DiscussMormonism.com

In the Bible, the only god who ever defeated Yahweh was the Cannaanite god Chemosh. Despite Yahweh promising the Israelites a victory, Chemosh prevailed.

I don't know much about Chemosh, but I wonder if Christians have chosen the wrong god to worship. It doesn't sound like Chemosh promoted slavery, condoned rape or genocide, like Yahweh. And, it appears Chemosh is more powerful than Yahweh. Maybe Chemosh deserves a second look?

Here's Daniel McClellan discussing the Bible passages that describe the defeat of Yahweh at the hands of Chemosh:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFbbiC5m3A4

Also, Chemosh does look kind of like a cool god to worship:

Was he one of the divine council Gods?

drumdude wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 10, 2023 11:28 pm

Was he one of the divine council Gods?

Good question. Kish? Philo?

Durga's partner?

Everybody Wang Chung wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 10, 2023 10:00 pm

In the Bible, the only god who ever defeated Yahweh was the Cannaanite god Chemosh. Despite Yahweh promising the Israelites a victory, Chemosh prevailed.

I don't know much about Chemosh, but I wonder if Christians have chosen the wrong god to worship. It doesn't sound like Chemosh promoted slavery, condoned rape or genocide, like Yahweh. And, it appears Chemosh is more powerful than Yahweh. Maybe Chemosh deserves a second look?

Here's Daniel McClellan discussing the Bible passages that describe the defeat of Yahweh at the hands of Chemosh:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFbbiC5m3A4

Also, Chemosh does look kind of like a cool god to worship:

I don't think Dan is doing his best work on this one. The scholarship I've seen suggests his view is in the minority. His appeals to his own inadequate paraphrase, parallels, and trying to make a vague verse more specific than it is sounds a lot like he is "ginning" up evidence to support his pre drawn conclusion.

Many times army’s retreat only to gain victory at a later time. But thank you for that post. I had not heard about that information.

Tapir Rodeo wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 11, 2023 1:21 pm

Everybody Wang Chung wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 10, 2023 10:00 pm

In the Bible, the only god who ever defeated Yahweh was the Cannaanite god Chemosh. Despite Yahweh promising the Israelites a victory, Chemosh prevailed.

I don't know much about Chemosh, but I wonder if Christians have chosen the wrong god to worship. It doesn't sound like Chemosh promoted slavery, condoned rape or genocide, like Yahweh. And, it appears Chemosh is more powerful than Yahweh. Maybe Chemosh deserves a second look?

Here's Daniel McClellan discussing the Bible passages that describe the defeat of Yahweh at the hands of Chemosh:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFbbiC5m3A4

I don't think Dan is doing his best work on this one. The scholarship I've seen suggests his view is in the minority. His appeals to his own inadequate paraphrase, parallels, and trying to make a vague verse more specific than it is sounds a lot like he is "ginning" up evidence to support his pre drawn conclusion.

Tapir Rodeo, Perhaps you could explain what you are considering .I checked my study Bible and the notes for this section match Dans comments. The word is normally used to indicate a divine wrath. Now I suppose that some exception could exist but the Bible story really does not go into any further explanation in order to point to an exception. I do not think it is difficult to imagine alternatives to the wrath of Chemosh but those alternatives would be speculation not included in the reported story.

It is an odd story. I am not personally attracted to a God who is roused when you sacrifice your first born son but human sacrifice was a widespread practice though perhaps not a daily affair.

huckelberry wrote: ↑

Sat Aug 12, 2023 4:51 pm

Tapir Rodeo, Perhaps you could explain what you are considering .I checked my study Bible and the notes for this section match Dans comments. The word is normally used to indicate a divine wrath. Now I suppose that some exception could exist but the Bible story really does not go into any further explanation in order to point to an exception. I do not think it is difficult to imagine alternatives to the wrath of Chemosh but those alternatives would be speculation not included in the reported story.

It is an odd story. I am not personally attracted to a God who is roused when you sacrifice your first born son but human sacrifice was a widespread practice though perhaps not a daily affair.

There is a lot going on in the passage. First Elisha was reluctant to help but finally decided to prophesy for the sake of the king of Judah. The prophecy is as follows.

This is but a slight thing in the sight of the Lord; He will also give the Moabites into your hand. Then you shall strike every fortified city and every choice city, and fell every good tree and stop all springs of water, and mar every good piece of land with stones.’”
— 2 Kings 3:18-19

The army ambushes the Moabites and the prophecy appears to be fulfilled.

But when they came to the camp of Israel, the Israelites arose and struck the Moabites, so that they fled before them; and they went forward into the land, slaughtering the Moabites. Thus they destroyed the cities; and each one threw a stone on every piece of good land and filled it. So they stopped all the springs of water and felled all the good trees, until in Kir-hareseth only they left its stones; however, the slingers went about it and struck it.
— 2 Kings 3:24-25

Now at the end, the Moabites seem to retain control of one stronghold. They appear to be losing and in desperation the king of Moab sacrifices his son but we are not told to what deity the sacrifice is made. Wrath comes against Israel but we don't know who's wrath and then the Israelites leave.

When the king of Moab saw that the battle was too fierce for him, he took with him 700 men who drew swords, to break through to the king of Edom; but they could not. Then he took his oldest son who was to reign in his place, and offered him as a burnt offering on the wall. And there came great wrath against Israel, and they departed from him and returned to their own land.
— 2 Kings 3:26-27

The Hebrew word translated as Wrath is usually used to describe the Wrath of Yahweh. But in Esther and Ecclesiastes it is used to describe human anger.

So I think Dan's paraphrase is pretty weak and misses some incredibly important details. The parallel to another story argument can actually work against his case since, in the other story Dan alludes to it is the wrath of Yahweh which drives an army away.

Overall, this story has been the source of much debate with many possible explanations put forward. I think the story is much too vague for Dan to just declare himself correct and accuse anyone who disagrees with him of "ginning" up evidence when he is also "ginning" up evidence and making huge assumptions to support his conclusion.

Here is a relatively short video that offers an alternative explanation. https://youtu.be/2rq8F_9Yg-Y

Tapir Rodeo, Your link was interesting. I find it fairly easy to see the possibility that Elisha prophesy was not intended to be the complete story because of his reservations about the whole undertaking. One could read the story as Yahweh withdrawing having reached the limit of intended support. A story about a prophesy which causes a persons greed or pride to mislead themself is a possible folk story type. I found the further suggestions about Israel participating in the sacrifice as a political agreement strained and not supported by anything but speculation.

It would be interesting to have Dan further his presentation, as it stands it is a rather minimal treatment. I wonder if there are not serious historical difficulties here. Dan may be wishing to see the story as a remnant of times when the sole power of Yahweh was not an established belief. Your link article views the story as being told by somebody following both Deuteronomy and holding a mature monotheist view.(view within which Chemosh has no power or only subservient power) Dan doubts such monotheism held that kind assumed control of thinking.

Of course the writer (s) of Kings were Babylonian captivity or after and would be aware of Yahweh monotheism but the original story would have been much earlier. Did it get included leaving the story in the older form, a form told perhaps by people who thought Chemosh had some power?

I incline in my view towards seeing only partial commitment by Yahweh. Well it is also possible to see the vicissitudes of war without divine determination.(the story in the Bible does not explain)