The following is a short, but well-written, article which is why I am sharing it here:

University of Idaho -- Hebrew Henotheism

For those who do not wish to read it in its entirety, here are some highlights:

Quote:"God has taken his place in the divine council; in the midst of the gods he holds judgment." (Psalm 82:1)

    Some Christian commentators have taken the ontological pluralism of 'elohîm as definite proof of the Trinity. Genesis 18, where three mysterious visitors come to Abraham, has been used to support this view.19 But rather than imposing a Christian view developed two millennia later on the Hebrews, the proper hermeneutic strategy would be to place it in the context of the religions of the ancient Near East.

    Theodore Gaster has done just this and discovered that the story has basic similarities with the polytheistic folklore motif of "hospitality rewarded." Gaster explains: "The classic parallel is the tale, told by Ovid and Hyginus of how Jupiter, Neptune, and Mercury (i.e., three visitors, as in the biblical narrative), while traveling through Boeotia, came in disguise to Hyrieus, a childless peasant of Tanagra, and in return for his hospitality, granted him the boon of a son.20 This story goes back at least as far as Pindar (518-438 B.C.E.)

    On our theory, pure monotheism did not come to the Hebrew scriptures until the writings of Deutero-Isaiah, i.e., during and after the Babylonian captivity in the sixth century B.C.E. Indications of monotheism before Deutero-Isaiah must then be the work of later monotheistic editors. We have seen how later scribes did not hesitate to change passages (Deut. 32:8; Gen. 31:53) which had explicit polytheistic implications. It is significant to note that the monotheistic passages in Isaiah (like 45:21, 22; 46:90) come after Cyrus the Great has been named the Lord's Messiah, "anointed one," in 45:1. Cyrus was a Zoroastrian, one who worshipped the single, supreme God Ahura Mazda. Many scholars believe that Zoroastrianism was the world's first truly monotheistic religion and that Hebrew religion was influenced profoundly by the fact that the new state of Israel was a small province in a great Persian empire.

Of course, discussion is most welcome!

The issue of claiming monotheism when there was a history of polytheism isn't lost on me.

(October 14, 2022 at 7:33 pm)Jehanne Wrote: The following is a short, but well-written, article which is why I am sharing it here:

University of Idaho -- Hebrew Henotheism

Thanks for posting that. I printed the article for a friend who is into studying biblical history. 

(October 14, 2022 at 7:33 pm)Jehanne Wrote: The following is a short, but well-written, article which is why I am sharing it here:

University of Idaho -- Hebrew Henotheism

For those who do not wish to read it in its entirety, here are some highlights:

Quote:"God has taken his place in the divine council; in the midst of the gods he holds judgment." (Psalm 82:1)

    Some Christian commentators have taken the ontological pluralism of 'elohîm as definite proof of the Trinity. Genesis 18, where three mysterious visitors come to Abraham, has been used to support this view.19 But rather than imposing a Christian view developed two millennia later on the Hebrews, the proper hermeneutic strategy would be to place it in the context of the religions of the ancient Near East.

    Theodore Gaster has done just this and discovered that the story has basic similarities with the polytheistic folklore motif of "hospitality rewarded." Gaster explains: "The classic parallel is the tale, told by Ovid and Hyginus of how Jupiter, Neptune, and Mercury (i.e., three visitors, as in the biblical narrative), while traveling through Boeotia, came in disguise to Hyrieus, a childless peasant of Tanagra, and in return for his hospitality, granted him the boon of a son.20 This story goes back at least as far as Pindar (518-438 B.C.E.)

    On our theory, pure monotheism did not come to the Hebrew scriptures until the writings of Deutero-Isaiah, i.e., during and after the Babylonian captivity in the sixth century B.C.E. Indications of monotheism before Deutero-Isaiah must then be the work of later monotheistic editors. We have seen how later scribes did not hesitate to change passages (Deut. 32:8; Gen. 31:53) which had explicit polytheistic implications. It is significant to note that the monotheistic passages in Isaiah (like 45:21, 22; 46:90) come after Cyrus the Great has been named the Lord's Messiah, "anointed one," in 45:1. Cyrus was a Zoroastrian, one who worshipped the single, supreme God Ahura Mazda. Many scholars believe that Zoroastrianism was the world's first truly monotheistic religion and that Hebrew religion was influenced profoundly by the fact that the new state of Israel was a small province in a great Persian empire.

Of course, discussion is most welcome!

Context is everything, plus there is a huge distinction between capitalized 'God' and lowercase 'god'. Mankind was created in the image of God, and therefore are the lowercase gods, I'm saying this in general, because 'god' can only be applied to those 'who are sons of God' and were with him from the beginning, or were among the "Elohim"


1 {A Psalm of Asaph.} God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.

2 How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? Selah.

3 Defend the poor and fatherless: do justice to the afflicted and needy.

4 Deliver the poor and needy: rid them out of the hand of the wicked.

5 They know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of course.

6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.

7 But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.

8 Arise, O God, judge the earth: for thou shalt inherit all nations.




And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.
- Exodus 7:1

And, that's the issue, one of translation. But, in the above passage, why state that, “You are gods, sons of the Most High, all of you; nevertheless, you shall die like men, and fall like any prince" if the entities being referred to were just human beings? It doesn't make sense to tell someone that he is going to die "like [a] man" if, in fact, that individual is a man; he would already know that!

(October 20, 2022 at 5:57 am)Jehanne Wrote: And, that's the issue, one of translation.  But, in the above passage, why state that, “You are gods, sons of the Most High, all of you; nevertheless, you shall die like men, and fall like any prince" if the entities being referred to were just human beings?  It doesn't make sense to tell someone that he is going to die "like [a] man" if, in fact, that individual is a man; he would already know that!

Man was originally immortal, did you forget that whole part in the garden of Eden?

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. - Genesis 2:17

(October 20, 2022 at 6:08 pm)Huggy Bear Wrote:

(October 20, 2022 at 5:57 am)Jehanne Wrote: And, that's the issue, one of translation.  But, in the above passage, why state that, “You are gods, sons of the Most High, all of you; nevertheless, you shall die like men, and fall like any prince" if the entities being referred to were just human beings?  It doesn't make sense to tell someone that he is going to die "like [a] man" if, in fact, that individual is a man; he would already know that!

Man was originally immortal, did you forget that whole part in the garden of Eden?

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. - Genesis 2:17

What a set-up THAT was, eh?

1. An immortal, non-omnipotent being cannot have an understanding of death, so ‘thou shalt surely die’ would have been gibberish. But there’s wide agreement that God used ‘die’ in a spiritual, as opposed to a physical sense, since those poor, benighted kids didn’t drop down dead the day they at the fruit.

2. Rating from the Tree imparted knowledge of good and evil, so until they ate, Adam and Eve could not possibly have known it was wrong to disobey God.

As origin myths go, it’s a pretty clumsy one.

Boru

(October 20, 2022 at 6:08 pm)Huggy Bear Wrote:

(October 20, 2022 at 5:57 am)Jehanne Wrote: And, that's the issue, one of translation.  But, in the above passage, why state that, “You are gods, sons of the Most High, all of you; nevertheless, you shall die like men, and fall like any prince" if the entities being referred to were just human beings?  It doesn't make sense to tell someone that he is going to die "like [a] man" if, in fact, that individual is a man; he would already know that!

Man was originally immortal, did you forget that whole part in the garden of Eden?

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. - Genesis 2:17

The First Commandment implies henotheism:

"You shall have no other gods before me." (Exodus 20:3)

How could the author speak of "other gods" if the author did not believe in gods other than Yahweh?

(October 20, 2022 at 6:50 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(October 20, 2022 at 6:08 pm)Huggy Bear Wrote: Man was originally immortal, did you forget that whole part in the garden of Eden?

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. - Genesis 2:17

What a set-up THAT was, eh?

1. An immortal, non-omnipotent being cannot have an understanding of death, so ‘thou shalt surely die’ would have been gibberish. But there’s wide agreement that God used ‘die’ in a spiritual, as opposed to a physical sense, since those poor, benighted kids didn’t drop down dead the day they at the fruit.

2. Rating from the Tree imparted knowledge of good and evil, so until they ate, Adam and Eve could not possibly have known it was wrong to disobey God.

As origin myths go, it’s a pretty clumsy one.

Boru

Death simply means 'separation', in this case it means separation from God. Sin cannot enter the presence of God, hence "The soul that sinneth, it shall die."- Ezekiel 18:20 or in other words be cut off from the presence of God. An atonement had to be made for sin in order for man to once again enter the presence of God.

(October 20, 2022 at 8:03 pm)Jehanne Wrote:

(October 20, 2022 at 6:08 pm)Huggy Bear Wrote: Man was originally immortal, did you forget that whole part in the garden of Eden?

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. - Genesis 2:17

The First Commandment implies henotheism:

"You shall have no other gods before me." (Exodus 20:3)

How could the author speak of "other gods" if the author did not believe in gods other than Yahweh?

The definition of 'god' simply means object of worship, which could mean anything. God is saying he should be number one priority, anything you prioritize over God is your god.