Polytheism in the Book of Daniel, a late second temple religious document

by fulltimestudent 54 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  fulltimestudent

  TTTE: Rereading your first few posts, and, now the last few on this page, I get the feeling that the idea you started this thread was to try to discredited JWs for their stance that there is only one Almighty God and that Jesus is also “God”.
  You totally misunderstand the usage of monotheism and polytheism. You seem to understand that both words relate to worship of God(s)

  1. This thread honored a promise I made late last year, when Doug Mason (as I recall) mentioned Boyarin's book. I found the book in Sydney University's library and said I would attempt to follow Boyarin's argument and comment ... thus this thread.

  His argument, as a recognised scholar* deserves, at least to be listened to. Yes, I believe his argument challenges the J.witness world view, but who is going to accuse the JW's of deep scholarship (grin).

  2. You charge that I misunderstand the meanings of polytheism and monotheism, inferring that YOU understand, but you do so without definitions.(Boyarin, in your view, wouldn't understand either, would he?)

  3. You keep telling us we must go back to the original understandings of the Hebrew words for 'god,' but rely for YOUR understanding on the seventeenth century understandings of the KJV translation and the nineteenth century definitions of the Strong's contributors.

  http://www.patheos.com/blogs/anxiousbench/2013/05/3159/
  

  
  

  * The University of California, Berkeley was in the top 10 in last years world rankings. Note his publication list: http://nes.berkeley.edu/Web_Boyarin/boyarin_cv.html#publications

  This is not an argument that what Boyarin** wrote is right, because he's a scholar (as another anti-intellectualist charged). It's simpler than that. To most minds the Jews were the premier monotheists in the world. When that view is challenged, (and remember that he is not talking about Judaism in general, he's talking about the document we know as the "Book of Daniel.") What was the author of this document imagining as he wrote down his visions? How did it relate to the world he lived in?

  As, I've commented previously, I suggest we are seeing the influence of Hellenic thinking creeping into Judaism. That's only natural, The Jews were constantly influenced by the people around them, including:

  A. Egyptian thought - Remember Moses:

  "Moses was educated in all the wisdom of the Egyptians." Acts 7:22 NIV

  B. Semitic thought (Babylonian) - the flood stories. A Law Code. (i.e. Similar to Hammurabi's)

  C. Iranian thought. 'Dualism' as evident in the Dead Sea Scrolls and some Christian groups. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/anxiousbench/2013/05/3159/

  From your posts it seems, that you've locked your mind into the imagined witness concept that there is a 'pure line' of truth, held by faithful witnesses that stretches from the contemporary world scene, right back to Adam.

  Nothing could be farther from the truth. As east-west trade developed along the so-called Silk Roads, so did the 'trade' in ideas, as human influenced human.

  
  

  ** Note that The University of California, Berkeley was in the top 10 in last years world rankings. Boyarin did not get the job he has there because he was a second class thinker.

  Also note his publication list: http://nes.berkeley.edu/Web_Boyarin/boyarin_cv.html#publications
  
• 

  jhine

  fullime student

  We are clearly.offering two different possible explanations for the vision in the book of Daniel . I see the "son of man " as the second person of the Trinity , you see him as proof of polytheism .

  Either way it does challenge the WT view of scripture .

  TTTE please think about all this with an open mind , and do not be upset when the Bible is discussed and differing opinions are put forth .I am always being told that my theology is wrong by Witnesses and their publications often attack Christendom . Are they the only ones allowed to challenge the ideas of others ? Full's views are different again to mine but I am not going to be upset by this .

  It has been said many times that if WT theology is correct it will stand up to scrutiny and Witnesses should not fear open and sincere debate .

  Jan
• 

  fulltimestudent

  hine:

  an hour agofullime student - We are clearly.offering two different possible explanations for the vision in the book of Daniel . I see the "son of man " as the second person of the Trinity , you see him as proof of polytheism .
  Either way it does challenge the WT view of scripture

  The way you wish to view any information, must be your own personal decision. As you likely have realised, I am not a believer in either view, I'm simply interested in the transfer and development of ideas. I used to wonder how the trinity doctrine developed. I now have a rather comprehensive view of that.

  Quite likely, Daniel 7 may have been part of the story. I think it is arguable that Jesus did exist (as a small time Galilean, would-be prophet) and came to be under the delusion that Daniel 7 (and other texts) would be fulfilled in/by him. It is clear that in less than 100 years of his death, some Christians were seeing him as (smile) Divine.

  I turned to Geza Vermes, one of the best of modern scholars, for some more information. But the men are unimportant, the arguments they present, and the supporting evidence they call attention, to are far more important. Vermes has been both Catholic and Jewish, so may have a unique way of seeing the world.In his, "Christian Beginnings-From Nazareth to Nicea," AD 30 to 325 (Allen Lane, 2012) he notes that the well-known Ignatius, as early as 110 CE, could talk about, "Our God, Jesus." (p.170). Ignatius is seen (according to church historian, Origen) as the immediate successor to Peter as the Bishop of Antioch. (Eusebius, however lists him as third in line ) he's an important early source of information, as on his way to martyrdom in Rome, in 110CE, he wrote to many early churches. And, if the WTS chronology for John was/is correct, Ignatius could have known the Apostle John.

  So here's this man, writing about, "our God Jesus." I'm not sure how Charlie Russell or Fredy F, would've explained that.
• 

  Pistoff

  Most scholars feel that the Israelites worshipped the gods of their neighbors, including Baal, El and others, and that monotheism was retrojected onto the history when older documents and oral histories were redacted (in exile), reframing the existing and accepted polytheism that existed as being the struggle between 'true' and 'false' worship; Israel's misfortunes, rather than being accepted as random events and cruel fate, were seen as her failure to be true to the one 'true' God, YHWH.
  

  In reality, the Israelites were Canaanites who distinguished themselves by various means, including the efforts of the Yahwists, cultural oddities and possibly ethics that were more advanced than their neighbors.
  

  We can argue semantics for ever for but the only meaning of the word that matters is the one meant by the writers of the books of Daniel and Isaiah .

  More importantly, what was the reality of the actual Israelites?

  We will never know for sure, but it is highly unlikely that they were monotheists, the evidence is against it.

  The book of Daniel is partially an apocalyptic piece, with the expected depiction of a savior to come; if we assume it was written in the 160's to 170's, as evidence suggests, then it was written after the redaction of older documents, and after the injection of monotheism onto the Israelite history.

  That makes it unlikely (to me) that the text means to introduce a second God, or god, to the readers.
  
• 

  jhine

  fulltime , sorry if I misrepresented you in any way .I was just trying to point out to TTTE ( who I am not sure is still with us , on the thread I mean ) that exchange of ideas is a healthy thing .

  You are right about Ignatius of course and it might be him who says that this teaching came down from the Apostles as he was so close to John . This is obviously why the WT resorts to misquoting the Early Church Fathers in their literature ..

  Pisstoff all through the Old Testament the main moan that the prophets had was that the Israelites were worshipping the idols from the surrounding nations . So it is not contradictory to the Bible to find evidence of idol or false god worship in history

  Jan.
• 

  Pistoff

  Pisstoff all through the Old Testament the main moan that the prophets had was that the Israelites were worshipping the idols from the surrounding nations . So it is not contradictory to the Bible to find evidence of idol or false god worship in history

  My point is that while the Israelites had multiple gods and were actually a part of 'surrounding nations', it was not viewed as idol worship, or false worship; it was just that they were not monotheistic.

  The 'idol' or 'false worship' label came later.

  The bible was redacted and the history of the Israelites was molded to fit a narrative that was in the interest of the one or ones who did the redaction; the tone of Kings and Judges and prophets points to priestly, pro-southern kingdom origins for the redaction.
  

  Maybe the prophets had something to say about having multiple gods, but it could also be a retrojection, part of a rewriting of history to favor the pro-yahweh, pro-priestly class, ie, 'all the bad things happening to us are due to your false gods'.
• 

  fulltimestudent

  jhine6 hours ago
  fulltime , sorry if I misrepresented you in any way .I was just trying to point out to TTTE ( who I am not sure is still with us , on the thread I mean ) that exchange of ideas is a healthy thing .
  You are right about Ignatius of course and it might be him who says that this teaching came down from the Apostles as he was so close to John . This is obviously why the WT resorts to misquoting the Early Church Fathers in their literature ..

  Jan, I hadn't seen myself misrepresented, so that's OK!

  If you have not yet found the site, a site called 'Early Christian Writers" provides an opportunity to read what they wrote. (link: http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/ ).

  These writers 'flesh' out what other 'Christians' were thinking/believing after the Apostles were dead. Sad, that we know so little about those of the 12 who are 'disappeared' by the well-known names. A good collection of these writings can be found in Bart Ehrman's, 'After the New Testament- A Reader in Early Christianity.' It just may be in your local library.

  Ignatius, is most famous, for his peddling a church structure controlled by the Bishop (who must be obeyed), assisted by Elders and Deacons. My previous Ignatius quote (provided courtesy of Vermes) came from Iggies, "Letter to the Romans." Ch.3. verse, 3. It says in full,

  "Nothing you can see has a real value. Our God Jesus Christ, indeed, has revealed himself more clearly by returning to the family. The greatness of Christianity lies in its being hated by the world, not in its being convincing to it."

  Here's old Iggie being eaten by lions, a little after writing the above. The lions, of course, (grin) have no real value. Though, I guess the lions thought a mouthful of Iggie was real value.

  

  The painting is from from the Menologion of Basil II (c. 1000 AD)

  --------------------
  

  There are some interesting quotes, about "god" that I've culled from Verme's book. Cant spend time to post them right now, I must submit a visa application this morning, for a planned trip to southern China, next month.
• 

  jhine

  Pistoff , I'm not sure how to reply cus I think we could get into a he said this and she said that situation as often happens . As you said it COULD be a retrojection .

  Fulltime , thanks for the link .I have actually read a lot of the Early Church Father' s writings . I checked them out when I smelled a rat in the " Should You Believe in The Trinity " booklet .

  I hope that your application goes well . Is the trip for work or a holiday ?

  Jan
• 

  fulltimestudent

  jhine: I hope that your application goes well . Is the trip for work or a holiday ?

  Thank u. I don't think there's any complications with the visa, after all this is my 12th trip since 2001. but these days, there's so many people going to China, that there are usually large queues. Not so bad yesterday, as Sydney was deluged with a cyclone.

  My reason for visiting is out of interest, "How did the Chinese people manage to go from 3rd world to 1st world in 35 years?"
• 

  jhine

  Gosh fulltime ,you do take your study seriously !

  Jan