Polytheism and Canaanite origins of Hebrew religion.

[outlawState]

Re the "teraphim" cult.

It does appear that teraphim (household gods/spirits) formerly large in the era of Saul, latterly small (period of the kings), made of clay, were prevalent in ancient Israel together with YHWH worship (the State religion). These minature idols cannot be assumed to represent Asherah, who was, where worshipped, depicted by a large wooden pole (Hebrew asherim and made of wood cf Judges 6;25).

"Josiah (641/640 to 610/609 BC),a reforming king, did away with the magicians and wizards as well as with the teraphim and idols (

), all of which are grouped together as "abominations" (II Kings xxiii. 24). With these passages should also be compared Zech. x. 2 (R. V.): "for the teraphim have spoken vanity, and the diviners have seen a lie; and they have told false dreams.""
TERAPHIM - JewishEncyclopedia.com

So the existence of teraphim / household gods in the archaeology before the Babylonian captivity cannot be said to in any sense invalidate the biblical record, which is what you're trying to use it for.

 

[shunyadragon]

Reread the OT.

I have read and studied the OT, and it is clear when compared to the archaelogy. The Hebrews had a tradition of polytheism at minimum with a female God that changed to monotheism ~600 BCE when the Canaanite idol disappeared.

Jer 7:18 The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the Queen of Heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger.

Jer 44:17 But we will certainly do whatsoever thing goeth forth out of our own mouth, to burn incense unto the Queen of Heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, as we have done, we, and our fathers, our kings, and our princes, in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem: for then had we plenty of victuals, and were well, and saw no evil.

Jer 44:18 But since we left off to burn incense to the Queen of Heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, we have wanted all things, and have been consumed by the sword and by the famine.

 

[shunyadragon]

Re the "teraphim" cult.

It does appear that teraphim (household gods/spirits) formerly large in the era of Saul, latterly small (period of the kings), made of clay, were prevalent in ancient Israel together with YHWH worship (the State religion). These minature idols cannot be assumed to represent Asherah, who was, where worshipped, depicted by a large wooden pole (Hebrew asherim and made of wood cf Judges 6;25).

The clay female idols commonly found among Hebrews are very very similar to the Canaanite idols of Asherah, and it is widely accepted that they represent this Canaanite Goddess.

"Josiah (641/640 to 610/609 BC),a reforming king, did away with the magicians and wizards as well as with the teraphim and idols (

), all of which are grouped together as "abominations" (II Kings xxiii. 24). With these passages should also be compared Zech. x. 2 (R. V.): "for the teraphim have spoken vanity, and the diviners have seen a lie; and they have told false dreams.""
TERAPHIM - JewishEncyclopedia.com

This confirms my view and the archaeological record that the clay idols of the Canaanite Goddess disappeared ~600 BCE.

So the existence of teraphim / household gods in the archaeology before the Babylonian captivity cannot be said to in any sense invalidate the biblical record, which is what you're trying to use it for.

It does not invalidate the Biblical record, but confirms it that before ~600 BCE polytheism was a part of the Hebrew culture.

Jer 7:18 The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the Queen of Heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger.

Jer 44:17 But we will certainly do whatsoever thing goeth forth out of our own mouth, to burn incense unto the Queen of Heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, as we have done, we, and our fathers, our kings, and our princes, in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem: for then had we plenty of victuals, and were well, and saw no evil.

Jer 44:18 But since we left off to burn incense to the Queen of Heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, we have wanted all things, and have been consumed by the sword and by the famine.

 

[outlawState]

The clay female idols commonly found among Hebrews are very very similar to the Canaanite idols of Asherah, and it is widely accepted that they represent this Canaanite Goddess.

The question is what did those idols represent to the Hebrews of 900-600BC. The Asherah concept was long prevalent in Canaan:

"The term [Asherah] appears 40 times in the Hebrew Bible, usually in conjunction with the definite article “the.” The definite article in Hebrew is similar to English in that personal names do not take an article. For example, I am Ellen, not the Ellen. Thus it is clear that when the definite article is present that it is not a personal name, but this does not eliminate the possibility of it being a category of being (i.e., a type of goddess).....In Ugarit, she is Athirat, the wife of El. In Akkadian, she might be Asratum, the consort of Amurru (chief deity of early Babylon). In Phoenician, she is the mother goddess, which is different from Astarte, the fertility goddess. In the Hittite empire, she is goddess Asertu, who is married to Elkunirsa, the storm god."​

Asherah and the Asherim: Goddess or Cult Symbol? - Biblical Archaeology Society

It is clear that Asherah of old was associated with wooden poles in the ground, i.e. sacred trees, and equally associated with Ba'al worship, and extant before the 1200BC collapse of the great pagan empires. At the time we are talking about, 900BC-600BC the Asherah concept may have mutated from the grosser fertility cult symbol to just a feminine counterpart of YHWH.

The Kuntillet Ajrud (North Eastern Sinai) 9th/early 8th centuries BCE site described as “Yahweh and his Asherah.” Asherah is thus to be conceived as the "divine feminine" of today's feminists, a gnostic concept rooted in idolatry to be sure, but not necessary equivalent to the gross fertility rituals of the empires of pre 1200BC, which were overthrown by the sea peoples invasions.

This confirms my view and the archaeological record that the clay idols of the Canaanite Goddess disappeared ~600 BCE.



It does not invalidate the Biblical record, but confirms it that before ~600 BCE polytheism was a part of the Hebrew culture.

Jer 7:18 The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the Queen of Heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger.

Jer 44:17 But we will certainly do whatsoever thing goeth forth out of our own mouth, to burn incense unto the Queen of Heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, as we have done, we, and our fathers, our kings, and our princes, in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem: for then had we plenty of victuals, and were well, and saw no evil.

Jer 44:18 But since we left off to burn incense to the Queen of Heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, we have wanted all things, and have been consumed by the sword and by the famine.

I am not disagreeing with you here, but one has to distinguish the Canaanite Ba'al-Asherah concept from the heretical YHWH-Asherah concept.

 

[shunyadragon]

The question is what did those idols represent to the Hebrews of 900-600BC. The Asherah concept was long prevalent in Canaan:

"The term [Asherah] appears 40 times in the Hebrew Bible, usually in conjunction with the definite article “the.” The definite article in Hebrew is similar to English in that personal names do not take an article. For example, I am Ellen, not the Ellen. Thus it is clear that when the definite article is present that it is not a personal name, but this does not eliminate the possibility of it being a category of being (i.e., a type of goddess).....In Ugarit, she is Athirat, the wife of El. In Akkadian, she might be Asratum, the consort of Amurru (chief deity of early Babylon). In Phoenician, she is the mother goddess, which is different from Astarte, the fertility goddess. In the Hittite empire, she is goddess Asertu, who is married to Elkunirsa, the storm god."​

Asherah and the Asherim: Goddess or Cult Symbol? - Biblical Archaeology Society

It is clear that Asherah of old was associated with wooden poles in the ground, i.e. sacred trees, and equally associated with Ba'al worship, and extant before the 1200BC collapse of the great pagan empires. At the time we are talking about, 900BC-600BC the Asherah concept may have mutated from the grosser fertility cult symbol to just a feminine counterpart of YHWH.

The Kuntillet Ajrud (North Eastern Sinai) 9th/early 8th centuries BCE site described as “Yahweh and his Asherah.” Asherah is thus to be conceived as the "divine feminine" of today's feminists, a gnostic concept rooted in idolatry to be sure, but not necessary equivalent to the gross fertility rituals of the empires of pre 1200BC, which were overthrown by the sea peoples invasions.


I am not disagreeing with you here, but one has to distinguish the Canaanite Ba'al-Asherah concept from the heretical YHWH-Asherah concept.

I am not sure what differentiation you are trying to make. Both represent a form of polytheism, and yes different Canaanite tribes had different Gods.

I am familiar with this reference, and it basically agrees with my conclusions that the Hebrews evolved an independent culture, religion, and language from ~ 900 - 600 BCE.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

... it basically agrees with my conclusions that the Hebrews evolved an independent culture, religion, and language from ~ 900 - 600 BCE.

Claiming that "Hebrews evolved an independent culture ... 900 - 600 BCE" does not imply that Israel lacked an independent culture prior to 900 BCE, and most peoples evolve their culture, religion, and language over a span of three to four centuries.

 

[shunyadragon]

Claiming that "Hebrews evolved an independent culture ... 900 - 600 BCE" does not imply that Israel lacked an independent culture prior to 900 BCE, and most peoples evolve their culture, religion, and language over a span of three to four centuries.

The evidence implies that the Hebrews began as a Canaanite pastoral culture in the Hills of Judah. The time frame of the Hebrew culture became independent is open to conjecture, A degree of independence is obvious among the Canaanite tribes including the Ugarits, Moabites and Hebrews, but archaeology and linguistics have established relationships.

 

[outlawState]

The evidence implies that the Hebrews began as a Canaanite pastoral culture in the Hills of Judah. The time frame of the Hebrew culture became independent is open to conjecture, A degree of independence is obvious among the Canaanite tribes including the Ugarits, Moabites and Hebrews, but archaeology and linguistics have established relationships.

Unfortunately you've still failed to explain where the Israelite YHWH came from, at the beginning of this "culture" time frame.

 

[shunyadragon]

Unfortunately you've still failed to explain where the Israelite YHWH came from, at the beginning of this "culture" time frame.

I believe neither of us know for a fact where it came from. Of course, many theists believe it is the one true God. It is a matter of archaeology that different tribes had their own Gods, or their own names for the Gods.

 

[outlawState]

I believe neither of us know for a fact where it came from. Of course, many theists believe it is the one true God. It is a matter of archaeology that different tribes had their own Gods, or their own names for the Gods.

You don't have any answers. All pagan gods arose by copying and syncretism. Talking about culture does not address the issue as to where YHWH came from, nor the Egyptian connection in the bible. Your culture theory cannot stand as it provides no answers, only riddles. Even amongst scholars, Amos, dated mid 8th century BC,is deemed to indicate YHWH to be long established in Israel. YHWH is viewed as a "desert God" and thus not indigenous to the land of Canaan. The name is very unlikely to have spontaneously arisen in Canaan.

 

[shunyadragon]

You don't have any answers. All pagan gods arose by copying and syncretism. Talking about culture does not address the issue as to where YHWH came from, nor the Egyptian connection in the bible. Your culture theory cannot stand as it provides no answers, only riddles. Even amongst scholars, Amos, dated mid 8th century BC,is deemed to indicate that YHWH to be long established in Israel. YHWH is viewed as a "desert God" and thus not indigenous to the land of Canaan. The name is very unlikely to have spontaneously arisen in Canaan.

I do not question the history of YHWH as the God of the Hebrews, The argument concerns the history of polytheism among Hebrews,

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

The evidence implies that the Hebrews began as a Canaanite pastoral culture in the Hills of Judah.

That is an oversimplification, but don't let me step on your mantra.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Unfortunately you've still failed to explain where the Israelite YHWH came from, at the beginning of this "culture" time frame.

Sadly, you're wasting your time.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

All pagan gods arose by copying and syncretism.

What about the very first one?

 

[shunyadragon]

That is an oversimplification, but don't let me step on your mantra.

Step on any mantra you choice, but there is abundant literature supporting my view whether it is the correct on or not. I have studied this for many years and my first course in the early seventies. The reality is the Ugarit cuneiform is the closest link of Hebrew religion to more ancient polytheism than Canaanite texts. My first sources in class were: Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic Essays in the History of the Religion of Israel 1971 by Frank Moore Cross, and the first classic works published by W. F. Albright beginning in 1929.

I believe the archaeology research since has confirmed their work.

The following is a sample of the evidence based on archaelogy and the Ugarit/Canaanite texts.

From: Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic Essays in the History of the Religion of Israel 1971 by Frank Moore Cross,

‘El in the Ugaritic Pantheon The discovery of the Ugaritic texts beginning in 1929 and continuing into the present has removed any doubt that in the Canaanite pantheon ‘II was the proper name of the god par excellence, the head of the pantheon. While ‘if may be used, of course, as an appellative of deity, for example in such an expression as ‘il Haddu, “the god Haddu,” such usage is relatively rare. In mythic texts, in epic texts, in pantheon lists and temple records, ‘I1 is normally a proper name.’ That ‘El was the name of a particular deity should have been clear from the beginning from Sakkunyaton’s “Phoenician Theology” preserved in fragments in Philo Byblius who in turn was epitomized by Eusebius in the Praeparatio evangelica. 2 Moving to East Semitic we find again very ancient evidence that II was the proper name of a deity. II appears often in earliest Old Akkadian sources without the case ending,’ unambiguously the divine name and not an appellative.4 The forms Ilu and Ilum are ambiguous as are forms written logographically with DINGIR, but many of these forms, too, are no doubt the divine name. For example, the pattern DN-I,-lum does not occur, but kinship names (A&ifum A@-ilum, and so on) and like patterns (//urn-bdni, “II/God is my creator,” I/urn-qurdd. “II/God is a warrior”) are frequent and give the same picture of the god as ‘patron, creator, “god of the Father,” and warrior that we find in unambiguous names. One also finds names like I-Ii-DINGIR-lum /Iii-ilum/ “my god I. See the study of 0. Eissfeldt, El in ugaririschen Pamheon (Leipzig, Akademie Verlag, 1951) and the excellent treatment by M. Pope, El in fhe Ugaritic Texrs, VT Suppl. 2 (Leiden, 1955). 2. The best critical text is that of K. Mras, ed., Eusebius Werke, vol. 8, part 1, Die Praeparario evangelica (Berlin, 1954) 1.10. l-44 (hereafter referred to as Praep. evang.). Cf. C. Clemen, Die phiinikische Religion nach Philo van Bvblos (Leipzig, J. C. Hinrichs Verlag, 1939); 0. Eissfeldt. Ras Schamra und Sanchunjaron (Halle, Niemeyer. 1939): Sanchunjaton van Berut und Ilumilku van Ugarit (Halle. Niemeyer. 1952). The most thoroughgoing recent study of Sakkunyaton is the unpublished Harvard dissertation of Lynn R. Clapham, Sanchuniathon: The Firs1 Two Cycles (1969). 3. Exclusive of the predicate state. 4. See the recent study of J. M. Roberts, The Early Akkadian Pantheon to be published shortly by the Johns Hopkins Press. Cf. also 1. J. Gelb, Glossary of Old Akkadian, MAD’ (Chicago, 1957) pp. 2636, esp. p. 28; Old Akkadian Writing and Grammar, 2nd ed. MAD*(Chicago, 1961). pp. 139-142, 1455148. 1 4 The Religion of Canaan and the God of Israel is Il(um).” I. J. Gelb has gone so far as to say “we may note the very common use of the element If in Akkadian theophorous names, which seems to indicate that the god II (later Semitic ‘En was the chief divinity of the Mesopotamian Semites in the Pre-Sargonic period.“5 In the Amorite onomasticon of the eighteenth century B.C. the god ‘11 plays a large role.‘j Occasionally the divine name is spelled ila which many scholars have normalized /‘ilah/.’ It is perhaps best to take the -a of ila as a morpheme denoting predicate state both in Amorite and Old Akkadian.* Among the more interesting Amorite names are those compounded with sumu “the name,” sumuhu “his name,” plus the element ‘I1 or ‘ila. Kinship terms used as theophorous elements are also frequent with the name ‘11 in the onomasticon : ‘abum-‘ilu, “‘II is the (divine) father”; ‘adi-‘Ilu, “‘11 is my (divine) sire”; ‘a&m-ma-‘Il. “‘II is my (divine) brother”: FJali-ma-‘Nu, ‘ammu-‘IL, and fjatni-‘Ilu, all “‘II is my (divine) kinsman.” The divine proper name ‘II is frequently found in Old South Arabic. As we have noted, some of the patterns of Amorite ‘II names are found also in South Arabic. In view of the fact that ‘II appears as a proper name in the earliest strata of languages belonging to East Semitic, Northwest Semitic, and South Semitic, we may conclude that this denotation of ‘if belongs to Proto-Semitic as well as its use as a generic appellative. To argue that one of the two denotations takes priority is to speculate in the shadowy realm of a pre-Semitic language and is without point."

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

My first sources in class were: Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic Essays in the History of the Religion of Israel 1971 by Frank Moore Cross, and the first classic works published by W. F. Albright beginning in 1929.

Like the book. In fact, own the book. So, too, From Epic to Canon. Nevertheless, and despite your efforts to impress, the results are sophomoric and increasingly tiresome.

Gotta go; perhaps we'll chat more later.

 

[outlawState]

What about the very first one?

The first one was the devil, pandering to the idolatry of the "divine" feminine. Woman herself became the idol of Adam and so he sinned, being not deceived, but wilfully pandering to her deceived instructions.

Amongst the non-Adamites, the "divine" feminine had been worshipped for thousands of years previously outside the garden of Eden (Venus of Willendorl, Venus of Hohle Fels etc). After his sin, Adam was expelled from the garden to join the rest of the idolators. Many gods probably derived originally from human kings and rulers, who became exalted to the status of gods on their death.

 

[outlawState]

Step on any mantra you choice, but there is abundant literature supporting my view whether it is the correct on or not. I have studied this for many years and my first course in the early seventies. The reality is the Ugarit cuneiform is the closest link of Hebrew religion to more ancient polytheism than Canaanite texts.

All you can show is that the patriarchs used the same proper name for God as the Canaanites, which is not surprising as they derived from Canaan. There is nothing in what you have said that can remotely justify the revelation of YHWH to Moses as being other than per the biblical account.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

The first one was the devil, pandering to the idolatry of the "divine" feminine. Woman herself became the idol of Adam and so he sinned, being not deceived, but wilfully pandering to her deceived instructions.

That doesn't make any sense for a number of reasons:

1. At no point did Adam worship Eve or equate her with the divine;
2. Eve was created to be "an help meet" for Adam so what was he supposed to do, ignore her advice?
3. Eve was deceived by the serpent (operating on Yahweh's knowledge and presumably permission, unless Yahweh isn't actually omniscient) so Christianity says the fault is Eve's? Victim-blaming...
4. Yahweh placed the Tree of Knowledge in Eden knowing Adam & Eve would eat from it even though he told them not to. What's worse is he made the fruit beguiling That's entrapment so the fault ultimately lies with your god. Which brings me neatly to my next point;
5. Adam & Eve were created not knowing good or evil, right or wrong etc. It makes literally no sense to punish them for not acting within the constraints of a moral code they were created incapable of perceiving or understanding - and that your god chose to deny them access to;
6. Early Christians made depictions of the devil so that he resembled Pagan deities like Dionysus, whose worship was prominent at the time Christianity came into being. So technically the Christian Devil was copied from our gods;

At this point I should probably point out that my question was rhetorical as it's impossible to know for certain when, how or why humans developed the concept of a god or goddess as distinct from spirits.

Amongst the non-Adamites, the "divine" feminine had been worshipped for thousands of years previously outside the garden of Eden (Venus of Willendorl, Venus of Hohle Fels etc). After his sin, Adam was expelled from the garden to join the rest of the idolators. Many gods probably derived originally from human kings and rulers, who became exalted to the status of gods on their death.

So in other words humans existed before Adam and the doctrine of Original Sin has no basis whatsoever since Adam is ultimately not humanity's common ancestor.

 

[shunyadragon]

All you can show is that the patriarchs used the same proper name for God as the Canaanites, which is not surprising as they derived from Canaan. There is nothing in what you have said that can remotely justify the revelation of YHWH to Moses as being other than per the biblical account.

I can and have provided abundant evidence that polytheism, evolved from Canaanite/Ugarit beliefs, and was the dominant belief up until 600 BCE, which is the topic of the thread.

I have accepted YHWH as a God of the Hebrews likely back to 1400 BCE or earlier, but I also documented a close relationship linguistically and culturally, and polytheism up until ~600 BCE.

If you choose to justify the Revelation to Moses and the accounts of Exodus as accurate and dating to some point when Exodus took place, you need to do that in one of the other threads that deal with this issue, or start a thread to support your argument.