Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
8 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 7/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Origins of the Judeo-Christian god and religion
SuperNintendo Chalmers
Member (Idle past 5833 days)
Posts: 772
From: Bartlett, IL, USA
Joined: 12-27-2005


Message 1 of 282 (308268)
05-01-2006 5:29 PM


In some of the other threads about Islam the origins of the judeo-christian god and religion were also discussed.
I am not an expert on the subject, but I have been able to find some material out there and will do some more research. I'd be interested in what some of our members who might be more familiar with ancient history have to say on this subject.
From answers.com
Answers about Judaism
Central to these themes is the notion of monotheism, which most scholars believe to have been the outgrowth of a process that began with polytheism, progressed to henotheism (the worship of one god without denying the existence of others), and ended in the belief in a single Lord of the universe, uniquely different from all His creatures. He is compassionate toward His creation, and in turn humans are to love and fear (i.e., stand in awe of) Him. Because God is holy, He demands that His people be holy, righteous, and just, a kingdom of priests to assist in the fulfillment of His designs for humankind and the world.
and for kids!!! hehehe
Page not found - History for Kids
The first signs of monotheism in West Asia come from the Bible, where by around 1000 BC the Jews seem to have already thought that they should worship only their own one God. They clearly believed that there were many gods, but they should only worship theirs, and in exchange he would take care of them against all the other gods. They may have gotten this idea from the Egyptians.
and more:
Jesus brought the next wave of monotheism to West Asia six hundred years later with the development of Christianity. Christianity was the first religion to insist that not only should you worship only one god, but the other ones were not really even gods at all, but demons. This has some similarity to the Zoroastrian idea that some minor gods are on the side of the Lie, and some relationship to the Jewish idea that you should only worship your own one God, but it takes both ideas to more of an extreme. Christianity gradually took over most of the western part of West Asia, the part that was under Roman control, but the Sassanian part of West Asia remained Zoroastrian until about 700 AD.
I would love to read more on this and see what scholars think about the origins of the judeo-christian god (and really monotheism in general). It seems that people's polytheistic beliefs evolved into monotheism.

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by CK, posted 05-01-2006 6:42 PM SuperNintendo Chalmers has replied
 Message 5 by jar, posted 05-01-2006 7:55 PM SuperNintendo Chalmers has not replied
 Message 273 by Jon, posted 06-23-2006 3:41 AM SuperNintendo Chalmers has not replied
 Message 280 by SpecKeta, posted 05-26-2007 5:46 AM SuperNintendo Chalmers has not replied

  
AdminPD
Inactive Administrator


Message 2 of 282 (308294)
05-01-2006 6:36 PM


Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

  
CK
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 3 of 282 (308298)
05-01-2006 6:42 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by SuperNintendo Chalmers
05-01-2006 5:29 PM


I can see really problems with this thread unless you put some limitations on the discussion.
Bizzare as it might seems, putting the bible off limits to the discussion might be helpful.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by SuperNintendo Chalmers, posted 05-01-2006 5:29 PM SuperNintendo Chalmers has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by SuperNintendo Chalmers, posted 05-02-2006 12:09 AM CK has not replied

  
Dierotao
Junior Member (Idle past 6095 days)
Posts: 22
Joined: 04-03-2006


Message 4 of 282 (308311)
05-01-2006 7:27 PM


This is a good question. I looked around the web a little and tossed the idea around my mind a bit. And the first thing I thought of is: what is a "god"?
If a god can simply be any spiritual being, then any monotheistic religion would become polytheistic. Unless there happens to be a monotheistic religion which acknowledges one god, but not angels, demons or anything else of a purely spiritual nature. Christians believe in angels and demons and their abilities to alter the physical universe, should they then be considered polythiests? If those Christians see people worshiping carved wooden idols, and they say those idols represent a demonic spirit, or they say those idols represent a "god", is there really any difference? What then is the actual difference between polythiesm and monothiesm? What is a "god"?
Is it that monotheists believe there is one supreme, eternal god who created all else, whether spiritual or physical in nature? But if a polythiest believes that there is one "father/mother" god of all other gods (such as early Greek cosmological arguments concluded), would they be monotheists or polythiests?
Is it that monotheists believe the one supreme, eternal god has absolute control over all he created, whether spiritual of physical in nature? So if those Greek philosophers concluded the one father/mother god of all other gods wes necessarily powerful enough to control all he created, whether spiritual or physical in nature (could this first god create something, or somethings, more powerful than his ability to control?).
I realize the topic is "Origins of the Judea-Christian god and religion". So I hope I'm not taking this in a broader direction than you had intended. But as with any debate, terms must be defined and agreed upon sufficiently prior to proceeding with the actual debate.
-
Note: I realized that the first quote in the opening post defines "polytheism" apparently as the belief of multiple gods, as well as the worship of multiple gods. While this "henotheism" refers to the belief in multiple gods, though only the worship of one god. By dictionary.com's definition, "polytheism" is "The worship of or belief in more than one god"; while "henotheism is "Belief in one god without denying the existence of others". The line between them seems rather blurry by such definitions. My understanding of polytheism is that it never necessitates that one worship more than one god, but merely that one believe in the existence of more than one god. I fear this authors redefining such terms may lead to a great deal of needless debate, when in the end those debaters may disagree on nothing but the terms they use.
The reason I focus upon this so much, is that many "scholars" seem to wish to show this path of polytheism to monotheism as a form of intellectual evolution. However, if the jew 4,000 years ago says a idol represents a god, but the christian today says an idol represents a spirit, does this really show any "evolution" of religious beliefs?
This message has been edited by Dierotao, 05-01-2006 10:42 PM

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 5 of 282 (308315)
05-01-2006 7:55 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by SuperNintendo Chalmers
05-01-2006 5:29 PM


lots of Polytheism.
The growth of Judaism took place over thousands of years and did not really become monotheistic until fairly late in its history. For most of its history it simply saw the Hebrew God as one of many, the particular God of the tribal Hebrews and of their territory. The Nature of the God also changed dramatically, from the almost human God found in the old Genesis tales of Genesis 2&3 to the more sophisticated and remote God found in the later story in Genesis 1.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by SuperNintendo Chalmers, posted 05-01-2006 5:29 PM SuperNintendo Chalmers has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by arachnophilia, posted 05-01-2006 11:46 PM jar has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 6 of 282 (308350)
05-01-2006 11:46 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by jar
05-01-2006 7:55 PM


Re: lots of Polytheism.
The growth of Judaism took place over thousands of years and did not really become monotheistic until fairly late in its history. For most of its history it simply saw the Hebrew God as one of many, the particular God of the tribal Hebrews and of their territory. The Nature of the God also changed dramatically, from the almost human God found in the old Genesis tales of Genesis 2&3 to the more sophisticated and remote God found in the later story in Genesis 1.
it should be pointed out that the path was neither a steady nor gradual progression. at the point the bible was written, most of the religion was fairly strongly monotheistic, but much of the tradition it records is still henotheistic.
ironically, has the history progressed, parts actually became LESS monotheistic, with the invention of another god to rival yahweh's benevolence: satan.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by jar, posted 05-01-2006 7:55 PM jar has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 7 of 282 (308351)
05-01-2006 11:48 PM


repost, from the allah thread
once more into the fray.
faith writes:
a)All the other religions did too.
The Biblical God certainly didn't start out as a pagan god.
you really should research this claim a little better. because the FACT of the matter is that aspects and the name and titles of the biblical god exist as part of other cultures' polytheistic religions. we can find El in particular in quite a few cultures of the region as the cheif diety, and sometimes a wind god.
why do christians deny El's origin as a wind god? that claim is about as valid as your claim regarding islam. we don't worship a wind god any more than they do a moon good.
but look a little further, here. El, in ugarit, was Il, and he was head of a council of gods, the Ilohim. sound familiar? it should. do you really think "Elohim" didn't start out as a plural word, and became singular?
maybe we should look for som polytheistic tendencies in the bible. we'll ignore that "we" in genesis 1-3, even though the plural of majesty hadn't been invented yet. let's look at this verse:
quote:
Deu 32:8 When the most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.
Deu 32:9 For the LORD'S portion is his people; Jacob is the lot of his inheritance.
i've pointed this out before, i'm sure. god divided the sons of adam into nations in genesis 11, at babel. and he did it... according to the number of the children israel? when? there certainly weren't any at the time (israel hadn't been born yet). maybe the first generation? there's gotta be more than 12 nations. this really doesn't make any sense -- what do the children of israel have to do with the number of countries?
check the footnotes.
quote:
As in Dead Sea Scrolls, which read of the sons of God, and Greek version, which reads of the angels of god; Masoretic Text reads of the sons of Israel.
(from the nlt, not my favourite translation)
the dead sea scroll and the septuagint are older than the masoretic version. somebody changed something. now, let's think about the implications:
one angel/son of god per nation, except for israel which belongs to Yahweh. kind of sounds a lot like patron gods, don't you think?
quote:
Main Entry: heno·the·ism
Pronunciation: 'he-n&-(")thE-"i-z&m
Function: noun
: the worship of one god without denying the existence of other gods
now, look at stories from genesis again. abraham doesn't deny the gods of people he's visiting -- and they don't deny his god. in fact, they seem to quite respect each other's religions. even when elijah is proving to israel on mount carmel that Yahweh is their god, and not Ba'al, he doesn't deny the existance of Ba'al. read closely:
quote:
1Ki 18:36 And it came to pass at the time of the offering of the evening sacrifice, that Elijah the prophet came near, and said, LORD God of Abraham, Isaac, and of Israel, let it be known this day that thou art God in Israel, and that I am thy servant, and that I have done all these things at thy word.
this is why "Elohim" was preceded by god's name -- so you knew WHICH god they were talking about. not just any old god, YAHWEH god. even more curious is that god commands sacrifice to another spiritual entity, in the book of leviticus:
quote:
Lev 16:10 But the goat, on which the lot fell to be the scapegoat, shall be presented alive before the LORD, to make an atonement with him, and to let him go for Azazel into the wilderness.
and, of course, one of the most important points: abraham. abraham came from Ur, a place that was near the center of the akkadian/babylonian/sumerian empire. do you really suspect that abraham was NOT a polytheist living in the heart of babylon? do you think abram knew the lord as his only god before the covenant was made? before he was called out of ur?
The OP is about how the name came from the moon god. That's the whole topic. Now they worship some concept of one Creator God using the old pagan name.
and do we not do the same? Yah/Yaw is certainly present in other cultures. in ugarit, he was the son of Il, a member of the Elohim. some have even suggested that the name bears a phonetic relation with the akkadian/sumerian god Ea. The are pronounced the same.
original post: http://EvC Forum: Does Allah = Moon God?


Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Faith, posted 05-02-2006 12:39 AM arachnophilia has replied

  
SuperNintendo Chalmers
Member (Idle past 5833 days)
Posts: 772
From: Bartlett, IL, USA
Joined: 12-27-2005


Message 8 of 282 (308354)
05-02-2006 12:09 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by CK
05-01-2006 6:42 PM


Good point
This is intended to be a discussion of the history of the religion and not it's dogma, other than how that dogma arose. I am interested in how juadiam (and thus xtianity) came to be monotheistic and what the origins of the their concept of god was.
I don't think the bible needs to be off limits, but it should only be used to illustrate what judaism believed. I'm interested as to where the ideas in the bible came from, so it's not for use as evidence (if that makes sense)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by CK, posted 05-01-2006 6:42 PM CK has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 9 of 282 (308356)
05-02-2006 12:39 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by arachnophilia
05-01-2006 11:48 PM


Repost answered
Perhaps this is the source of your "evidence" that I just asked you to point me to on the other thread, so maybe I can deal with it here.
The Biblical God certainly didn't start out as a pagan god.
you really should research this claim a little better. because the FACT of the matter is that aspects and the name and titles of the biblical god exist as part of other cultures' polytheistic religions. we can find El in particular in quite a few cultures of the region as the cheif diety, and sometimes a wind god.
The Biblical God is THE God of all, UNCREATED, and therefore never a pagan god, which by definition is a CREATED being.
"Aspects of the name and titles existing in the cultures' polytheistic religions" only proves that the followers of the Biblical God used the terms of their culture to describe their new conception of God, it does not mean that these terms describe the same old polytheistic concepts, as clearly, from the context of the Bible itself, they did not.
why do christians deny El's origin as a wind god?
Maybe because this is a stupid idea -- concretistic thinking I believe is the term for it. "El" meant "god" and described all kinds of gods, including the wind god as well as the Lord of hosts when it was used in the Bible. "Elohim" is also sometimes used in the bible to refer to multiple "gods" or angels.
that claim is about as valid as your claim regarding islam. we don't worship a wind god any more than they do a moon good.
No, the connection with the moon god, or even another god in the polytheistic pantheon, was a HISTORICAL thing, not a mere linguistic connection which would be meaningless, just as it is in the Biblical connection you are trying to make. There is HISTORICAL evidence of Mohammed's choosing to promote the head god of the pantheon to the object of sole worship in Islam.
but look a little further, here. El, in ugarit, was Il, and he was head of a council of gods, the Ilohim. sound familiar? it should. do you really think "Elohim" didn't start out as a plural word, and became singular?
Huh? We KNOW Elohim is the plural of El, it's discussed in Bible studies all the time as an indicator of the Trinity in its use in Genesis among other things.
maybe we should look for som polytheistic tendencies in the bible. we'll ignore that "we" in genesis 1-3, even though the plural of majesty hadn't been invented yet. let's look at this verse:
Interesting you would ignore that plural in Genesis, which is theologically one of the many trinitarian references in the Old Testament.
Deu 32:8 When the most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.
Deu 32:9 For the LORD'S portion is his people; Jacob is the lot of his inheritance.
i've pointed this out before, i'm sure. god divided the sons of adam into nations in genesis 11, at babel. and he did it... according to the number of the children israel? when? there certainly weren't any at the time (israel hadn't been born yet). maybe the first generation? there's gotta be more than 12 nations. this really doesn't make any sense -- what do the children of israel have to do with the number of countries?
What on earth is your point here? I simply cannot follow your whole section on this topic. Perhaps you would be so kind as to try to put it more clearly for this ignorant fundie to follow? I know it supposedly feeds into your next comment but you lost me completely and I have a response to the next comment anyway:
now, look at stories from genesis again. abraham doesn't deny the gods of people he's visiting -- and they don't deny his god. in fact, they seem to quite respect each other's religions.
Your point is?
even when elijah is proving to israel on mount carmel that Yahweh is their god, and not Ba'al, he doesn't deny the existance of Ba'al. read closely:
1Ki 18:36 And it came to pass at the time of the offering of the evening sacrifice, that Elijah the prophet came near, and said, LORD God of Abraham, Isaac, and of Israel, let it be known this day that thou art God in Israel, and that I am thy servant, and that I have done all these things at thy word.
Arach, you are very confused about something and I'm not sure what. Nobody ever said there weren't all these other "gods" around. Where did you get that idea? Somewhere in Deuteronomy it is even revealed that those who worship them are worshiping demons. They certainly exist and nobody denies it.
{ABE: Here's the reference: Deu 32:17 They sacrificed unto devils, not to God; to gods whom they knew not, to new [gods that] came newly up, whom your fathers feared not. }
this is why "Elohim" was preceded by god's name -- so you knew WHICH god they were talking about. not just any old god, YAHWEH god.
Of course. What else is new?
No comment on your Azazel reading except that it sounds very weird and I'll look it up sometime.
and, of course, one of the most important points: abraham. abraham came from Ur, a place that was near the center of the akkadian/babylonian/sumerian empire. do you really suspect that abraham was NOT a polytheist living in the heart of babylon? do you think abram knew the lord as his only god before the covenant was made? before he was called out of ur?
Didn't I answer you sufficiently on the other thread? I had ALREADY mentioned myself that Abraham's family were polytheists. His family owned household idols. They became an issue in the time of Jacob when Rachel brought the family idol with her to her marriage with Jacob.
The OP is about how the name came from the moon god. That's the whole topic. Now they worship some concept of one Creator God using the old pagan name.
This is true.
The difference here is the HISTORICAL connection of Mohammed's specific use of the main god in Mecca as the one and only God. And perhaps this was legitimate in the sense that Allah was considered to be the creator God above all gods already, and what Mohammed did was eliminate all the OTHER gods, and did in that way make Islam more of an approximation to a worship of the true God.
No such historical connection pertains to the Biblical God. That is a story of polytheists GIVING UP their own polytheism in stages as they embrace the one true God who is never represented by an idol and who speaks directly to His chosen ones. This is not a moving of an old image into a new God as it was in Islam, this is the complete supplanting of the old conception by the new.
and do we not do the same? Yah/Yaw is certainly present in other cultures. in ugarit, he was the son of Il, a member of the Elohim. some have even suggested that the name bears a phonetic relation with the akkadian/sumerian god Ea. The are pronounced the same.
You have to do better than find a mere linguistic clang association for evidence. Prove that this Yah/Yaw has ANYTHING to do with Yahweh.
By the way, your link is wrong. It should be:
your original post.
and my answer to it, which I have elaborated above.
{Edited to add Deuteronomy reference to worship of demons/devils.}
This message has been edited by Faith, 05-02-2006 01:31 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by arachnophilia, posted 05-01-2006 11:48 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by arachnophilia, posted 05-02-2006 1:39 AM Faith has replied
 Message 24 by RickJB, posted 05-02-2006 4:02 AM Faith has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 10 of 282 (308363)
05-02-2006 1:39 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by Faith
05-02-2006 12:39 AM


maybe christianity is still polytheistic
The Biblical God is THE God of all, UNCREATED, and therefore never a pagan god, which by definition is a CREATED being.
surely the biblical god was perverted by a few pagan tribes. think of the three golden calves in the bible. think of the samarians.
"Aspects of the name and titles existing in the cultures' polytheistic religions" only proves that the followers of the Biblical God used the terms of their culture to describe their new conception of God, it does not mean that these terms describe the same old polytheistic concepts, as clearly, from the context of the Bible itself, they did not.
ok, now change the word "bible" to "qu'ran" and "god" to "allah" and re-read your own statement. why is this a valid answer for your religion, but not islam?
Maybe because this is a stupid idea -- concretistic thinking I believe is the term for it. "El" meant "god" and described all kinds of gods, including the wind god as well as the Lord of hosts when it was used in the Bible.
and muslims see your assertion as equally stupid. they don't worship the moon god, and it's not THEIR fault that some earlier pagans also called thier god "god."
surely, you also realize that the general term el- for god or gods is derived from a proper name of a god, el. the usage to mean "god" began as a name.
"Elohim" is also sometimes used in the bible to refer to multiple "gods" or angels.
yes.
No, the connection with the moon god, or even another god in the polytheistic pantheon, was a HISTORICAL thing, not a mere linguistic connection which would be meaningless, just as it is in the Biblical connection you are trying to make. There is HISTORICAL evidence of Mohammed's choosing to promote the head god of the pantheon to the object of sole worship in Islam.
yes, and there is historical evidence that the biblical tradition has roots in polytheism. and that el/yahweh is a member of a pantheon.
Huh? We KNOW Elohim is the plural of El, it's discussed in Bible studies all the time as an indicator of the Trinity in its use in Genesis.
*sigh* what did i tell you about taking a hebrew class instead of a bible study class? elohim is NOT a plural word, unless the grammar indicates it.
look:
‘, ‘ —
b'reishit, bara elohim. it doesn't say b'reishit barim elohim. if it DID, elohim would be plural. when referring to yahweh, it is always a singular noun, and the verb next to it is always singular.
the only acceptable explanation for the fact that it is a singular noun that looks plural, is that it began as a singular word, and became a name of a singular entity before it became a title (as it is used now, and in the bible).
seriously, faith. this is relatively simple hebrew grammar. no hebrew-speaking person with a third grade education would make such a claim. it is simply being used to read a preconcieved interpretation into the text. one that is not there.
interesting you would ignore that plural in Genesis, which is theologically one of the many trinitarian references in the Old Testament.
i was ignoring it because it's an obvious point. but fine. if you wanna play trinity, that's polytheism. muslims consider christians polytheists because of it.
What on earth is your point here? I simply cannot follow your whole section on this topic. Perhaps you would be so kind as to try to put it more clearly for this ignorant fundie to follow? I know it supposedly feeds into your next comment but you lost me completely and I have a response to the next comment anyway:
i think you missed the important point. according to deuteronomy, the sons of god watch over the other nations, one per nation. israel is the lord's portion. we have one divine being per country. that's the same exact idea as a patron god. they have their gods, we have our god. only their gods have been taken down a rank.
it is strongly indicative of henotheistic attitudes, which is the stepping-stone from polytheism.
Your point is?
my point is that it clearly demonstrates a step in the progress from polytheism to monotheism.
Arach, you are very confused about something and I'm not sure what. Nobody ever said there weren't all these other "gods" around. Where did you get that idea?
how many gods are there now? how many do you believe exist?
one? or many?
No comment on your Azazel reading except that it sounds very weird and I'll look it up sometime.
knock yourself out. azazel pops up in the book of enoch as one of god's angels (who falls).
Didn't I answer you sufficiently on the other thread? I had ALREADY mentioned myself that Abraham's family were polytheists. His family owned household idols. They became an issue in the time of Jacob when Rachel brought the family idol with her to her marriage with Jacob.
ok, so we have a family of polytheists (terah and co). from them, abram is called by the one true god -- a god who was concievably known the his fathers. after all, adam knew god, and the sons of adam called on the name of god. so yahweh was one very likely of their many gods. but he chooses abram to be the father of his chosen people, calls him out of ur, and gives him a bunch of land and a new name. he also reveals to him the (monotheistic) truth.
now, let's contrast this with the claim you're making about muslim's polytheistic origins, where one god is chosen from a group of many, and claimed to be the one true god. how exactly is it different?
see, i think you've got a bit of a problem here. yahweh, granted, is the one true god all along. but if he's worshipped as part of a pantheon before judaism is established (i'll be generous here) by abraham, then judaism came out of polytheistic religions. whether or not its the true religion.
you are applying an immense double standard here. your one god from many is real to you, and you believe in him, therefor the "out of many" part doesn't matter to you. why then can it be used against a muslim who feels the same way about his god? to him, allah was the one true god all along. and those other pantheists who happened to worship him are of no consequence, because it's the revelation to muhammed that matters. just like, to you, it's the revelation to abram, moses, and jesus that matter, not what abram's polytheistic family believed.
No such historical connection pertains to the Biblical God.
yes, you're right. because it's in the bible, and the bible is not history.
That is a story of polytheists GIVING UP their own polytheism in stages as they embrace the one true God who is never represented by an idol and who speaks directly to His chosen ones.
whoa, whoa. never represented by an idol. oh, wait deja vu. check those golden claves again from the beginning of this post. i think you'll find that the people who made them claimed them to be the god of abraham, isaac, and jacob (according to the bible). but you'll find that the god of the bible (which was written after those events, not before) is quite abhorrent of idolatry. allah, in qu'ran, is also quite abhorrent of idolatry -- so much so that the entirety of islamic art is geometric and does not depict anything. why do you think muslims got so offended over muhammed cartoons? it's against their religion to depict their god, their prophet, or anything at all. how can you possibly use claims of idolatry in the name of allah against them, when their commands against it? is your god a golden calf because someone once sculpted one and called it god? or would you laugh at that claim (as well you should)?
You have to do better than find a mere linguistic clang association for evidence. Prove that this Yah/Yaw has ANYTHING to do with Yahweh.
here's a good place to start:
Bible Search and Study Tools - Blue Letter Bible
hey, remember those golden calves? guess what el is portrayed as. and guess who's son yaw is. when the hebrews screw up and depict their god, why do you think they keep screwing up in this particular way? clearly, even they were confusing the two.
This message has been edited by arachnophilia, 05-02-2006 01:39 AM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Faith, posted 05-02-2006 12:39 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Faith, posted 05-02-2006 2:06 AM arachnophilia has replied
 Message 27 by Faith, posted 05-02-2006 10:13 AM arachnophilia has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 11 of 282 (308365)
05-02-2006 2:03 AM


does yahweh = the moon god?
Please point me back to your "proof" that "yah or yaw" has anything to do with Yahweh.
above i addressed concerns that "yahweh" is often refered to as "yah" and that the golden calf idols are a good indication of relation to gods in other cultures. besides which: yah is renamed "yam" which is the word for "sea." yam controls the waters, and the primordial chaos. this should sound familiar: hebrews have a similar traditions.
but i want to post an alternative theory, because it entertains the hell out of me.
there's another god named "yah." in egypt, yah is the, of all the things, the moon god. yes, i am serious.
now, moses was from egypt. he was a well educated prince of egypt, in fact. he goes off in the desert, and comes back with a new god. one named yah. egyptians already have a yah as one of their gods (and they've already tried the monotheism thing once, with the sun).
so moses, and egyptian, assigns some new properties to an egyptian god that already exists, and then leads a bunch of hebrews of into the desert. when his next-in-line takes over, he proceedes to conquer the holy land in the name of this egyptian moon good.
he is one god, revealed to a person who already knew a god of that name as part of a pantheon, and then that person instructs people to go and commit genocide, waging war on entire civilizations.
very ironically similar to the islam story we're being told.


Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by Faith, posted 05-02-2006 2:10 AM arachnophilia has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 12 of 282 (308366)
05-02-2006 2:06 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by arachnophilia
05-02-2006 1:39 AM


Re: maybe christianity is still polytheistic
surely the biblical god was perverted by a few pagan tribes. think of the three golden calves in the bible. think of the samarians.
I'll deal with your whole post tomorrow. Right now I just want to comment on this. For heaven's sake, of COURSE there was a TON of pagan influence among the people of God. They were saturated in polytheistic culture -- the God of Abraham was still a new thing to them. When they sinned they made idols of the sort the heathen tribes made. AND YAHWEH PUNISHED THEM FOR IT because He was teaching them the truth about His nature, that He cannot be known under an idol, that the heathen religions were false, that they must learn to know Him as the one and only invisible God over all things.
You seem to have a problem rightly dividing the word of Truth. You are always getting things backwards. The Bible reports on the actual situation of the times, it doesn't whitewash anything. It shows the idol worship of the times, and it CONSISTENTLY teaches that this sort of worship is false, that the true God cannot be worshiped in images, and in fact that those who worship idols are really worshiping demons or devils.
The idea that a religion so absolutely totally consciously committed to overthrowing polytheism and every false religion could still be polytheistic unbenownst to itself takes a degree of confusion or cynicism or hubris hard to comprehend.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by arachnophilia, posted 05-02-2006 1:39 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by arachnophilia, posted 05-02-2006 2:20 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 13 of 282 (308367)
05-02-2006 2:10 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by arachnophilia
05-02-2006 2:03 AM


Re: does yahweh = the moon god?
Do you know what a clang association is? It's finding nonexistent meanings in random similarities such as sounds, rhymes, etc. That is what you are doing with language. You are playing word games.
You have to show that any of those terms you are referring to have some REAL connection to Yahweh, something, anything. Your thinking that because they look like or sound like "Yahweh" they must somehow BE connected to Yahweh is about as bogus a bit of logic anyone could come up with.
What do these terms MEAN in their respective cultures and languages and their association with particular gods. Funny you don't seem interested in that. You just like the clang association.
Basically, Arach, you are babbling nonsense.
ABE: We KNOW that Mohammed designated the god "Allah" from the pre-Islamic pantheon as the one true God to be worshiped in Islam, though I am no longer convinced this was a moon god, but rather perhaps a god more along the lines of the Greeks' "Unknown God" that Paul preached about, that represented the creator God. Whichever, this transformation of an existing god to the God Allah is a historical fact. This is not a clang association. It actually happened in history.
You on the other hand have simply made up a story out of nothing -- a lot of disconnected circumstances -- to pretend Jehovah had a similar origin.
This message has been edited by Faith, 05-02-2006 02:22 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by arachnophilia, posted 05-02-2006 2:03 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by lfen, posted 05-02-2006 2:27 AM Faith has replied
 Message 17 by arachnophilia, posted 05-02-2006 2:34 AM Faith has replied
 Message 20 by lfen, posted 05-02-2006 2:46 AM Faith has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 14 of 282 (308370)
05-02-2006 2:20 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by Faith
05-02-2006 2:06 AM


Re: maybe christianity is still polytheistic
I'll deal with your whole post tomorrow. Right now I just want to comment on this. For heaven's sake, of COURSE there was a TON of pagan influence among the people of God. They were saturated in polytheistic culture -- the God of Abraham was still a new thing to them. When they sinned they made idols of the sort the heathen tribes made. AND YAHWEH PUNISHED THEM FOR IT because He was teaching them the truth about His nature, that He cannot be known under an idol, that the heathen religions were false, that they must learn to know Him as the one and only invisible God over all things.
and islam claims the same thing about their god. why is their claim wrong, and your's right?
You seem to have a problem rightly dividing the word of Truth.
you seem to have a problem sorting out fact from belief. your opinion of the bible = faith. which god you choose to believe in = faith. whether you believe your god to be derived from earlier polytheistic religions, or the one true god all along = faith. it is just as much faith for you as it is for a muslim.
The Bible reports on the actual situation of the times, it doesn't whitewash anything.
except when it does. i've pointed out an omission before.
It shows the idol worship of the times, and it CONSISTENTLY teaches that this sort of worship is false, that the true God cannot be worshiped in images, and in fact that those who worship idols are really worshiping demons or devils.
and the qu'ran says the same thing.
they have faith in their text. you have faith in your text. this amounts to a difference of OPINION and BELIEF not FACT.
The idea that a religion so absolutely totally consciously committed to overthrowing polytheism and every false religion could still be polytheistic unbenownst to itself takes a degree of confusion or cynicism or hubris hard to comprehend.
yes, faith. but this is what YOU allege, not what i allege. you make this very claim against islam -- a religion so commited to overthrowing polytheism, idolatry, and false religion that it creates people who openly wage war on those religions they see as polytheist, false, and idolatrous. they are so anti-idolatry that entire arab countries rioted in the streets over the mere fact that someone drew a picture of muhammed.
ever seen islamic art? it looks like this:
pretty much all of it. they take that law about not depicting their god, their prophet, or anything else pretty darned seriously.
so it is hard to comprehend the confusion or cynicism or hubris that goes into your idea that a religion like islam, that so absolutely, totally, conciously committed to overthrowing polytheism and every false religion could still be polytheistic unbeknownst to itself.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Faith, posted 05-02-2006 2:06 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by Faith, posted 05-02-2006 2:25 AM arachnophilia has replied
 Message 31 by Coragyps, posted 05-02-2006 11:06 AM arachnophilia has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 15 of 282 (308371)
05-02-2006 2:25 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by arachnophilia
05-02-2006 2:20 AM


Re: maybe christianity is still polytheistic
so it is hard to comprehend the confusion or cynicism or hubris that goes into your idea that a religion like islam, that so absolutely, totally, conciously committed to overthrowing polytheism and every false religion could still be polytheistic unbeknownst to itself.
You are not reading carefully. I have not said that Islam is NOW polytheistic EVER.
They are certainly adamantly anti-polytheistic.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by arachnophilia, posted 05-02-2006 2:20 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by arachnophilia, posted 05-02-2006 2:37 AM Faith has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024