Origins of the Judeo-Christian god and religion

And no one has said that it didn't appreciate the greatness of YHWH. He did. That's why he wanted the soil, so that he could pray to YHWH on YHWH's teritory.What the Bible is telling gives us a glimpse into the mindset of the peoples of the time. The reason Naaman is worried about going with his master and bowing to Rimon is because he believed Rimmon was another God, the God of his homeland. Elisha believed the same thing. Elisha doesn't say "Don't worry about it because Rimmon doesn't even really exist" because he too believes that Rimmon is the God of Raaman's homeland. Rimmon is seen by the people of the time, Israelite and Syrian alike as a real God, just not the RIGHT God, not the God of Israel or of Raaman.Faith, the story in the Bible, the polytheism and henotheism does not say anything about GOD. It only speaks of the attitudes and beliefs of the people who wrote the books, and their audience.The Map is not the Territory.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This is complete nonsense. There is a change TO polytheism from Adam on as the effects of the Fall settled in, but YHWH is the God of Israel from the calling of Abraham throughout. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob followed YHWH and so did Moses. They all had to be trained in His ways but they had no other Gods and acknowledged no other Gods as legitimate. The first three of the Ten Commandments establish Yahweh's supremacy. The name I Am that I Am is the same as saying God has no beginning and no end, is eternal and self-existent. There IS no other God than Yahweh. He IS God. The other "gods" are all usurpers, either man-made or demonic in origin. The idea that they were EVER recognized by Israel as legitimate in any sense at all is ridiculous. Yes, the people were vulnerable to seduction to following all the heathen gods, but they were also condemned for it. The term applies only to the one true God who rules over all things. The very idea that it has any relation to anything polytheistic is ridiculous. The only "polytheistic days" among the people of God refer to what they came OUT of and had to be trained out of too. IN Israel there was to be no more polytheism from the very beginning. It was Moses who wrote the first five books and Moses was a dedicated servant of the one true God. Whether you believe in Yahweh or not, there is no excuse for claiming the Bible is not about Yahweh, God of Gods, from beginning to end, and the answer to polytheism from beginning to end. Nonsense. From beginning to end the Bible is a testimony to the one true Creator God, and humanity's fickleness in recognizing and following Him, and being seduced by manmade and demonic gods instead. There is no other trend in the Bible. I had no idea that Liberal Christianity had gone this far in denying what the Bible is all about -- unless this is all your own idea and doesn't come from Liberal Christianity.

No, the reason is that he didn't want to lose his position as the Syrian King's right-hand man. Elisha may have allowed Naaman his weakness as a new convert from an idolatrous background untrained in the ways of God, but he certainly did not acknowledge the god of Syria in any way at all. Where are you getting this nonsense? The Bible is chock full of statements about how the gods of the heathen are false gods, not real gods, gods who can do nothing for people, "empty cisterns" and so on.ABE: It's not that these "gods" "don't exist" -- it's that they are not real gods with any real power. Good grief, the writers of the Bible, every last one of them, was a dedicated servant of YAHWEH. There is no message but that YAHWEH is the God of all the earth from beginning to end. Your map must be of some distant planet. It sure has nothing to do with Biblical religion.This message has been edited by Faith, 05-05-2006 11:45 AMThis message has been edited by Faith, 05-05-2006 11:47 AM

Faith, really, try to read what I write and respond to what I'm saying, not what you think I'm saying.I wrote: to which you responded: Faith, your response has absolutely nothing to do with what I said.You seem to have answered the question "Why would Raaman go into Rimmon's temple with his master?", and that is likely a good explanation. Another would be that he respected his master and his masters beliefs.But that has nothing to do with what I said. Again, what I said was: Rimmon is worried about the act of bowing in the temple of Rimmon. Why? The reason is that Raaman has become a YHWHist, that he now accepted YHWH as his personal God and not Rimmon. But that does not make Rimmon not a God.There is nothing in the story that implies that Raaman does not believe that Rimmon is a God, or that he tells his master that the only God is YHWH, or that he even thinks that. Instead, it is quite clear, he says: "...for your servant will never again make burnt offerings and sacrifices to any other god but the LORD.There's nothing in there that says there is no other God than YYHWH, only that Raaman will not pray to any other God but YHWH, that Raaman has accepted YHWH as his personal God and that he has become a YHWHist.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Which is exactly what I answered. He doesn't necessarily believe Rimmon is a real god (unless he has no real understanding of Yahweh, which is possible, and if so doesn't reflect on Israeli belief), he simply does not want to offend his master who DOES believe Rommon is a real god. Depends on what Naaman's mental set is. Perhaps you are right and he is still a heathen who hasn't let go of his old religion yet. But as far as the God of Israel goes, in fact Rimmon is not a God. Not in the sense that it is nonexistent but in the sense that it has no powers. Yahweh cancels out all other gods. Message of OT beginning to end.However, again, I don't know about Naaman's grasp of the nature of Yahweh. It may be that, being a Syrian, he doesn't fully understand. He's experienced God's power, but does he get that this power puts Yahweh above all other Gods? Hard to know. But in any case, what Naaman believes has nothing to do with the God of Israel and their view of Him. Yes, I grasp the way you have the language all tangled up. Nobody says the other "gods" are "nonexistent" -- what would be the point of that? The other nations all have their gods. They are a major part of their life. Deuteronomy 32 somewhere says that to sacrifice to an idol is to sacrifice to a demon, which means they are even real in the sense of having a living being behind them. The point is that they are FALSE gods. YAHWEH is the only true God.I'm sure you can point to some circumstantial facts to prove that Yahweh only takes on this character later in the OT, but I see this same character affirmed from the very beginning on.

quote:

---

The point is that they are FALSE gods.

---

But where does the Bible clearly support that they were false gods?

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

You would agree that William Albright was a scholar of deep faith and immense scholarship?Or what about Nelson Glueck or George Wright, or John Bright?Do you agree that any or all of these men are men of deep faith and immense scholarship?Brian.

Is there anything that is absolute about archaeology, if so, can you give an example or two?Brian.

To get a feel for some of the early origins of the authors of the Bible, look to Sumer. The region identified as Sumer was an old old civilization dating back to at least 6000 BCE and maybe as far back as 9000BCE. By the time of Abraham it was an old, old developed nation that pretty much controled the area stretching from the Persian Gulf to what today would be Lebanon.The traditions of the Sumerians include a long list of Kings, many who were likely mythological. One of the first that can actually be identified is Enmebaragesi who was the King of one of the City States, supposedly lived 900 years and was captured by one of the predessors of Gilgamesh.Abraham lived much later in a town that was likely a sea port on the Euphrates leading into the Persian Gulf. He would have been familar with the tales of floods, of long lived Kinds, of Giants. For some reason, perhaps a flood, perhaps a drought, perhaps because the river had silted in and was no longer close to the Persian Gulf, he and his family packed up and decided to move to the frontier.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

...so you're saying evidence that's actually in the bible doesn't count? i just want to know the bit in the bible you're referring to when you assert that all of the ancestors of the jews were "godly" and therefor could not have worshipped idols (contrary to what joshua says).that's pretty on-topic.

---

What about a few names of these great great men of deep faith so that we can examine their credentials for ourselves?brian

well yes, they did worship yehwah along with other gods, sometime beside him sometimes below him, a lot of scripture is written to condem the practices of returning to other gods.
most of the scripture was written by yehwahists not the polythieists so i wouldn't think you'd see any good things about other godsheck they did worship some of the gods in the temple along side yehwah, they found evidence of this

ok you have no clue about how people thought back then, to everyone even the israelits rimmon was a god, but yehwah was a better god, a stronger one. it has powers just as much as yehwah, but yehwah beat rimmon. i guess that can be your message but don't expect anyone to agree with you on it they arn't considered by the people back then false, maybe the authors wanted them to not lose belief in yehwah though, so they made them out to be demons, i would say that the priests wanted people to only worship thier god.
I read that later along the line, yehwah starts taking on attbutes that all the others had, including female ones, so the hebrews wouldn't stray i read that they really only start considering yehwah the only god after the exile, ie: everything else is false or a demon

The Bible is a record of a COUNTERCULTURAL MOVEMENT, you could say. What people normally did in those days is SPECIFICALLY BEING COUNTERED, CONTRADICTED AND CORRECTED by the revelation of the Biblical God. Therefore to apply to it the standards of the cultures surrounding the Israelites is to completely miss the point.This message has been edited by Faith, 05-05-2006 09:36 PM

Sure if you discount all the supernatural parts of the Bible you could come up with such a scenario. That seems to be what this thread is about, or what SNC intended it to be -- all the speculations about the Israelites leaving out the whole point of their history as the work of the one true God. Just surgically remove all those parts that are so offensive to modern man and you get something like:Abraham moved to Canaan as the Bible says he did but for some natural reason or just because he wanted to, rather than because God called him to.Abraham invented his religion, made up his god out of his knowledge of the existing gods in Ur, rather than that the true God Himself called him and taught him things about Himself Abraham could never have invented.Etc.This message has been edited by Faith, 05-06-2006 09:32 AM