Posts by Doug Mason

13

The “Most High” allocated Yahweh to Jacob

by Doug Mason in

deuteronomy 32:8-9 describes the most high (god) apportioning the nations to the gods according to “the number of the sons of israel/gods”.

one can argue over the niceties of the meaning of that expression.

of interest is that the “most high” allocated jacob to yahweh (“jehovah”).

Doug Mason

Diogenesister,

El and his cohort of gods - the Elohim - came to the Israelites from the north. The Israelites took a few of 70 or so gods on offer. Initially EL was also made their chief god while Asherah was his wife and Baal was one of their sons. Yahweh came from the south, in the region of Moses' father-in-law. Yahweh was not part of the Elohim

There were similarities with Ba'al and Yahweh: both were angry, warrior weather-gods, but they were not the same god.

Yahweh became the Israelite's main god, and in time characteristics of other gods and goddesses were applied to him. El was an old god with a beard - the original "Ancient of Days". In time Yahweh became identified with El. The writers criticised Ba'al but never El.

Monolatry means to worship one god but to recognise that there are other real gods, but they are lesser gods. Henotheism says that not only are there other gods but there is recognition that other people may worship their god with equal validity.

I am aware of Finkelstein. I suggest reading a range of scholars to see a wider range of views.

I do not know why the NRSV rendering is different. It might relate to their source. Maybe someone can help here. Look at the marginal readings. My NIV writes: "Jeshurun" in the margin. Conduct a wide ranging online search for the full background of that word.

Regarding "satan", note that the Biblical concept is very different to that which was developed during the European Middle Ages. In Job, Satan had direct access to God in his court. Satan was simply an accuser.

Doug

13

The “Most High” allocated Yahweh to Jacob

by Doug Mason in

deuteronomy 32:8-9 describes the most high (god) apportioning the nations to the gods according to “the number of the sons of israel/gods”.

one can argue over the niceties of the meaning of that expression.

of interest is that the “most high” allocated jacob to yahweh (“jehovah”).

Doug Mason

Hi Phizzy,

The Judaism that we consider as typical came out of the minority elite following their experience with the Neo-Babylonian Captivity and Exile.

Some scholars say that the Israelites (pre-Neo-Babylonian period) were polytheists. Some scholars say they were monolatrists. There are early traces of monotheism, but they were in the minority.

Some scholars say that "Asherah" was the name of the goddess. Some say that it was the symbol of a goddess. Some say that Asherah was given Yahweh as his wife. Some say that this did not happen.

Some scholars give priority to archaeology, others look only through the text of the Bible. But as you say, difficulties arise because the written history (Israelite Bible -- it's all Jewish) is distorted "history".

If you do not mind reading a technical book that could address your thoughts on monotheism, then this could possibly help: "Gods, Goddesses, and Images of God in Ancient Israel" by Othmar Keel and Christoph Uehlinger.

It's heavy on facts with hundreds of images, but with application it is possible to extract relevant information.

Doug

13

The “Most High” allocated Yahweh to Jacob

by Doug Mason in

deuteronomy 32:8-9 describes the most high (god) apportioning the nations to the gods according to “the number of the sons of israel/gods”.

one can argue over the niceties of the meaning of that expression.

of interest is that the “most high” allocated jacob to yahweh (“jehovah”).

Doug Mason

Deuteronomy 32:8-9 describes the Most High (God) apportioning the nations to the gods according to “the number of the sons of Israel/Gods”. One can argue over the niceties of the meaning of that expression. Of interest is that the “Most High” allocated Jacob to Yahweh (“Jehovah”). The “Most High” told Yahweh that his share was Jacob.

NWT
When the Most High gave the
nations an inheritance,
When he parted the sons of
Adam from one another,
He proceeded to fix the
boundary of the peoples
With regard for the number
of the sons of Israel.
For Jehovah’s share is his people;
Jacob is the allotment that he inherits.

NIV
When the Most High gave the nations their inheritance,
when he divided all mankind,
he set up boundaries for the peoples
according to the number of the sons of Israel.
For the LORD'S portion is his people,
Jacob his allotted inheritance.

NRSV
When the Most High apportioned the nations,
when he divided humankind,
he fixed the boundaries of the peoples
according to the number of the gods;
the LORD's own portion was his people,
Jacob his allotted share.

17

Uncovering "GOD"

by Doug Mason in

with self-righteous indignation, the watchtower society (wts) points to its restoration of the hebrew tetragram (hwhy = “yahweh” = = = > “jehovah”) wherever the english translator renders it as “lord”..

the wts complains that the use of “lord” hides the fact that the name (“jehovah” for the wts) is intended.

however, with its call of “look over here, look over here”, the wts diverts attention, probably unintentionally, from related information that it, in turn, does not reveal..

Doug Mason

sir82,

Your hilarity is not alone. There is an amazing sense of relief and freedom that comes with breaking free of the pressures from practitioners of religion. They play on fear. They create the sense of guilt, saying that the only solution is to join their organisation.

With this freedom one can look with objective rejection at the opinions (including those expressed in the Bible) and the ceremonies with their myths.

I hope that I can, in some small way, help someone to see.

I know only too well that there are good people of many faiths who do good things. Equally, I know that the higher morality we now expect is the product of the secularization of society.

Enjoy this life, with hilarity.

Doug

17

Uncovering "GOD"

by Doug Mason in

with self-righteous indignation, the watchtower society (wts) points to its restoration of the hebrew tetragram (hwhy = “yahweh” = = = > “jehovah”) wherever the english translator renders it as “lord”..

the wts complains that the use of “lord” hides the fact that the name (“jehovah” for the wts) is intended.

however, with its call of “look over here, look over here”, the wts diverts attention, probably unintentionally, from related information that it, in turn, does not reveal..

Doug Mason

eyeuse2badub,

When the writers (now called P - priestly) created the creation myth, they took their religiously-based model from Psalm 104.

John Day, in his book, "Yahweh and the Gods and Goddesses of Canaan" writes: "it seems more natural to suppose that Genesis 1 has demythologized Psalm 104 than that Psalm 104 has remythologized Genesis 1. The fact that Psalm 104 also displays remarkable parallels with the fourteenth-century BCE Egyptian Pharaoh Akhenaten's Hymn to the Sun suggests that this is Psalm 104's basic source, not Genesis 1." (page 101)

Doug

17

Uncovering "GOD"

by Doug Mason in

with self-righteous indignation, the watchtower society (wts) points to its restoration of the hebrew tetragram (hwhy = “yahweh” = = = > “jehovah”) wherever the english translator renders it as “lord”..

the wts complains that the use of “lord” hides the fact that the name (“jehovah” for the wts) is intended.

however, with its call of “look over here, look over here”, the wts diverts attention, probably unintentionally, from related information that it, in turn, does not reveal..

Doug Mason

Onager,

Thank you for that link to bibleorigins. I have copied it to my computer.

My research also says that HWHY (Yahweh) is an amalgam of other gods. He started out as a warrior god from the south. After the Israelites adopted him, they made him their chief god, replacing EL.

Initially Baal and Yahweh had much in common. El was different, being a kindly god, portrayed as an old man with a long beard -- an "Ancient of Days" character. His goddess wife was named Asherah.

Over time, attributes and characteristics of other gods were applied to Yahweh, including feminine qualities.

When reading the written material (aka Hebrew Scriptures) it is important to identify the religious politics at play. Much of it as we have it today results from the "Deuteronomists" at the time of the Babylonian Captivity. These people were determined monotheists and this is reflected in their writings. Note particularly the material by "Second Isaiah", namely chapters 40 ff of Isaiah. These were produced at the time of the Captivity. Note the strong emphasis they place on Yahweh and that there was no other god, dead or living.

They denigrated anyone who they did not agree with and they distorted the historical record to reflect their ambitions and views. The only people to come out completely unscathed are Hezekiah and Josiah, inasmuch as these kings supported their views. Since these writers came from the south (Jerusalem), all northern (Israeli) kings were bad.

But at least in making their condemnations, the writers were acknowledging that the Israelites were polytheists.

Doug

17

Uncovering "GOD"

by Doug Mason in

with self-righteous indignation, the watchtower society (wts) points to its restoration of the hebrew tetragram (hwhy = “yahweh” = = = > “jehovah”) wherever the english translator renders it as “lord”..

the wts complains that the use of “lord” hides the fact that the name (“jehovah” for the wts) is intended.

however, with its call of “look over here, look over here”, the wts diverts attention, probably unintentionally, from related information that it, in turn, does not reveal..

Doug Mason

With self-righteous indignation, the Watchtower Society (WTS) points to its restoration of the Hebrew Tetragram (HWHY = “Yahweh” = = = > “Jehovah”) wherever the English translator renders it as “LORD”.

The WTS complains that the use of “LORD” hides the fact that the Name (“Jehovah” for the WTS) is intended. However, with its call of “look over here, look over here”, the WTS diverts attention, probably unintentionally, from related information that it, in turn, does not reveal.

Not only does “LORD” hide “Yahweh” from open view, but the same happens with the word “GOD”. In this instance, the Name of this god is – in English – “EL”.

This god named EL was the chief god of the Canaanites. His goddess wife was named Asherah (or variants thereof). They had 70 sons, all gods, including Baal. Together, these gods were known as the “Elohim”.

EL (“God”) and his ELOHIM (“let us make”) are encountered in the first chapter of Genesis. At the time that chapter was written, the Israelites were dominantly polytheists.

Yahweh was not a member of the Elohim. While the Elohim came to the Israelites (hill-dwelling Canaanites) from the north, Yahweh came to the Israelites from the south – likely from the region of Moses’ father-in-law. Yahweh came as a warrior-god who controlled nature. Baal and Yahweh shared these characteristics.

The Israelites adopted Yahweh as their main and national god. They practised monolatry, meaning that they treated Yahweh as their dominant god while not denying the existence of other gods. They were aware of and worshiped other gods.

“In the Judges period, Israelite divinities may have included Yahweh, El, Baal, and perhaps Asherah as well as the sun, moon, and stars. During the monarchy, Yahweh, Baal, Astarte, and the sun, moon, and stars were considered deities in Israel. … The Queen of Heaven (Jer. 7:18; 44:18-19, 25) was the title of a goddess, perhaps Astarte, Ishtar (or, a syncretized Astarte-Ishtar) or, less likely, Anat.” (“The Early History of God: Yahweh and Other Deities in Ancient Israel”, page 182, Mark Smith.)

The Ten Commandments simply ordered them to ensure that they did not put any of these other gods “before” the god who was speaking to Moses.

Over time, the Israelites assimilated characteristics of other gods and goddesses into Yahweh. Some reassigned Asherah to Yahweh as his consort.

The disaster of the Babylonian Captivity and Exile provided the opportunity for the minority group that was intent on making Yahweh the one and only god. See, for example, “Second” Isaiah (from chapter 40 on). They moved from monolatry to monotheism.

The nation that emerged from the Exile is different to the nation that existed before. They transitioned from Israelites and Hebrews to Jews, with parties such as the Pharisees being created.

Next time you encounter the WTS’s cry of “look over here at what we have uncovered with ‘LORD’”, remember the facts about “GOD” (EL) that the WTS fails to uncover – facts that would be too uncomfortable for it.

Doug

20

Sources of John's vivid imagery

by Doug Mason in

in common with other apocalyptic writings, such as daniel and 1 enoch, john’s letter employs vivid, memorable imagery.

as with the other elements of his apocalypse (revelation), john draws on existing sources for his material.. meanings inferred from the images need to keep the following firmly in mind:.

1. the symbols had to have meaning for and be clearly understood by his immediate intended hearers.. 2. john intended that these images encourage those hearers to “overcome”, then and there.. 3. john anticipated that the coming of jesus was imminent, “soon”.. it is my belief that the images were intended to depict earthly opposition (rome and apostate jews) as well as heavenly opposition (wars in heaven involving satan).. the writers/compilers of daniel also employed vivid imagery.

Doug Mason

Bobcat.

I looked at many places but without any joy. Such as at:

http://judaism-and-rome.cnrs.fr/ezekiel-apocalypse-transformation-prophetic-language-revelation-16-17-19-10

Were you able to download that PDF of the thesis that I gave the link for? It's searchable and you will find comments about Jean-Pierre Ruiz in it.

Also, a search for his name (in full) will tell you where he is currently -- and possibly contactable(?). I see that he is on a YouTube video, but I did not look at it.

Doug

20

Sources of John's vivid imagery

by Doug Mason in

in common with other apocalyptic writings, such as daniel and 1 enoch, john’s letter employs vivid, memorable imagery.

as with the other elements of his apocalypse (revelation), john draws on existing sources for his material.. meanings inferred from the images need to keep the following firmly in mind:.

1. the symbols had to have meaning for and be clearly understood by his immediate intended hearers.. 2. john intended that these images encourage those hearers to “overcome”, then and there.. 3. john anticipated that the coming of jesus was imminent, “soon”.. it is my belief that the images were intended to depict earthly opposition (rome and apostate jews) as well as heavenly opposition (wars in heaven involving satan).. the writers/compilers of daniel also employed vivid imagery.

Doug Mason

Regarding the planets, Venus -- the Morning Star -- was known as "Lucifer". Jesus thus gives himself that name -- Rev 22:16.

Doug

20

Sources of John's vivid imagery

by Doug Mason in

in common with other apocalyptic writings, such as daniel and 1 enoch, john’s letter employs vivid, memorable imagery.

as with the other elements of his apocalypse (revelation), john draws on existing sources for his material.. meanings inferred from the images need to keep the following firmly in mind:.

1. the symbols had to have meaning for and be clearly understood by his immediate intended hearers.. 2. john intended that these images encourage those hearers to “overcome”, then and there.. 3. john anticipated that the coming of jesus was imminent, “soon”.. it is my belief that the images were intended to depict earthly opposition (rome and apostate jews) as well as heavenly opposition (wars in heaven involving satan).. the writers/compilers of daniel also employed vivid imagery.

Doug Mason

What an amazing array of information. I am impressed.

I in no way pretend to know the answers, but my hope is that we are all inspired to read and research honestly and openly. And to then live our lives according to our own convictions, and to extend to others the same respect that we want for ourselves. My desire is to inspire research so that others will experience the excitement of challenge and discovery.

I believe Revelation had to have immediate meaning to the hearers, therefore any understanding of the narratives and the symbols need to be looked at through the directly immediate intended hearers. There can be no doubt that John drew on the supernatural imagery they were familiar with. But we must beware of imposing the ideas of different and subsequent communities upon that time.

As for accommodating the date of Revelation? My initial reaction is that we do not know what was originally written (which is true for all of those writings). The earliest written material comes to us from maybe 300 years later, and much had been done to the material during that time. I do not know the answer to that difficulty.

It is my view that a symbol represented either Satan or Rome (maybe as agents of Satan??) and that John built on previously known images.

I have looked online for the book, "Ezekiel in the Apocalypse", without success. It intrigues me.

In the process of searching, I came across this one, which might be promising. When you select it, it downloads directly (at least it did to my computer).

https://www.era.lib.ed.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/1842/8887/Luo1999.pdf

Doug