A thought occurs: If you set aside Isaiah and Moses (especially Deuteronomy) what basis is left for monotheism?
For Higher Critics-Why does NT have a TRINITARIAN slant so foreign to OT
by jwfacts 25 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Midget-Sasquatch
Hi LT,
Are we just talking about OT texts that were somehow used by later christians? That would be interesting to see.
If we're talking about the OT in general, then Ezra and Nehemiah may do so to some extent. Although they may more precisely be said to be stressing exclusive worship to Yahweh.
-
Leolaia
If we're talking about the OT in general, then Ezra and Nehemiah may do so to some extent. Although they may more precisely be said to be stressing exclusive worship to Yahweh.
Yeah, that doesn't cut it. "Only Yahweh must be worshipped" is not the same thing as saying "Yahweh is the only god that exists". The former is an example of henotheism, the later an example of monotheism. Even Deuteronomy evidences the former, tho its text in ch. 32 has been altered to remove henotheistic overtones....
-
Midget-Sasquatch
Understood. Was I mistaken then to think that monotheism was in full swing among the returnees to Judah post exhile?
Is the statement at Nehemia 9:6 to be understood as a developing stage between monotheism and henotheism?
-
Narkissos
I guess we should not imagine the shift from henotheism to monotheism as a uniform, unanimous and instantaneous "event" even in a limited group such as "the returnees of Judah". If we look at the extant Torah as a picture of the ideological battlefield within the post-exilic Jerusalem establishment -- not to mention dissident groups, the `am ha-'arets or the diaspora communities which had little direct part in the writing / redaction -- we still find a wide variety of heno/monotheisms which are logically incompatible but were obviously all acceptable to the same community. Only from a logical, not religious perspective are expressions such as "Yhwh is above all gods," "the only one to be worshipped," "the only one that exists" mutually exclusive. Practically they could easily coexist in liturgy, as they still do.
One of the major interpretative issues, which doesn't exactly correspond with the distinction between henotheism and monotheism, is that of exclusivism vs. inclusivism. In Deuteronomy we have a strongly exclusive henotheism: Israel must absolutely reject other gods, not because they do not exist, but because Israel is Yhwh's people and Yhwh is jealous (i.e., of other gods which are real). In Deutero-Isaiah we have an exclusive monotheism: other "gods" are not "gods," only "idols," they are "nothing" but their nothingness is still dangerous somehow. In many patriarchal stories, or the novellae of Joseph, Ruth or Jonah, we have a completely different, inclusivistic, view of monotheism, where "God" relates to Gentiles in spite of, or even through the names of, their own deities. This I think was practically a more important difference within heno/monotheism than the very difference between henotheism and monotheism (which I guess rarely emerged to consciousness).
-
jwfacts
Hi Nark, welcome back, have you been on holidays?
When you say the Jews were polytheistic, is that based on passages from the OT, or other historical Jewish works?
-
Midget-Sasquatch
I can see henotheistic and ditheistic trends continuing within the diaspora (the inclusive theism makes for better integration). I can also see how there was still some form of henotheism among the post-exile community in Judah with many having Moabite wives. I was under the impression that around that time, exclusivism was being reinforced in the community along with the notion that there was only one true God. But is that a bias I'm picking up by how the NWT translates Nehemiah? In several places, it inserts the word "true" to make the phrase "the [true] God" as opposed to "the God".
-
LittleToe
Didier:
In Deuteronomy we have a strongly exclusive henotheism: Israel must absolutely reject other gods, not because they do not exist, but because Israel is Yhwh's people and Yhwh is jealous (i.e., of other gods which are real). In Deutero-Isaiah we have an exclusive monotheism: other "gods" are not "gods," only "idols," they are "nothing" but their nothingness is still dangerous somehow.
That little gem made it worth responding to this thread, for me. Thank you, my friend (though that thanks is inclusive, as it must be shared with the other posters, but you may take the Eldest brother's double portion ).
-
Terry
A fact that must be faced is this: if a monotheistic Jehovah really performed so well for Israel and so evidently; why would there be ANY temptation to try another brand of god?
It seems pretty logical that people only switch brands when there is NON-PERFORMANCE or dissatisfaction.
As the people of the Middle East bumped into stronger cultures with more fully developed religious mythos it caused them to "window-shop".
When you see a better god or system of gods more highly refined than your own and that system is represented by a people more advanced than you it is only natural to look into the matter and try on the features and benefits for yourself.
Israel had fallen many times to Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Greeks and Romans. If the MONOtheism didn't work to preserve them, why wouldn't they absorb the shiny knobs and whistles of the greater and abandon the lesser? (Each time Israel fell it picked up language, ideas and behavior which aped the aggressors. (We confuse ourselves if we think the operative cult of monotheism represents ALL the people. That can be a trap set by the redactors of scripture to paint a lovely picture of a chosen people.)
Certainly, there was always a fanatical core of Luddite-style cultists who clung to the STORY with the strong mythos of "chosen people who will be given a "Messiah". (It is only when you are oppressed and dominated that you need rescue by a hero) It was all they had that made them SPECIAL! However, when you are practically wiped out--you could stand a good RETHINK. What size hero do you need? Man-size or God-size?
The new and improved MESSIAH (Jesus) only really worked (to defeat awesome enemies such as Rome) when he was on par with Deity.
A frail executed miracle worker with catch-phrases isn't enough in trying times.
I think the marketplace of ideas changes one's tastes and that is how the Jewish concepts became paganized.
-
Midget-Sasquatch
(We confuse ourselves if we think the operative cult of monotheism represents ALL the people. That can be a trap set by the redactors of scripture to paint a lovely picture of a chosen people.)
Like Ezra did? To legitimize and get the Jews to invest in the Establishment of the period?
I may have been hoodwinked by Nehemiah.