Tumah
Veteran Member
Yes, but I believe it's through the Aramaic elah that leads to the Arabic ilah, which then became All_h.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
El in elohim
- Thread starter Fool
- Start date
'el was evidently the supreme god in canaanite the religion. we see its first inference to melchizedek in genesis.
Genesis 14:18
18 Then Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine. He was priest of God Most High,
melchizedek was a canaanite. the jewish encyclopedia claims him to be the son of cham.
cham was supposedly and ancient name for egypt. it is also where the word al-chemy comes from. it is also the land where alchemy was founded. some believe hermes to be melchizedek. out of egypt, or the furnace, i called my son.
sodom is called a furnace in another place. melchizedek is associated with destroying sodom by fire.
Genesis 19:28
He looked down toward Sodom and Gomorrah, toward all the land of the plain, and he saw dense smoke rising from the land, like smoke from a furnace.
fire acts as a catalyst and increases the rate of change, evolution.
Last edited:
is the 'el in 'elohiym ?
or
is the 'elohiym in 'el ?
Like asking:
Is Brahma in Brahman ?
or
Is Brahman in Brahma ?
isn't it !....and now I have a lesson in Yiddish and whatever !
Llewellyn Worldwide - Encyclopedia: The Khabs is in the Khu
Thelemapedia: The Encyclopedia of Thelema & Magick | Khu
Llewellyn Worldwide - Encyclopedia: Term: khabs
harpocrates
Last edited:
hey Fool,
Khabs is in the Khu,
not the Khu in the Khabs
But they're both in the Akh
If the Akh dies, they all die
one for one and one for all.
Ahhhh...now I know Egyptian
But I like mine better
Stars in galaxies
not galaxies in stars
and all in the Cosmos
and maybe....Jesus and God ???
I doubt it,
but one never knows,
does one ?
Khabs is in the Khu,
not the Khu in the Khabs
But they're both in the Akh
If the Akh dies, they all die
one for one and one for all.
Ahhhh...now I know Egyptian
But I like mine better
Stars in galaxies
not galaxies in stars
and all in the Cosmos
and maybe....Jesus and God ???
I doubt it,
but one never knows,
does one ?
allow me to help you from another perspective
are you in the universe,
or
is the universe in you?
EtuMalku
Abn Iblis ابن إبليس
You can't be serious? Genesis, if it was in fact written by Moses, would be around 1445 B.C. Mesopotamian culture and cosmology is at least 3500 B.C.
yes i agree but the general association to a monotheistic deity for the western world would come through the abrahamic association to the canaanites; which i wonder isn't mostly zoroastrianism.
another influence would be through the israelite exile via the babylonians. we see syncretism by these influences. i'm not denying the mesopotamian cultural influence.
sorry for the confusion
while the morning stars shouted for joy?
Daniel 12:3
Those who are wise will shine like the brightness of the heavens, and those who lead many to righteousness, like the stars for ever and ever.
InChrist
Free4ever
I believe the plural elohim is used to reveal the unity and diversity of the One God, Father, Son , and Holy Spirit.
The Hebrew word elohim (gods) occurs about 2500 times in the Old Testament, while the singular form (el) occurs only 250 times and most of those designate false gods. Genesis:1:1 reads, “In the beginning, elohim created the heaven and the earth”; that is, literally, “gods” created the heaven and the earth.” Though a single noun is available, yet the plural form is consistently used for God. And in violation of grammatical rules, with few exceptions, singular verbs and pronouns are used with this plural noun. Why?
At the burning bush it was elohim (gods) who spoke to Moses. Yet elohim did not say, “We are that we are,” but “I AM THAT I AM” (Exodus:3:14). One cannot escape the fact that all through the Bible God is presented as a plurality and yet as One, as having both diversity and unity. This is unique among all the world’s religions!
Nuggets from An Urgent Call to a Serious Faith by Dave Hunt - Nature and Trinity
Moreover, if God is a single Being, then why is the plural Hebrew noun elohim (literally "gods") used for God repeatedly? In fact, this plural noun is in the center of Israel's famous confession of the oneness of God! The Shema declares, "Hear, O Israel, The Lord our God is one Lord" (Deut 6:4; Mk 12:29). In the Hebrew it reads, "Jehovah our elohim [gods] is one [echad] Jehovah." The Hebrew word echad allows for a unity of more than one. For example, it is used in Genesis:2:24
where man and woman become one flesh; in Exodus:36:13
when the various parts "became one tabernacle"; in 2 Samuel:2:25
when many soldiers "became one troop"; and elsewhere.
Nor is the word elohim the only way in which God's plurality is presented. For example: Psalm:149:2
, "Let Israel rejoice in him that made him" (literally "makers"); Ecclesiastes:12:1
, "Remember now thy Creator (lit. "creators"); and Isaiah:54:5
, "For thy Maker is thine husband (lit. "makers, husbands"). Unitarianism has no explanation for this consistent presentation of God's plurality all through the Old Testament. Although the word "trinity" does not occur in the Bible, the concept is clearly there, providing the unity and diversity which makes possible the love, fellowship and communion within the Godhead. Truly the trinitarian God is love—and He alone.
The Trinity
rosends
Well-Known Member
A quick note -- the -im suffix is often associated with the masculine plural. But it isn't always. In a bunch of Hebrew words, the word in question is not a plural word (shamayim, mayim, chayim, panim, sky, water, life, face for example). Similarly, the word elohim has its number determined by context. A singular verb indicates a singular noun, not some "plurality" -- look in Ex 7:1 to see a case where it would be very difficult to understand any plural in use (apparently the NIV, page 6 explains the suffix as intensification, not number). This writer http://www.stateofformation.org/2015/05/but-not-in-number-one-and-many-in-hebrew-grammar/ points to the plural adjective associated with these nouns as pointing to a multiplicity of understanding.
Nachmanides understands the plural suffix to relate to an associated concept and he explains the words as "master of all other forces".
Nachmanides understands the plural suffix to relate to an associated concept and he explains the words as "master of all other forces".
Buddha Dharma
Dharma Practitioner
Yes, which is not what the word originally infers at all. In fact, Christians took Elohim and made it plural again after Jews had made it almost exclusively singular.
Elohim meant gods in a polytheistic sense at one time. This is why Exodus says YHVH-Elohim punished the Elohim of the Egyptians, and you see statements in the Bible about a council of gods.
Kelly of the Phoenix
Well-Known Member
Or the original polytheism was correct but the prophets and priests wanted to monopolize political and economic power and started arguing only one of them was real.
Hebrew lacks something like "everyone is happy"? The conjugation is clearly singular but we are obviously talking about more than one person.
I found this book rather helpful:
Canaanite Myths and Legends | Yahweh | Religious Texts
rosends
Well-Known Member
kulam s'meichim. All are happy. Plural noun and (predicate) adjective.
74x12
Well-Known Member
That's basically what he was already saying. I'm giving the alternative perspective.
Cary Cook
Member
First El meant one specific Canaanite god, who came to dominate the pantheon. Then el became the term for god in general. Then elohim became the term for gods plural. Early Canaanite literature spoke of gods plural. Then henotheists mushed it up, calling "el most high" elohim. By the time of Abraham, it was already fubar.
74x12
Well-Known Member
El was an older more traditional god of the Canaanite pantheon. The god that came to dominate the pantheon was not El, but Baal the storm god. So to me that points to how the Hebrews were right to worship Eloah and reject all the newer gods that came later from all the nations around them.