The rise of Yahweh: from Canaanite warrior-storm deity to the God of the Abrahamic world

Tiger

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2023
Messages
1,294
Reaction score
1,384
Hilarious stuff, Lusty. Any chance of an actual critique?
Just a reminder, as even Zipporah mentions, he mentions nothing outside of mainstream scholarship.
Sure.

The suggestion of continuity from the Canaanite religion of polytheism to to early Israelite monotheism beliefs is at best flimsy and more likely simply academic makey uppy wankery.

He quotes sources throughout and was even kind enough to provide a recommended reading list.
It’s the interpolation of information that is key

A godless eejit like you does not understand this.
 

Zipporah's Flint

Moderator
Staff member
Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2022
Messages
1,467
Reaction score
1,252
Sure.

The suggestion of continuity from the Canaanite religion of polytheism to to early Israelite monotheism beliefs is at best flimsy and more likely simply academic makey uppy wankery.

The Divine title El for the High God was adopted by the Old Testament Church/Yahwehism. Also poetically, in terms of hymns Baal imagery was repackaged.
 

Tiger

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2023
Messages
1,294
Reaction score
1,384
A fascinating interview with Francesa Stavrakopoulou (I had to copy and paste that surname 😄)


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMQciYeDHU0


Here are some of the key points from the video (courtesy of google gemini in case you're wondering):

The God of the Bible was originally a corporeal deity with a human-shaped body.
  • This is evident from the fact that the God of the Bible is often described as having a physical body in the early parts of the Bible, such as Genesis 1:27, where God is said to create humankind in his own image.
  • The description of the God of the Bible as having a physical body becomes less common over time.
  • This is likely due to the influence of Greek philosophy, which emphasized the immateriality of the divine.
  • The desire to create a more abstract and universal deity may also have played a role in the disembodiment of the God of the Bible.
  • They discuss the reasons why the God of the Bible may have been disembodied.

The influence of Greek philosophy, which emphasized the immateriality of the divine.
  • The desire to create a more abstract and universal deity.
  • The need to distance the God of the Bible from the physical world, which was seen as corrupt and sinful.

The video concludes by arguing that the disembodiment of the God of the Bible was a significant development in the history of religion.
  • It allowed for the creation of a more abstract and universal deity.
  • It made it possible to believe in a God who was not limited by the physical world.It contributed to the development of monotheism.

A fascinating interview with Francesa Stavrakopoulou (I had to copy and paste that surname 😄)


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMQciYeDHU0


Here are some of the key points from the video (courtesy of google gemini in case you're wondering):

The God of the Bible was originally a corporeal deity with a human-shaped body.
  • This is evident from the fact that the God of the Bible is often described as having a physical body in the early parts of the Bible, such as Genesis 1:27, where God is said to create humankind in his own image.
  • The description of the God of the Bible as having a physical body becomes less common over time.
  • This is likely due to the influence of Greek philosophy, which emphasized the immateriality of the divine.
  • The desire to create a more abstract and universal deity may also have played a role in the disembodiment of the God of the Bible.
  • They discuss the reasons why the God of the Bible may have been disembodied.

The influence of Greek philosophy, which emphasized the immateriality of the divine.
  • The desire to create a more abstract and universal deity.
  • The need to distance the God of the Bible from the physical world, which was seen as corrupt and sinful.

The video concludes by arguing that the disembodiment of the God of the Bible was a significant development in the history of religion.
  • It allowed for the creation of a more abstract and universal deity.
  • It made it possible to believe in a God who was not limited by the physical world.It contributed to the development of monotheism.

This is juvenile shit.

The claim that God had a human based body based on the phrase ‘in his own image’ is clearly metaphorical you daft twat.

The transition from a more anthropomorphic God to a less physical one can be viewed as a sign of a maturing understanding of the Devine, not necessarily influenced solely by external philosophical ideas.
 

Tuco Salamanca

Active member
Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2023
Messages
131
Reaction score
48
Sure.

The suggestion of continuity from the Canaanite religion of polytheism to to early Israelite monotheism beliefs is at best flimsy and more likely simply academic makey uppy wankery.

Really?
The observation that newer belief systems typically emerge from older ones is "makey uppy wankery"?
And there was me thinking it was a perfectly reasonable expectation based on even the most cursory understanding of human cultures and the pattern of history.

It’s the interpolation of information that is key

The 'interpolation' is perfectly reasonable. The burden of proof is on anyone arguing that the standard pattern of the evolution of cultures and religions somehow doesn't apply to Yahwehism.

A godless eejit like you does not understand this.

And here we get to the nub of the matter: "how dare you not believe in my sky daddy!"
 

Tuco Salamanca

Active member
Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2023
Messages
131
Reaction score
48
This is juvenile shit.

The claim that God had a human based body based on the phrase ‘in his own image’ is clearly metaphorical you daft twat.

Temper temper.
It's 'metaphorical' when it suits you; at least try to be consistent. But I suspect this has gone over your head.

Lusty, no offense, but I think you'd be better off sticking to discussing the wendy ball with the other gobsh1tes on the estate.

The transition from a more anthropomorphic God to a less physical one can be viewed as a sign of a maturing understanding of the Devine, not necessarily influenced solely by external philosophical ideas.

Really? If that's the case, why not just jettison all the bronze age stuff?

Why not just embrace deism?
 

Tuco Salamanca

Active member
Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2023
Messages
131
Reaction score
48
All I can say, if this thread has some of you rattled, wait until you see what I have lined up :D
 

Tiger

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2023
Messages
1,294
Reaction score
1,384
Temper temper.
It's 'metaphorical' when it suits you; at least try to be consistent. But I suspect this has gone over your head.

Lusty, no offense, but I think you'd be better off sticking to discussing the wendy ball with the other gobsh1tes on the estate.



Really? If that's the case, why not just jettison all the bronze age stuff?

Why not just embrace deism?
Tuco

You embody all the elements of a junkie. Not someone who is debating the existence of God.
 

Tuco Salamanca

Active member
Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2023
Messages
131
Reaction score
48
The irony of being accused of being under the influence by a bloke evidently hammered -- on a Tuesday evening.
 

Tuco Salamanca

Active member
Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2023
Messages
131
Reaction score
48
Dude, your initial claim was clearly drug induced.

"Dude?"
Another Gen Zer reared by the Disney channel. Pathetic.

Now do me a favour and stop scuttering all over my thread, there's a good lad.
 

tldr

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2023
Messages
817
Reaction score
691
Really?
The observation that newer belief systems typically emerge from older ones is "makey uppy wankery"?
And there was me thinking it was a perfectly reasonable expectation based on even the most cursory understanding of human cultures and the pattern of history.



The 'interpolation' is perfectly reasonable. The burden of proof is on anyone arguing that the standard pattern of the evolution of cultures and religions somehow doesn't apply to Yahwehism.



And here we get to the nub of the matter: "how dare you not believe in my sky daddy!"

It's really unfair to pick at you over this and say that it sucks to be you. The real key to faith is a sense of the Presence of God and that's not something available to everyone. You won't feel abandoned or hopeless if you can perceive it.

RFK's description of his return to faith rings very true when he described it as first choosing the good and then becoming aware of the Presence. He was impelled towards it through the trauma of addiction but there are other ways. No atheists in a foxhole as they say. Perhaps some manner of harrowing is indispensable to its discovery.





It's there to be found. I don't deny your right to your own mind, don't despise my poor efforts at reverence. You could try looking through the Catechism and asking what a particular portion means, how it figures. Don't just pick the most controversial parts. See if it can make sense. Ultimately trying to explain it away is an effort at evasion. There are greater personages than either me or you that were of a firm faith.


'The story goes, a young student in France boarded a train and took a seat across from an elderly gentleman who appeared to be dozing. When the trained lurched, a rosary fell from the gentleman’s hand. The young man retrieved it and handed it back to him. He couldn’t resist asking the gentleman if he still believed in such things as praying the rosary. The gentleman admitted that, indeed, he still believed.

Surprised, the young student told the gentleman that his professors at the university did not believe in such superstition. He then went on to enlighten the elderly gentleman about the more modern and sophisticated view of the world and explained that enlightened people did not believe in such nonsense as praying the rosary.

As the older gentleman prepared to leave the train at his stop, the young man offered to send him materials to further enlighten him. The older man kindly accepted the offer and gave the young man his business card as he departed. As the train pulled away, the young man read the card out loud to himself: “Louis Pasteur, Director of the Institute of Scientific Research, Paris.”

Perhaps Louis Pasteur, through his path-breaking work and his life experience, knew something the young man had yet to learn. It seems that often the more we know and the more we learn, the more we doubt how well we know what we think we know. We realize what our human limitations are. In a sense, we realize just how minuscule we are in the scheme of things, especially without God.

In the epilogue of his history of Christianity, Paul Johnson observes, and I quote at length, “Man is imperfect with God. Without God, what is he? As Francis Bacon put it, ‘They that deny God, destroy man’s nobility: for certainly man is of kin to the beast by his body; and, if he be not kin to God by his spirit, he is a base and ignoble creature.’ We are less base and ignoble by virtue of divine example and by the desire for the form of apotheosis which Christianity offers.”

In everyday terms, because we are created in the image and likeness of God, we are required to demand more of ourselves than our base instincts. To know, love, and serve God requires that we obey His commandments and the laws of the Church. This world will tug at you and attempt to divert you. Somehow, you must stay the course. God will provide a way, give you the strength and grace to endure and overcome your failures.'

https://www.getprinciples.com/a-pilgrim-on-the-road-of-life/
 

Tuco Salamanca

Active member
Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2023
Messages
131
Reaction score
48
It's really unfair to pick at you over this and say that it sucks to be you. The real key to faith is a sense of the Presence of God and that's not something available to everyone. You won't feel abandoned or hopeless if you can perceive it.

RFK's description of his return to faith rings very true when he described it as first choosing the good and then becoming aware of the Presence. He was impelled towards it through the trauma of addiction but there are other ways. No atheists in a foxhole as they say. Perhaps some manner of harrowing is indispensable to its discovery.





It's there to be found. I don't deny your right to your own mind, don't despise my poor efforts at reverence. You could try looking through the Catechism and asking what a particular portion means, how it figures. Don't just pick the most controversial parts. See if it can make sense. Ultimately trying to explain it away is an effort at evasion. There are greater personages than either me or you that were of a firm faith.


'The story goes, a young student in France boarded a train and took a seat across from an elderly gentleman who appeared to be dozing. When the trained lurched, a rosary fell from the gentleman’s hand. The young man retrieved it and handed it back to him. He couldn’t resist asking the gentleman if he still believed in such things as praying the rosary. The gentleman admitted that, indeed, he still believed.

Surprised, the young student told the gentleman that his professors at the university did not believe in such superstition. He then went on to enlighten the elderly gentleman about the more modern and sophisticated view of the world and explained that enlightened people did not believe in such nonsense as praying the rosary.

As the older gentleman prepared to leave the train at his stop, the young man offered to send him materials to further enlighten him. The older man kindly accepted the offer and gave the young man his business card as he departed. As the train pulled away, the young man read the card out loud to himself: “Louis Pasteur, Director of the Institute of Scientific Research, Paris.”

Perhaps Louis Pasteur, through his path-breaking work and his life experience, knew something the young man had yet to learn. It seems that often the more we know and the more we learn, the more we doubt how well we know what we think we know. We realize what our human limitations are. In a sense, we realize just how minuscule we are in the scheme of things, especially without God.

In the epilogue of his history of Christianity, Paul Johnson observes, and I quote at length, “Man is imperfect with God. Without God, what is he? As Francis Bacon put it, ‘They that deny God, destroy man’s nobility: for certainly man is of kin to the beast by his body; and, if he be not kin to God by his spirit, he is a base and ignoble creature.’ We are less base and ignoble by virtue of divine example and by the desire for the form of apotheosis which Christianity offers.”

In everyday terms, because we are created in the image and likeness of God, we are required to demand more of ourselves than our base instincts. To know, love, and serve God requires that we obey His commandments and the laws of the Church. This world will tug at you and attempt to divert you. Somehow, you must stay the course. God will provide a way, give you the strength and grace to endure and overcome your failures.'

https://www.getprinciples.com/a-pilgrim-on-the-road-of-life/


You assume a lot about me.
As it happens I'm very open to the extraphysical and the idea that the universe has some purpose that we're all inexorably driven towards.
Furthermore I'm not a materialist and I think that there's very compelling evidence that consciousness survives bodily death.

Life is characterised by a great deal more complexity and nuance than you seem to think it is. It's not a binary choice between religion and atheism.

So, stop conflating the notion of the divine with religious superstition.
 
Last edited:

Zipporah's Flint

Moderator
Staff member
Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2022
Messages
1,467
Reaction score
1,252
And in Christianity.
Scholasticism in particular seemed to centre around reconciling Yahweh with Aristotle's first mover.

That certainly is an accusation of many Protestants- though by no means all Protestants- towards Scholasticism, but I am unsure of just how true that was, certainly with the greats among the Scholastics. Jung also I believe made a similar accusation of mainstream Christianity as a whole in his book Aion.

On this subject you might be interested in the thread beneath-

 

tldr

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2023
Messages
817
Reaction score
691
You assume a lot about me.
As it happens I'm very open to the extraphysical and the idea that the universe has some purpose that we're all inexorably driven towards.
Furthermore I'm not a materialist and I think that there's very compelling evidence that consciousness survives bodily death.

Life is characterised by a great deal more complexity and nuance than you seem to think it is. It's not a binary choice between religion and atheism.

So, stop conflating the notion of the divine with religious superstition.

There has to be a method of application otherwise it's just a notional nod without a concurrent acknowledgement in behaviour. It's not enough to accept without practise - the actual doing of something imbues a deeper understanding and confidence.

That's why I suggested the Cathecism. Have you reviewed it and dismissed it or do you reject it because of disappointments in ecclesiastical governance? There's extraordinary wisdom in it.
 
Last edited:

Latest Threads

Popular Threads

Top Bottom