weeks chewing through the data you have given me. I thank you for the intrigue and hope you will not take my initial scepticism as an affront to your excellent studies. Any more data you have is very welcomed when you get time.

3 Replies

@Smileyrius,

There is no real academic basis to suggest EL was generic among the Canaanites (Israelites), these are theophoric, and I am well aware of Strong's lexicon, and that Yw is attested to Yam. However it is important to note that Yahweh shares a lot of Yam's epithets, and that Yahweh is likely a new construct in which assimilates the Canaanite Pantheon into one deity. Yahweh's roots as noted seem to begin just after the fall of the Canaanite civilization, and both el and Yam predate Yahweh by more than 1,000 years. However to answer your argument on Strong's lexicon, you must consider the following:

The Oxford Companion To The Bible, on p. 713, says:

Quote:

“The sons of God (EL) are divine members of God’s heavenly assembly.”

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 4, art. Sons of God, on p. 584, says:

Quote:

“SONS OF GOD - divine beings. Just as ‘sons of man’ means human beings in Hebrew, so ‘sons of God’ means divine beings, i.e. gods.”

New Bible Dictionary, J.D. Douglas, art. Sons of God, on p. 1133, says:

Quote:

“In the Old Testament [a] individual of the class ‘god.’ ‘Son’ [Heb. Ben, Aram. Bar] is commonly used in Semitic languages to denote membership of a class, as “son of Israel’ for “Israelite,’ ‘son of might’ for ‘valorous.’ ‘Son of God’ in Heb. means ‘god’ or ‘god-like.”

There is little doubt that what you are reading in the bible is mostly that of Canaanite culture, oral traditions, beliefs, and that which is reference to the pantheon of EL. So yes, the theophory of EL in the names we find in the Bible are indeed expected. If they were theophory of Yahweh, then we would have to figure out how and why that is in relation to where Yahweh is inferred as a son of EL.

Now I see you mention Noah, and there is a pretty big clue when we reference Ashur, the son of Shem to whom was the son of Noah. The presence of the "Shin" to which is a symbol of "El Shaddai"...AKA (EL).

Quote:

Ashur (אַשּוּר; often also transliterated as Asshur to reflect the pointing of Hebrew letter ‘ש‘ (Shin) in the Masoretic text, which doubles the ‘ש’), was the second son of Shem, the son of Noah.

It really can’t get anymore obvious than this, but in case there is lingering doubt, it’s even supported by the Oxford Companion to World Mythology here::

Quote:

It seems almost certain that the God of the Jews evolved gradually from the Canaanite El, who was in all likelihood the ‘God of Abraham’… If El was the high god of Abraham – Elohim, the prototype of Yahveh – Asherah was his wife, and there are archeological indications that she was perceived as such before she was in effect ‘divorced’ in the context of emerging Judaism of the 7th century BCE.(See 2 Kings 23:15)”.

^Leeming, David (2005). The Oxford Companion to World Mythology. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. pp. 118. ISBN978-0-19-515669-0. LCCN2005014216. OCLC60492027.

And although the Oxford Companion to World Mythology states EL as a Prototype of Yahweh, The Oxford University Press stated the following:

Quote:

Before El’s revelation with the name of Yahweh, it is said in Genesis 14:18–20 that Abraham accepted the blessing of El, when Melchizedek, the king of Salem and high priest of its deity El Elyon blessed him.[19] One scholarly position is that the identification of Yahweh with Ēl is late, that Yahweh was earlier thought of as only one of many gods, and not normally identified with Ēl.

^Coogan, Michael David (2009). A Brief Introduction to the Old Testament. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. pp. 74. ISBN978-0-19-533272-8. LCCN2008034190. OCLC243545942.

In departing, I will let you get caught up and do some research. There is more I can share, but at this point it would be adding more than I need to for this discussion

0 Replies

@Smileyrius,

Quote:

It was believed that the god to whom a ritually sacrificed animal was offered identified with it and that the god’s spirit fused with the animal’s spirit,” comments historian. As a result, by reading the signs visible on these organs, it was possible to have clear access to the spirit of divinities who were able to give either a positive or a negative answer to a question on future events or on the course of action to take in a specific situation.” (Le pays d’Ougarit autour de 1200 av.J.C.)

This is unfortunately untrue.. Animal and even human sacrifice and what to do with animal entrails ect are also attributed to Yahweh.. What he doesn't tell you is that Yahweh was a jealous GOD, and that what is being detested is actually only in reference to sacrifices ect done in the name of other gods... Now I know you mentioned, and I quote; "The God of the Hebrews detested such practices according to Deuteronomy 18:9-14."

Quote:

9 “When you come into the land that the Lord your God is giving you, you shall not learn to follow the abominable practices of those nations. 10 There shall not be found among you anyone who burns his son or his daughter as an offering,[e] anyone who practices divination or tells fortunes or interprets omens, or a sorcerer 11 or a charmer or a medium or a necromancer or one who inquires of the dead, 12 for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord. And because of these abominations the Lord your God is driving them out before you.

This sort of passage comes at a time when such practices began to become un-popular, and though you can find the detesting of such in the Deuteronomy, we can also find the acceptance of such.. This includes animal and human sacrifice to Yahweh as burnt offerings.

Quote:

Jephthah Burns His Daughter:
.
And Jephthah made a vow to the LORD. He said, “If you give me victory over the Ammonites, I will give to the LORD the first thing coming out of my house to greet me when I return in triumph. I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering….” “….So Jephthah led his army against the Ammonites, and the LORD gave him victory.
.
“Skipping ahead” –> her father kept his vow, and she died a virgin. So it has become a custom in Israel for young Israelite women to go away for four days each year to lament the fate of Jephthah’s daughter.”

The of course being in further review of the Laws of offerings:

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus+1&version=LEB

Quote:

Laws for Burnt Offerings
1 Then[a] Yahweh called to Moses and spoke to him from the tent of assembly, saying, 2 “Speak to the Israelites, and say to them, ‘When a person[c] from you presents an offering to Yahweh, you shall present your offering from domestic animals, from the cattle[d] or from the flock.[e] 3 If his offering is a burnt offering from the cattle,[f] then he must present[g] an unblemished male; he must present it at the door of the tent of assembly for his acceptance before[h] Yahweh.

4 “‘He must lay his hand on the head of the burnt offering and it will be accepted[j] for him in order to make atonement for him. 5 He[k] must slaughter the young bull[l] before[m] Yahweh, then[n] Aaron’s sons, the priests, will present the blood and sprinkle the blood all around the altar that is at the door of the tent of assembly. 6 Then[o] he must remove the skin of the burnt offering and cut it into its pieces. 7 The sons of[p] Aaron the priest will put fire on the altar and arrange the wood on the fire. 8 Then[q] Aaron’s sons, the priests, will arrange the pieces of meat,[r] the head, and the suet on the wood that is on the fire that is on the altar. 9 Then[s] he must wash its inner parts[t] and its lower leg bones with water, and the priest will turn into smoke the whole animal on the altar as a burnt offering by fire, as an appeasing fragrance for Yahweh.

Furthermore, Deuteronomy 12 states that you should bring these offerings to him rather than the God's of the other Nations. He's a jealous god of his siblings. He seeks dominion over their Nations and seeks to destroy them in so those of those Nations will come to worship him.

Quote:

4You must not worship the Lord your God in their way. 5But you are to seek the place the Lord your God will choose from among all your tribes to put his Name there for his dwelling. To that place you must go; 6there bring your burnt offerings and sacrifices, your tithes and special gifts, what you have vowed to give and your freewill offerings, and the firstborn of your herds and flocks. 7There, in the presence of the Lord your God, you and your families shall eat and shall rejoice in everything you have put your hand to, because the Lord your God has blessed you.

Yahweh being Lord of his inheritance of Israel.. Hence it's not really about detesting such offerings, but rather where, how, and to which lord you are to..

Quote:

8You are not to do as we do here today, everyone doing as they see fit, 9 since you have not yet reached the resting place and the inheritance the Lord your God is giving you. 10But you will cross the Jordan and settle in the land the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, and he will give you rest from all your enemies around you so that you will live in safety. 11Then to the place the Lord your God will choose as a dwelling for his Name—there you are to bring everything I command you: your burnt offerings and sacrifices, your tithes and special gifts, and all the choice possessions you have vowed to the Lord. 12And there rejoice before the Lord your God—you, your sons and daughters, your male and female servants, and the Levites from your towns who have no allotment or inheritance of their own. 13Be careful not to sacrifice your burnt offerings anywhere you please. 14Offer them only at the place the Lord will choose in one of your tribes, and there observe everything I command you.

So although human and child sacrifices to El Shaddai, Ba'al, and Yahweh became un-popular, it is noted that such is attested to both all of them.

0 Replies

@Smileyrius,

Quote:

merely that according to my understanding of life, the universe and the history of everything, I have not seen anything here to shatter my world view yet.

I thought I might address this...:
1. I don't know what your views are, and I am not sure how knowing the facts here would shatter your world view.., whatever that is..

2. That's not really the purpose of this discussion, or the intent. However, that could be a consequence of the nature of such discussions as, for example, evidence doesn't really care about any of our sensibilities regarding our world views, or about the things we want to believe in. It becomes at that point whether we can deal with it all.

3. Even if the bible is all wrong, it doesn't invalidate the idea of the existence of some sort of supreme being, or even a number of.. Neither would anything in science. Hence my disbelief as an Atheist has nothing to do with the accuracy of the Bible, science, or knowing that Yahweh and EL are rooted in Pagan mythology.. I have other reasons based on problematic paradoxes to which are not resolvable.., and I need not address them here.

Cheers Smile

0 Replies

@TheJackal,

I appreciate the level of research you have achieved. It seems quite a complex matter, this study of divinity. Now I will bring up an assertion that has often brought me scorn from the plethora of unbelievers on a2k; namely, Occam's Razor.

You see, the scriptures have an explanation which, although sublime, requires little in the way of esoteric reasoning. The Bible is not a scientific treatise; it is, rather a text designed for the least sophisticated of us.

Regarding God and gods:
There are many intelligent beings having powers beyond those of men and who may be referred to as gods. Their existence first becomes evident in Genesis 1:26 when God said "Let us make man in our image" This is restated in Job 38:7,when, speaking of creation, Moses wrote

Quote:

When the morning stars joyfully cried out together, And all the sons of God began shouting in applause

Many of those sons were among those who forsook their assigned places and materialized on earth as recorded in Genesis 6:2

Quote:

the sons of the true God began to notice that the daughters of men were beautiful. So they began taking as wives all whom they chose.

And, of course, these are the ones referred to by Peter as those assigned to tartarus.

BTW, any resemblance between the Bible accounts of Noah's time and Greco/Roman Pantheons is no coincidence.

Regarding the true God and those he created:
First the Master worker

Quote:

Jehovah produced me as the beginning of his way,The earliest of his achievements of long ago.
23 From ancient times I was installed,
From the start, from times earlier than the earth.
24 When there were no deep waters, I was brought forth,
When there were no springs overflowing with water.. . . Then I was beside him as a master worker (Proverbs 8: 20-30)

And again:

Quote:

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; 16 because by means of him all other things were created in the heavens and on the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All other things have been created through him and for him. 17 Also, he is before all other things, and by means of him all other things were made to exist. (Colossians 1:15,16)

Hopefully, this all sounds familiar; as Jesus, God's only begotten son, made his father's name known in his ministry. Matthew 6:9 John 17: 4,6. And, since both he an his disciples often quoted from the Hebrew scriptures containing the transmigration, there can be no doubt that YHWH represents the name of the creator, the first cause.

One God. Many gods..

2 Replies

So many say the bible is pure to Monotheism, So why is Tartaroo from Greek Polytheistism in the NT

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know