Origins of the Judeo-Christian god and religion

you were given the impression that it was a gradual process of slowly becoming more and more lost. if adam himself started worshipping other gods, that's something a little different...

When Does Jewish History Begin? Only after the Babylonian Exile does the Word "Jew" begin to appear in Jewish books. Jew = Judean. Three major Issues:* God
* Temple
* TorahWere Israelites Monotheists?
Accordng to Nevi'im, the answer is no. The Israelites, like everyone else, seemed to worshp the Pantheon, with Hashem as the "Father of the Gods". In other words, they were henotheist - considering one god to be first, but accepting the existence of one major deity. In this, the concept of a national deity is spawned.Still, there were indivual monotheists, also considered purists.So...What about public worship?
Well, there was no public worship of of the Pantheon, or even public worship of minor gods..there was just the practice of worshipping the Israelite god, as to keep the purity of worship in check. In other words, public worship = monotheistic.

The information actually comes from here:
Jewish Theological Seminary - Inspiring the Jewish World

Faith, you do realize that you are also a member of a cult I hope.

There is no way the Israelites can be properly called henotheists, ...

The mainstream view of critical biblical scholarship accepts that Genesis-Joshua (perhaps Judges) is substantially devoid of reliable history and that it was in the Persian period that the bulk of Hebrew Bible literature was either composed or achieved its canonical shape.

For that reason I am not satisfied merely to conclude (as is that minimalist Dever, for instance) that the stories of Genesis to Joshua are unhistorical. I also want understand what the stories mean to communicate and why. To discover what the biblical writers knew is both impossible and misguided; the question of one untrained in the interpretation of ancient texts and bound to literality as the only criterion of validity remains. What the writers said and meant, who they were, who were their audience, and why they said what they did: these are questions for biblical critics of a historical bent. My reasons for thinking that most of the biblical writings were composed in the Persian period by urban intellectuals are manifold. Essentially, I ask what motives the writers might have had for compiling, in stages, an epic history that went back to creation, for inventing a twelve-tribe nation that escaped from Egypt and annihilated the Canaanites, generated several portraits of an ideal society set in a mythical wilderness scenario, developed an aniconic monotheistic religion and assigned it to antiquity, and so on (for the arguments in more detail, see Davies 2001).

It is not henotheism if it is warned against and punished to worship any other gods than Yahweh.

17 "If you will not," said Naaman, "please let me, your servant, be given as much earth as a pair of mules can carry, for your servant will never again make burnt offerings and sacrifices to any other god but the LORD. 18 But may the LORD forgive your servant for this one thing: When my master enters the temple of Rimmon to bow down and he is leaning on my arm and I bow there also”when I bow down in the temple of Rimmon, may the LORD forgive your servant for this."19 "Go in peace," Elisha said.

That is the direction I expected this thread to go in from the beginning -- into modern critical scholarship that denies the inspired nature of the scriptures and imputes it all to human work. You may get Brian and Arach and a few others to join in, but their premises conflict with mine so I should probably consider my contribution here finished unless posts continue to be addressed to me.

No, that's incorrect. Under henotheism it doesn'tr matter if the other God's are warned against. YHWH is the God of the Hebrews, of Israel, but other Gods were recognized as the Gods of other Nations and peoples.

But in the case of Naaman even that is immaterial. When Naaman is about to return home after being cured, he asks for some of the soil to take with him so that he can worship YHWH on YHWH's soil. That's because YHWH was the God of Israel and would be powerless on the soil of his homeland. He's given the soil to take back with him.

Well, that implies an official recognition of them as true Gods, a legitimizing of them.

The Promised Land is considered holy by some even today, as the land where the God of all Gods Himself chose to plant His temple. Naaman knew who the God of Israel really was, THE God of Gods. If there was any spiritual purpose in taking the soil, it was probably to let Rimmon know he belonged to Yahweh, not to him.