Origins of the Judeo-Christian god and religion

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

Trying to turn back towards origins, the parallels between the founding of Islam, Judaism and Christianity are remarkable. In each case there is the tale of the Divine personally reaching out to a particular Prophet who is then told to go out and spread the word to the believers in polytheism. In the case of Judaism it is Abram, with Christianity it is Paul and with Islam it is Muhammad.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

But Allah is a generic word for God, not some particular diety.The parallels between Islam Judaism are remarkably deep. Both show a reverence for the actual name of GOD and so do not utter it. They instead use generic terms, to indicate that being that is above all and encompasses all. Allah = GOD = YWH.Throughout almost all of the Old Testament, the idea that there are other Gods and that those Gods are real Gods and not just some demons is central. YWH is the God of the Hebrews, their personal and territorial God. As late in the Bible as Kings, the idea that YWH is tied to a particular area and peoples is indicated by the tale of Naaman found in 2 Kings where Naaman takes some of the land of Israel back with him so that he can pray to YWH and YWH will have the power to hear those prayers.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Again, we all know that you do not believe that Allah = YWH, but the discrepancies you mention are really trivial when it comes to defining GOD and say nothing about the nature of the GOD.Judaism and Islam do not assign Jesus a position as divine but do consider Jesus as a special prophet. That has nothing to do with either the identity or nature of Allah or YWH.The issue of which is the chosen people is also trivial. According to the Bible everyone on earth is the child of a chosen person. To say that Isaac is the Father of the Hebrews does not preclude Ishmael being the Father of the Arabs.It does bring up yet more interesting parallels, in the fact that Ishmael supposedly engendered 12 tribes.Both can and IMHO are chosen as is all mankind.But we are talking about the origins of the Judeo-Christian god and religion. In that what I mentioned is a remarkable parallel. That in one of the tales GOD chooses to send the message by Angel does not change the parallel, throughout all of the books, Jewish, Christian and Muslim we find GOD sending messages by Angels.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Jar said: to which Faith replied: Thank you for supporting my position. Yes, Allah and El were both used as generic terms for Gods.The message of Abram, Paul and later Mohammad was that Allah is not a generic God, or part of a Pantheon, but rather the Primary GOD (in teh case of Abram which gradually over time was changed to being the only God). Again, that is not supported by the Bible itself. there are numerous instances in the Bible of tests between YWH and other Gods, and the picture particularly from the old testament is not that these sre demons, but rather the wrong God. The significance of being tied to a region is that the Hebrews believed, as did other peoples, that outside of YWHs personal territory he was not all powerful. This is tested several times in the Bible, in most cases the report is that YWH turns out to be more powerful than the other God (but not always) but that the other God is not shown to be a demon, but just not as powerful as YWH. This is the reason that Naaman takes some of the soil from Israel back with him. Whithout the soil, YWH would be powerless in Naamans homeland. In addition, Naaman is given saanction to go with his master when the master prays to his own God. Naaman is told, "No harm, no foul."

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Not exactly. Allah is still YWH. What is different is that the Christian belief that Jesus is divine is wrong.As Christians you and I belive that Jesus is the divine Son of GOD, of Allah, but that is just a belief. but guess what, neither the Jews or Muslims agree. No one agues that and it has nothing to do with Allah, but rather only of Christianity's views on Allah.Allah is still YWH. It is one thing to believe you are a Chosen People, yet another to believe you are the ONLY chosen people. According to the Bible GOD chose all mankind as his people. That is the meaning of one GOD. He changed his mind and then wiped out almost everybody and everything. All that was left was one family, one chosen family.Later Allah made a covenent with one of the children of that chosen family, Abram. Abram had a bunch of wives and lots of kids. Two of those kids were Isaac and Ishmael, but from different mothers. One of the wives, Sara, was jealous of Hagar and had Hagar and her baby son abandoned in the wilderness. That child was Ishmael while Sara's child was Isaac. Ishmael was the half brother of Isaac and the Father-in-law to Esau.But again, nothing in your quote has anything to do with the Nature or Origin of YWH/Allah. If you read the Qur'an and the Old Testament, the stories are remarkably consistent. The story of Abram's family is told from the decendents of Isaac in one book, the decendents of Ishmael in the other, but it is the same story.By the way, the deceit and preferential treatment of children continues to be shown in the Bible. Isaac marries a woman, Rebbeca, much like his mother, who then conspires to see one son cheated out of his inheritance similar to how Isaacs mother Sara had Hagar and her son abandoned to the desert.In Islam, Ismael is considered a prophet as is Isaac.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

We need to look at the history and timing of both the events and cultures in the area and also when the various books of the bible were put into some written form.Alot of the stories, like those found in the various Genesis creation tales are a mixture of different myths. The older one, that found in Genesis 2 & 3 show a very different God than the later one found in Genesis 1.The history of the peoples that became the Hebrews originates in the area around the Tigris and Euphrates. It's interesting that the Euphrates was known as Al Furat, note the Al. When the two join they are known as Shatt al Arab.The early stories of Abram and his jouneys would not have been possible except for the fact that the whole area from the Persian Gulf to Canaan was realatively peaceful and under the control of the Northern Kingdoms.But these are oral traditions, influenced by the the cultures of the period and the area.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

One key thing to remember is that there is no one defining moment when the Judaic and Christian God suddenly appears. It is a long evolution taking place over thousands of years.The stories leading up to Abram are very generic epic myths. They also set the stage with general geographic and political pictures of the world as seen by a people, most likely from the viewpoint of nomads living in the plain between the two great rivers, the Tigris and Euphrates. The stories are a combination of Just So stories that explain why things are the way they are, some of the local folk tales such as the flood (and there actually are indications of major floods in that area, some leaving layers more than 10 feet deep) and geopolitical lessons. For example, the geneologies of Noah outline the basic peoples of the area and break them down by language family and their location.The nature of the God also changes throughout the Old Testament. In the oldest tales, for example the second part of Genesis beginning after Genesis 2:4 we see a God that is entirely different than the far more sophisticated but also far later tale found in Genesis 1. In the former stories, we see the remnants of a God that is but one God of some group. For example when that God chases Adam and Eve out of the Garden of Eden it is so they will not become immortal and like "one of us".We first find something that could be an actual history in the tale of Abram. To learn more of the origins of that story you need to look at the era and locations that he lived in and traveled through.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

But that is exactly what the Bible portrays. As I have pointed out to you several times the story of Naaman is a clear indication of exactly that, and it is just one of a continuing picture throughout most of the Old Testament.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

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.He goes even further though and asks forgiveness when he goes with his master to worship his masters God's and bows down to them. And that too is granted.From 2 Kings 5: Henotheism is simply the recognition that there are other Gods. Naaman, once he had accepted YHWH was constrained by the rules of the YHWHists. That does not say that the other Gods were not real, seen as real and real Gods of their peoples and territories.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

They were the Gods of others, but not the God of Israel. That's pretty common throughout the Bible. Nice try, but that isn't why he took it. It was because YHWH had power over the territories of Isreal. If he was on Rimmon's territory Rimmon might well be more powerful. That's why the Philistines took the Ark.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Yes and I already posted it.2 Kings 5 That's why he needed the dirt, so he would be praying on the soil of YHWH.This is the same story with the Ark and with the Philistines. The Philistines took the Ark because that weakened the power of YHWH. But they found that YHWH still held power wherever the Ark was taken (notice only in the vacinity of the Ark itself) so they moved it from town to town until finally no one would take it. Then they decided to give the thing back.Peoples at that time strongly believed that Gods were tied to places and things.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

You know, it might be a good idea to actually read what I write and not just what you think I write. Obviously since you and I can each read the Bible and come to two different conclusions it must not be so clear.But we are not talking about whether or not there is only one GOD or who that God is, we are talking about the origins of the Bible. What were the cultural influence on the many people that wrote the various books of the Bible? One of the trends that can be seen in the Bible is the gradual cahnge from polytheism to henotheism to moniotheism to YHWHists.You use the term "Lord of Lords" and that is very appropriate. It harkens back to the very earliest days, the polytheistic days.You also seem to really misunderstand what I'm saying. I don't deny that YHWH is the one true GOD. What I am saying is that the folk that wrote the Bible were not yet monotheists. Those who wrote and lived in the time of Kings were not yet Monotheists. They were Henotheists.This change from polytheism to henotheism to monotheism and back to kinda polytheism in a state of denial is part of the story of the Bible. It's not the Message of the Bible, but it is the history to be found in the Bible.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

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

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