YHWH a minor pagan god: Ugaritic Texts and the Sons of El

by DoomVoyager 124 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Farkel
    Farkel

    I remember this excellent thread. It's too bad the WTS never researched and printed the scholarship and thought-provoking comments found in just this thread alone.

    The BEST the WTS ever came up with was books written by Fred Franz, a delusional maniac who drooled all over his writings and mostly ranted, while patting himself on the back and basking in the dub glory as a "guru" and a "scholar." Then he died, and now they only have "scholars" who worked their way up to that lofty position by wiping down ink on the printing presses and sweeping the paper scraps from the floors.

    Any current WT magazine would be an insult to a modern 6th grader in an honors English class. Or a 10th grader who was forced to take remedial English, for that matter.

    Farkel

  • hamsterbait
    hamsterbait

    This deserves a bump.

    NOW

  • mrsjones5
    mrsjones5

    Thank you Hammy.

  • *lost*
    *lost*

    bumped

  • Jon Preston
    Jon Preston

    Marked for ref

  • Hmmm.2
    Hmmm.2

    Hi. I'm new to the forum. And have been a lurker for quite a number of years now.

    Also, the reason why I finally decided to register at this forum is because of something that the poster named Leolaia wrote in her Post 11636 on page 1 on 9/22/2008. She wrote:

    It is telling that the polythesitic overtones of the Song of Moses (the only text in the OT which clearly portrays Yahweh as distinct from the supreme god, although there is an echo of the old scheme in Daniel 7, in which the "Ancient of Days" is described with language evocative of El and the "one like a son of man" is described with language evocative of Yahweh) were systematically obliterated in later scribal activity. This was likely due to the embarassing theological implications of the passage, as the revisions obscure its polytheistic implications:

    4QDeut j : "When Elyon gave the nations as an inheritance, when he separated the sons of man, he set the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God (bny 'l[hym]). For Yahweh's portion was his people; Jacob was the lot of his inheritance".
  • EndofMysteries
    EndofMysteries

    marked for later, I've been researching this subject for quite some time now. On the OP post I've leaned toward a similar idea.

    Any other's who are also researching this, along w/ the OP post other points to check would be who exactly is YHWH who is dealing w/ the Israelites, is YHWH the name of the father but the entity was a son who was using the name, when they made the golden calf idol and YHWH told them his angel was going to lead them and to obey that angel because he is very strict and not tolerant was it that angel who is leading in YHWH name who is unforgiving (any touch ark instant death, all the so called overly strict things) or YHWH himself, the first martry stephen brought out a quote from Isaiah that they had not been following God when wandering the wilderness but following another god and his star, was that talking about YHWH as the other they were following or that another was posing as him? When in the NT it speaks of the disgusting thing causing desolation and also of the man of lawlessness and the one who puts himself in the seat of GOd showing himself to be God, is that YHWH or one who disguises himself as YHWH? For example when wandering in wildnerness and commands and things supposedly from God were they from somebody posing as YHWH? In Revelation the beast puts everybody UNDER COMPULSION to worship him, does that mean everybody thinks it's the true God when it's not and that's how they are compulsed? Compare the flaming sword in the garden of eden w/ 2 cherubs on both sides with the sword portruding out of the mouth in revelation and with the descriptions in ezekiel of God's throne w/ 2 cherubs on both sides. Also compare that w/ the ark of the covenant w/ 2 cherubs on both sides.

    It all at first seems to be random details but when you look closely at it, it then seems to all be internconnected as an advanced puzzle.

  • Hmmm.2
    Hmmm.2

    Oops! Sorry about not finishing my above post, but I didn't know how to continue to write under the quotation.

    But anyway, I don't know if Leolaia is around right now, but I wanted to share with her some information that I discovered about the Deuteronomy 32:8-9 Dead Sea Scroll quote:

    Monday, 23rd January, 2012 by martin

    deut 32:8–9 and the ancient israelite pantheon?

    During a recent online debate the question of the meaning of Deut 32:8–9 was raised as evidence of the Bible’s affirmation of polytheism and the subordinate status of the God of Israel, Yhwh. The essence of the claim is that the version of this passage preserved in the DSS identifies El Elyon as head of a pantheon who assigns nations to various subordinate deities, and Israel is assigned to Yhwh in this process.

    The argument rests upon the alternate reading found in a fragment from cave 4 at Qumran (4Q37 or 4QDeut j ). 1 This fragment only preserves a few words from these verses.


    Here’s a diagram which illustrates the extent of the relevant fragment of 4QDeut j (i.e. 4Q37):

    [...]

    Ultimately, however, there are too many problems with both of these claims for them to be viable.

    1. There are a number of references to sons of God in the OT. A singular “son” of God is a designation for God’s appointed human king (e.g. Ps 2:7). Plural sons appears to refer to the members of a divine court, presumably angelic beings but certainly not “gods” (e.g. Gen 6:2, 4; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7).

      One particularly interesting text is Ps 82:6 which reads:

      ‏אני אמרתי אלהים אתם
      ובני עליון כלכם

      I said, “You are gods,
      and sons of ʿelyôn are you all!”

      The gods (אלהים, ʾelōhîm) who are sons of עליון, ʿelyôn, here are clearly human beings — albeit rulers.

    2. The term עליון (ʿelyôn) is used as an epithet in the ancient Near East for quite a number of deities, and elsewhere in the Old Testament (and, indeed, in the new when ὕψιστος is used) it refers to Yhwh. In this way the term itself is relatively generic as a designation for a deity. To claim it must refer to some deity other than Yhwh in Deut 32 fails to recognise this observation.

      There is certainly no warrant in any manuscript from the DSS to support the claim that this is a reference to a Canaanite deity named ʾEl-ʿElyôn since the fragment from the DSS does not even preserve this portion of the text. Futhermore, even this expression, when it does appear, is clearly identified as Yhwh (e.g. Gen 14:22).

    http://blog.shields-online.net/?p=308

    And I'll let you read the rest of the article. However, if this information is correct at the shields-up site, the Deuteronomy 32:8-9 DSS quote doesn't really conclusively say what you have quoted in your DSS quote.

    Also, the reason why I am concerned about this is because I am a former JW and a regular poster at the "Discuss Jehovah's Witnesses" Beliefnet website, and I used your Deuteronomy DSS quote in a debate with a JW at that site, and basically, I try to be as accurate as I can within those discussions.

    But please share any feedback that you may have about this. :-)

  • EndofMysteries
    EndofMysteries

    Also in Daniel Gabriel tells him that he had to go against the "prince of persia" (the angel or son who was put in charge of Persia) and that Michael is the only other angel supporting Israel and is the prince of Israel.

  • Heliocentric
    Heliocentric

    Marked

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit