All of the supernatural characters of Christianity

[_Jersey Girl]

Buff,

A link to a book being sold on Amazon isn't supplying support material. I would like to see some quotes from the book.

If you intended for this thread to become a list of unsupported assertions, your goal is being fast met.

If you would like this to become a discussion/debate, you need to supply something we can all work with.

[_Buffalo]

Buff,

A link to a book being sold on Amazon isn't supplying support material. I would like to see some quotes from the book.

If you intended for this thread to become a list of unsupported assertions, your goal is being fast met.

If you would like this to become a discussion/debate, you need to supply something we can all work with.

I assumed that you could google the title of the book and come up with them, but if you require more I'm happy to provide them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Early_History_of_God

Summary

Smith begins from the understanding that Israelite culture was largely Canaanite in origin, and that deities such as El, Baal and Asherah, far from being alien to the Israelites, formed part of their heritage. He therefore sees Israelite monolatry (the insistence that Israel should worship one god, Yahweh, but without denying the reality of other gods) as a break with Israel's own past.

Yahweh, he argues, originated in Edom/Midian/Teman as a warrior-god and was subsequently assimilated into the highland pantheon headed by El and his consort, Asherah and populated by Baal and other deities.[2]

Smith sees this process as marked by two major phases, which he describes as "convergence" and "differentiation." In the period of the Judges and the early monarchy, convergence saw the coalescence of the qualities of other deities, and even the deities themselves, into Yahweh. Thus El became identified as a name of Yaweh, Asherah ceased to be a distinct goddess, and qualities of El, Asherah and Baal (notably, for Baal, his identification as a storm-god) were assimilated into Yahweh. In the period from the 9th century BC through to the Exile certain features of the Israelite religion were differentiated from the Yahweh cult, identified as Canaanite, and rejected: examples include Baal, child sacrifice, the asherah, worship of the sun and moon, and the cults of the "high places"

The Amazon summary:

This book is not an introduction to ancient Israel's religion or history, or to the Hebrew Bible. It shouldn't be your first book on the topic. (For your first book, try something by Friedman. In this book Smith will not review or attempt to prove source theory, Israel's Canaanite origins, and so on.) But it is about the evolution of Yahweh through his encounters with Canaanite deities on his way to becoming the "One God" of post-exhilic Judaism.

Smith's thesis is that the development of monolatry (which preceeded monotheism) in Israel began with a process of convergence and differentiation. "Covergence," he writes, "involved the coalescence of various deities and/or some of their features into the figure of Yahweh" (7). And differentiation was the process of Israel rejecting its Caananite heritage, creating a separate identity (8).

So, he writes, "The issue is not one of identifying the earliest instances of monolatry; rather, the old question of explaining monotheism becomes a new issue of accounting for the phenomenon of convergence, a stage in Israelite religion older than the appearance of monolatry" (197).

The deity Yahweh apparently came to Israel from Edom or another southern location (Smith discusses this in another book, "The Origins of Biblical Monotheism"). He was incorporated into Israel's pantheon, which was Canaanite: it featured the deities El, Baal, Anat and Asherah prominently. Smith has a lot of experience with the Ugaritic texts, which record Canaanite religion similar to what Israel must have inherited, so he has the ability to find ways that Yahweh has taken over the features of Canaanite gods. (Unfortunately, no one knows what Yahweh was like before he came to Israel.)

Smith naturally begins with Yahweh's convergence with El, which must have been complete by the time of the earliest texts: "there is no distinct cult attested for El except in his identity as Yahweh (35)." Then Smith examines the similarites between Ugaritic El and Biblical Yahweh, such as descriptions (aged patriarchal god with a heavenly court and a kindly disposition to humanity, and so on), epithets (Berit, Shaddai, Elyon), and iconography (bearded, enthroned).

Next Smith turns to Baal. There was a transition at some point from Baal being worshipped alongside Yahweh without controversy, to a struggle between their cults, to the final emergence of Yahweh's cult alone. This transition included Yahweh's taking over Baal's imagery as storm god (which may not have been part of his Edomite character), bull, warrior and fertilizing deity. Smith analyzes material in Judges and the historical texts, concluding that the conflict must have arisen (or at least intensified) because of Ahab's and Jezebel's attempt to elevate a foreign god, Baal Shamem of the Phoenicians (distinct from Baal of Canaanite/Israelite heritage). Smith covers the ways that Yahweh's cult adopted Baal's epithets, iconography, descriptions and mythology in the process of replacing him. However, Smith admits that all the evidence indicates that Baal remained a popular deity to the end of the southern kingdom.

In this chapter, Smith also looks at Yahweh's acquiring of Anat's martial imagery.

Next, he turns to Asherah, where his analysis is probably most controversial. Smith acknowledges that most scholars believe some goddess, probably Asherah, was worshipped during the period of the monarchy; but he believes she may have been forgotten already by the period of the judges. Her symbolism was obviously incorporated into Yahweh's cult (and later purged from it). Smith focuses on textual analysis, not on the ubiquitous figurines that most scholars believe demonstrate popular Asherah worship. He points to various forms of plausible uncertainty--"Yet scholars have long suspected that these figurines represent Astarte, and given the maternal imagery for her in Phoenician, this is as plausile an identification as that with Asherah. Moreover, these figurines may not represent any deity (111)."

A few scholars agree with Smith, but most continue to believe that Asherah was worshipped during that period. Moving on, Smith examines the ways that Yahweh's cult absorbed Asherah's. He analyzes gender language for Yahweh and comparison in this respect to other near eastern deities. He looks at the decline of anthropomorphic imagery in general for Yahweh. Finally, he also considers the figure of Wisdom as a continuation of many of Asherah's features in a way acceptable to monolatrous Yahwism.

Smith next briefly looks at solar imagery applied to Yahweh, concluding that on the whole it was an inovation of the monarchy of Judah, under the influence of Egypt's New Kingdom. He also looks at the rejection of this imagery by some Biblical authors.

A final chapter looks at transitions in some prominent Israelite cultic practices: the high places, practices associated with the dead, and the Molech sacrifice.

All in all: a fine coverage of the covergence of Canaanite deities and Yahweh. The presentation of evidence in some places could be more well-structured, but that is only my opinion. Here is a good book on Israelite religion, suitable for undergraduate students with a little experience, or armchair scholars. (For serious scholars, of course, it is essential.)

In addition to this book, Smith himself recommends Zevit's "The Religions of Ancient Israel." If you are considering this book or Smith's "The Origins of Biblical Monotheism," I recommend this one first.

You can read part of the book here:

http://books.google.com/books?id=1yM3Au ... &q&f=false

[_MrStakhanovite]

Jesus the man was just a man. If we imagine that he's Jehovah/Yahweh, he originated in in the area of Edom as a warrior god and was added into the El pantheon later, originally as a son of El, and then later as a replacement for the original El.

But that is not how Jews in 2nd Temple Judaism viewed God, all that shows is an etymology of the words elohim and YHWH.

[_Buffalo]

Jesus the man was just a man. If we imagine that he's Jehovah/Yahweh, he originated in in the area of Edom as a warrior god and was added into the El pantheon later, originally as a son of El, and then later as a replacement for the original El.

But that is not how Jews in 2nd Temple Judaism viewed God, all that shows is an etymology of the words elohim and YHWH.

El/Yahweh underwent many transformations over the course of Jewish history. It's not just etymology - traces of the Canaanite pantheon remain in the Bible.

[_MrStakhanovite]

El/Yahweh underwent many transformations over the course of Jewish history. It's not just etymology - traces of the Canaanite pantheon remain in the Bible.

Of course, but why should this raise alarm bells?

[_Buffalo]

El/Yahweh underwent many transformations over the course of Jewish history. It's not just etymology - traces of the Canaanite pantheon remain in the Bible.

Of course, but why should this raise alarm bells?

It should raise an alarm that Christians are worshiping a God who started his career as a pagan tyrant, and who was gradually reformed and revised over thousands of years. The implication is, obviously, that the God is a fictitious character. In fact, this would be the obvious conclusion for anyone to make, sans a preexisting faith in that god.

[_Jersey Girl]

buff

El/Yahweh underwent many transformations over the course of Jewish history. It's not just etymology - traces of the Canaanite pantheon remain in the Bible.

With all due respect, Buff, what you are describing is exactly an issue of etymology.

What is your understanding if the use of the term EL within the context of Judaism?

There are far more than "traces" of the Canaanite pantheon in the Old Testament. The Golden Calf comes immediately to mind and would be identifiable to even a novice investigator of the Old Testament.

Why do you seem surprised that the Bible contains references to Paganism? Is this material new to you?

[_Buffalo]

buff

El/Yahweh underwent many transformations over the course of Jewish history. It's not just etymology - traces of the Canaanite pantheon remain in the Bible.

With all due respect, Buff, what you are describing is exactly an issue of etymology.

What is your understanding if the use of the term EL within the context of Judaism?

There are far more than "traces" of the Canaanite pantheon in the Old Testament. The Golden Calf comes immediately to mind and would be identifiable to even a novice investigator of the Old Testament.

Why do you seem surprised that the Bible contains references to Paganism? Is this material new to you?

You're thinking of negative references to pagan material (I use the word pagan, but there's no real reason to differentiate "pagan" from Hebrew). I'm talking about the Hebrews borrowing pagan cosmology.

Deuteronomy 32:8-9.

When the Elyon (most high) gave the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of man, He set the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of the sons of El. But Yahweh's portion was with his people, (the tribe of) Jacob was his share of inheritance.

Psalm 82

(Psalmist) God stands in the assembly of El; He judges among the gods.
(Yahweh speaking to the gods) How long will you judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? Selah.
Defend the poor and fatherless: do justice to the afflicted and needy.
Deliver the poor and needy: rid them out of the hand of the wicked.
(Psalmist) They (the gods) know not, neither will they (the gods) understand; they (the gods) walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of course.
(Yahweh speaking to the gods) I thought you are gods; and all of you are the sons of the Most High?
But you shall die like Adam, and fall like one of the Shining Ones.
(Psalmist) Arise, O God, judge the earth: for you shall inherit all nations.

[_MrStakhanovite]

It should raise an alarm that Christians are worshiping a God who started his career as a pagan tyrant, and who was gradually reformed and revised over thousands of years. The implication is, obviously, that the God is a fictitious character. In fact, this would be the obvious conclusion for anyone to make, sans a preexisting faith in that god.

Couldn't it be understood as the evolution of Man's understanding and ever changing relationship with God?

[_Buffalo]

It should raise an alarm that Christians are worshiping a God who started his career as a pagan tyrant, and who was gradually reformed and revised over thousands of years. The implication is, obviously, that the God is a fictitious character. In fact, this would be the obvious conclusion for anyone to make, sans a preexisting faith in that god.

Couldn't it be understood as the evolution of Man's understanding and ever changing relationship with God?

Occam's razor makes us chose the simplest explanation - that El, like many other mythological figures, was altered to suit the changing temperament and needs of his worshipers.

El became civilized only as his worshipers became civilized. El was constantly remade in the image of the people who worshiped him. El went from a brash figure whose sexual exploits with the goddesses were solemnized in sacred poetry, to a sexless, touchy-feely father figure who really cares about everything you care about. And yet, he's also unchanging!