Israelites were polytheistic

[tumbleweed41]

heres a good read

http://www.thedivinecouncil.com/HIPHILDeut32 Psa82 article.pdf

The polytheistic nature of pre-exilic Israelite religion and Israel’s gradual​

evolution toward monotheism are taken as axiomatic in current biblical scholarship.

this guy takes a neutral stance and says Polytheism, Monolotry and henotheism doesnt do it any justice

And again,

Yahweh was “species unique” in the Israelite mind, and so terms such as henotheism,
polytheism, and even monolatry are not sufficiently adequate to label the nature of
Israelite religion.

A paper attempting to discount polytheism in ancient Israel altogether.
You're really not helping yourself here.

 

[outhouse]

And again,

Yahweh was “species unique” in the Israelite mind, and so terms such as henotheism,
polytheism, and even monolatry are not sufficiently adequate to label the nature of
Israelite religion.

A paper attempting to discount polytheism in ancient Israel altogether.
You're really not helping yourself here.

just showing you different opinions

what im looking for is VALID evidence that states what date, yahweh was the main deity in the henotheistic culture, and by culture I mean the whole culture. this includes E's work's which in 950 BC was not backing Yahweh but El

 

[outhouse]

Canaanite was not a nationality, or religion. It simply meant that you were one of the many of the Semitic tribes/cities that lived in the geological region of Canaan.

We cannot be certain if Abraham was originally from Canaan, biblical records have him as an outsider from Ur which may have been in southern Persia.

And no, Abraham was more than likely a henotheistic polytheist. That is, Yahweh was his god, to be worshiped above all the other gods.

Polytheist who worshipped El as in Mesopotamia, El was the father deity at the time Abraham was said to exist.

Problem is, now your giving attributes to a person said to be 100% mythology and never existed

 

[tumbleweed41]

Problem is, now your giving attributes to a person said to be 100% mythology and never existed

Really?

And the consensus among scholars on this claim is where?

 

[tumbleweed41]

what im looking for is VALID evidence that states what date, yahweh was the main deity in the henotheistic culture, and by culture I mean the whole culture. this includes E's work's which in 950 BC was not backing Yahweh but El

(E)'s works did not exist in 950 BCE.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

(E)'s works did not exist in 950 BCE.

Still banging your head against the outhouse wall?

 

[tumbleweed41]

Problem is, now your giving attributes to a person said to be 100% mythology and never existed

I would suggest Principles of Archaeology by professor T. Douglas Price.

 

[fallingblood]

At least according to [secular] archeologists, Judaism is the synthesis of various regional Semitic religions, with Zoroastrianism. Curiously, Elohim is a plural form, rather than a singular, but that in itself is explained by some scholars as being a "royal" plural.

Elohim can also be used in the singular form depending on context.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Curiously, Elohim is a plural form, rather than a singular, but that in itself is explained by some scholars as being a "royal" plural.

I think Burnett has a far better explanation.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Thanks, Jayhawker. That was an interesting little read. I know nothing about Biblical Hebrew grammar, so I found Burnett's explanation rather enlightening.

You're welcome. But be aware that the article does not do justice to the book which, in my opinion, does an excellent job in tracing the grammatical form that he calls "concretized abstract plural." Think about it the next time you raise a glass of wine and toast "L'Chaim!" (to life!).

 

[paarsurrey]

Canaanite was not a nationality, or religion. It simply meant that you were one of the many of the Semitic tribes/cities that lived in the geological region of Canaan.

We cannot be certain if Abraham was originally from Canaan, biblical records have him as an outsider from Ur which may have been in southern Persia.

And no, Abraham was more than likely a henotheistic polytheist. That is, Yahweh was his god, to be worshiped above all the other gods.

I don't agree with you.
My religion tells me very clearly that Abraham was a monotheistic:


[6:162] Say, ‘As for me, my Lord has guided me unto a straight path — a right religion, the religion of Abraham, the upright. And he was not of those who join gods with God.’
The Holy Quran Arabic text with Translation in English text and Search Engine - Al Islam Online

 

[tumbleweed41]

I don't agree with you.
My religion tells me very clearly that Abraham was a monotheistic:

I understand what your religion teaches about Abraham.

However, documents far older than the Qur'an indicate differently.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

However, documents far older than the Qur'an indicate differently.

Perhaps ...

I'm curious. If we posit a pervasively henotheistic culture at the time of the Josiah reforms , to what process do we attribute the advent of radical monotheism? What [insight] drove our zealous deuteronomist and how do we reconcile this with Robert Alter's contention ...

It is widely held by modern biblical scholarship that the Patriarchs, including Abraham, are not clearly and unambiguously attested in the Hebrew Bible earlier than the Babylonian exile. This has led modern scholars to propose that the entire Torah, which include the stories of Abraham, all originated from literary circles either during the Persian period of the late 6th century BCE, to the 5th century Babylonian rule, or as late as Hellenistic times. Under these dominions, the Patriarchal stories are seen as hope for the Jewish people when Jerusalem, the Temple, and the Davidic kingship were all but destroyed. YHWH's dealings with their ancestors provided hope for a future in which an ancestral foundation could be built. Thus, Abraham served as a model for those who would return to Judah.

There are however, modern supporters for an earlier dating. Robert Alter interjects that the Hebrew language evolved over nine centuries of biblical literary activity, from the First Commonwealth (1000 BCE to 586 BCE) to the late Persian/Hellenistic periods. Both Alter and Ronald Hendel argue that there is very little Hebrew in the Torah that could bare a late dating to the 6th-4th century BCE eras, due to their linguistic differences. [wiki]

It's important to realize how much of what we 'know' is little more than informed speculation. JEDP is a useful mythology that may even be substantially true.

 

[tumbleweed41]

Perhaps ...

I'm curious. If we posit a pervasively henotheistic culture at the time of the Josiah reforms , to what proicess do we attribute the advent of radical monotheism? What [insight] drove our zelous deuteronomist, and how do we reconcile this with Robert Alter's contention ...It's important to realize how much of what we 'know' is little more than informed speculation. JEDP is a useful mythology that may even be substantially true.

Do you think the Baal/Yahweh conflict may have been a driving force in the move towards monotheism?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I think very early on there developed a concept of false god (as opposed to 'their god' or 'lesser god') as part of an evolving iconoclastic theology that sought to demythologize nature while consolidating a federation of tribes on the basis of a covenant (with God or godliness - you choose). I think the persistent relapse into idolatry was a retrograde manifestation of two counterposed forces, parochialism and cultural churning.

 

[Levite]

Perhaps ...

There are however, modern supporters for an earlier dating. Robert Alter interjects that the Hebrew language evolved over nine centuries of biblical literary activity, from the First Commonwealth (1000 BCE to 586 BCE) to the late Persian/Hellenistic periods. Both Alter and Ronald Hendel argue that there is very little Hebrew in the Torah that could bare a late dating to the 6th-4th century BCE eras, due to their linguistic differences.

I'm curious. If we posit a pervasively henotheistic culture at the time of the Josiah reforms , to what process do we attribute the advent of radical monotheism? What [insight] drove our zealous deuteronomist and how do we reconcile this with Robert Alter's contention ...It's important to realize how much of what we 'know' is little more than informed speculation. JEDP is a useful mythology that may even be substantially true.

You know, it's interesting: for all my having studied the text and the scholarship, I often forget that the simplest points can be the most persuasive.

Looking at text that definitely comes from Babylonian and early Second Temple times, such as Ezra and Nechemiah, it is actually striking how different the language, the style, the idiom, and the structure are from texts posited to be potentially much earlier, such as Genesis and Exodus. And it's not as easy to dismiss as writing it off to the differences between D-school authors and J/E authors, even with the evening out from redaction. Any part of Genesis or Exodus sounds more like Deuteronomy or Judges/Samuel than it does Ezra/Nechemiah or Esther or Proverbs or Lamentations.

The differences in usage, style, and construction are perhaps not as stark as the differences between Chaucer and Tennyson in English literature, but then, Hebrew has evolved in a far more restrained and nuanced fashion than has English. But the differences here are at least as notable, I would say, as the difference between Shakespeare and Alexander Pope. And that is a very different language: one could not mistake the one for the other.

That convinces me anew that early Torah layers simply must predate the Babylonian Exile: they just don't read like later texts, in any fashion.

But I also have to concur about questioning the shift to monotheism. Such major theological shifts in an entire people don't take place overnight, and don't take place in a vacuum. Given that it seems quite clear that Jews were monotheistic by the early to mid-Second Temple Period at the very latest, how would that have come to pass had there not been a substantial movement toward monotheism for some considerable time previous?

No, it simply stands to reason that there was a progressively more widespread movement from henotheism to monolatry to monotheism that took place during the First Temple Period, finishing in the Babylonian Exile.

 

[tumbleweed41]

I think very early on there developed a concept of false god (as opposed to 'their god' or 'lesser god') as part of an evolving iconoclastic theology that sought to demythologize nature while consolidating a federation of tribes on the basis of a covenant (with God or godliness - you choose). I think the persistent relapse into idolatry was a retrograte manifestation of two counterposed forces, parochialism and cultural churning.

This makes sense, especially in light of what I have studied so far. Thank you.

 

[tumbleweed41]

You know, it's interesting: for all my having studied the text and the scholarship, I often forget that the simplest points can be the most persuasive.

Looking at text that definitely comes from Babylonian and early Second Temple times, such as Ezra and Nechemiah, it is actually striking how different the language, the style, the idiom, and the structure are from texts posited to be potentially much earlier, such as Genesis and Exodus. And it's not as easy to dismiss as writing it off to the differences between D-school authors and J/E authors, even with the evening out from redaction. Any part of Genesis or Exodus sounds more like Deuteronomy or Judges/Samuel than it does Ezra/Nechemiah or Esther or Proverbs or Lamentations.

The differences in usage, style, and construction are perhaps not as stark as the differences between Chaucer and Tennyson in English literature, but then, Hebrew has evolved in a far more restrained and nuanced fashion than has English. But the differences here are at least as notable, I would say, as the difference between Shakespeare and Alexander Pope. And that is a very different language: one could not mistake the one for the other.

That convinces me anew that early Torah layers simply must predate the Babylonian Exile: they just don't read like later texts, in any fashion.

But I also have to concur about questioning the shift to monotheism. Such major theological shifts in an entire people don't take place overnight, and don't take place in a vacuum. Given that it seems quite clear that Jews were monotheistic by the early to mid-Second Temple Period at the very latest, how would that have come to pass had there not been a substantial movement toward monotheism for some considerable time previous?

No, it simply stands to reason that there was a progressively more widespread movement from henotheism to monolatry to monotheism that took place during the First Temple Period, finishing in the Babylonian Exile.

Very informative.
Do you personally see this evolving movement as Israels progression towards finding/knowing God?

 

[Levite]

Very informative.
Do you personally see this evolving movement as Israels progression towards finding/knowing God?

Personally? Yeah, absolutely. I think the idea of One God, sole creator of everything, without form or physicality, both immanent and transcendant, to be worshipped anywhere but only sacrificed to at one place, whose primary concerns with human society involve justice for those most often deprived of justice, was so utterly foreign to the Ancient Near East that it required centuries, perhaps many centuries, to take hold. And even once all those things took hold, it still took more time and considerable national crisis, in order to evolve past blood sacrifice entirely, to say nothing of more complex and nuanced developments in theology.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

But I also have to concur about questioning the shift to monotheism. Such major theological shifts in an entire people don't take place overnight, and don't take place in a vacuum. Given that it seems quite clear that Jews were monotheistic by the early to mid-Second Temple Period at the very latest, how would that have come to pass had there not been a substantial movement toward monotheism for some considerable time previous?

That's why when you read some poster pontificating about how 'it happened in 622 bce,' there's little to do but laugh at such foolishnes and allocate the source a place of honor on one's ignore list.