Yahweh is not the Most High God, Israel in ancient Canaan and henotheism

a reply to: chr0naut
It is too late

originally posted by: areyousirius360
a reply to: chr0naut
It is too late

That damn "4-hour" window strikes again!

a reply to: Akragon

Then explain Elohim. Explain why David said "And the God said to my Lord...".

a reply to: chr0naut
What the hell is so ridiculous about it, we KNOW the bible is multiple traditions edited into bone, as Yahweh is even used before the introduction of the name, obviously inserted, as in Genesis. That's weak how much evidence your ignoring. Even clear as day biblical evidence.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest
Elohim is a plural word meaning essentially Gods, the descendants of El Elyon.
Later generations assigned a plural word for Gods, Elohim to every time you see God in English bibles. It's still a plural word, and its use is curious.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriestthe God is El, and Yahweh is the lord.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest
That's more evidence for me, thanks for bringing it to my attention.

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: Akragon

Then explain Elohim. Explain why David said "And the God said to my Lord...".

That would be a deliberate mistranslation of the word...ELohim

To say that the word is meant to mean a plural of "three" is nothing short of deceitful...

The same word is used in Exodus 7

The Lord said to Moses, “See, I have made thee a god אֶלהִים, (Elohim) to Pharaoh, and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet...

Perhaps Moses was a trinity as well?

Yes ELohim can be plural, but in no way does it express a three in one concept in Genesis... this was made up by people of your religion many years ago... and again, it was and still is pure dishonesty

Why people blatantly lie about their religion is far beyond me.... though im sure its merely what you and others have been taught all your lives...

YOU nor anyone else can not find evidence of a trinity in the NT... going so far as to say it was also a Judaic concept is wildly dishonest....

Tell your theory to a jew, and watch them laugh you out of the room

You people.... geez

originally posted by: areyousirius360
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest
That's more evidence for me, thanks for bringing it to my attention.

In what way? Please explain.

a reply to: Akragon

Why people blatantly lie about their religion is far beyond me.... though im sure its merely what you and others have been taught all your lives... 

Unnecessary. Don't pretend that you are without flaw.

Your attitude really discourages me from debating with you.

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: Akragon

Why people blatantly lie about their religion is far beyond me.... though im sure its merely what you and others have been taught all your lives... 

Unnecessary. Don't pretend that you are without flaw.

Your attitude really discourages me from debating with you.

Why make this about me?

You made the dubious claim... And there really is no debate...

I know all the "proof texts" Christians use to bolster the trinity... none hold any water...

And while as a Christian you are of course free to believe your doctrine no matter how wrong it may be "biblically speaking"... what you can't do is highjack another religion's texts and turn them into whatever you want to promote your dogma's

After 2000 some odd years Christianity has managed to come up with tons of different passages that elude to a triune God... but IF one actually looks into the claims... there nothing more then claims which are easily debunked with a little reading... Or in the OT case... someone with a firm grasp of the language.

a reply to: Akragon

what you can't do is highjack another religion's texts and turn them into whatever you want to promote your dogma's

Oh, I see, the way you do with the Gospels?

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

So again its about me...

The gospels are free domain... Christianity has no rights to them...

I happen to believe the message Jesus gave, and I subscribe to no religion... On the other hand I have issues with other books within the bible...

The OT isn't even Christian material... so Christians can try to find a trinity within them, but the adherents to that religion easily debunk any claim of a trinity within their books

And the NT is the same situation... said Trinitarian fomula is all but absent from them...

Two texts from the NT use it... both are fraudulent

Im no fan of this YHWH character myself... he/she/it might be considered many things...

Trinitarian is NOT one of them

a reply to: Akragon

 im sure its merely what you and others have been taught all your lives

To make things clear, you started the personal attack. But thats ok, you can have the last word if you want. What's the point in arguing with someone who thinks they know it all?

originally posted by: areyousirius360
a reply to: chr0naut
What the hell is so ridiculous about it, we KNOW the bible is multiple traditions edited into bone, as Yahweh is even used before the introduction of the name, obviously inserted, as in Genesis. That's weak how much evidence your ignoring. Even clear as day biblical evidence.

According to the documentary hypothesis, YHWH was added into the compilation of the Torah from the "Yahwist" source. According to this hypothesis there were at least three other writers. The support for this hypothesis was that there were repetitions and thematic threads that looked different than each other. Oh, and there were different "names of God". The original basis of this hypothesis was from textual criticism of the 1700's (AD) but is generally credited to Wellhausen @ 1876. Since then, there have been many issues with the hypothesis and it is no longer considered valid, the current academic consensus is that there is more likely a single author and a single priestly 'editor/compiler/redactor'.

The dating of the Mesha Stele to 850 BC which recounts the defeat of "Israel" and their God, "YHWH", by the Moabites with their god "Kemosh", is well before the Babylonian captivity in 605 BC. Ezra the scribe/priest, who is theorized to have edited the Torah, lived from 480-440 BC, at least 370 years after it was noted that Israel's God was "YHWH".

Alternately, the traditional view, supported by the text's own attribution, was that Moses (Moshe) wrote the five books of the Torah. (The passages describing Moses' death were obviously added afterwards - this is agreed by traditional/conventionalists). YHWH was the personal name of God (as opposed to a title) revealed to Moses at the burning bush. As Moses wrote the Torah, it is logical that the Tetragammaton would be included in those books.

Interestingly, in 2010, when the Torah text was analyzed statistically by computer, is that there was a 90% chance that it only had two sources. This computer analysis has been 'tweaked' in several ways and re-run in 2011, 2013 and 2015 and still the consensus is for only two sources.

Perhaps it indicates a single author and a single (priestly) editor as suggested by Idan (who contributed to the studies and the papers)? The computer study definitely demolishes the array of sources and editors that DH proposes. It also throws heavy doubt upon the possibility that El and YHWH referred to different Gods.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

that was hardly an attack... Not even close for that matter

I said get real... and I meant it... Though I can't help but wonder where you got such a ridiculous claim

Claiming the ancient people of the bible were Trinitarian is a straight up lie

IF anything you're attacking all that read this that happen to not be well versed in biblical studies via dishonesty

All I did was call you on said lie...

Perhaps you should try and understand the difference

a reply to: Akragon

I had some time to think about our exchange. I won't take back what I said, because I was speaking honestly, but I will admit that it was not my place to call you out on what I perceive(d) to be condescension. For that, I apologize. It was an argument that I should have avoided.

a reply to: areyousirius360

I did my research. You complain because you don't lihike the premise. Nobody knows when Yahweh was first worshipped by the Israelites, but they know it was not in Moses and Abrahams days.

No one said you didn't..look you don't have to get offensive just because someone critiques your view. I am wise enough to know to check information on a conspiracy forum. I simply asked you to provide the sources for where you are getting your information I think I am entitled to such seeing as how their was a mistake within the first few sentences of the O.P.

It's a late edition to scripture called the Yahwistic tradition that was merged with the Elohistic tradition and the name YHWH was inserted in places it did not belong. Moses didn't write the first 5 books, IF he even existed.

Now lets not go posting the documentary hypothesis as fact. This is simply an idea. If you want to try and convince me that idea is correct I am all ears. Much of what is relied upon is writer invariant the problem is this is far from an exact science. Depending on the style of content and the audience much of the things they take into account can change. Just because some people think the documentary hypothesis hold weight doesn't discredit mosaic authorship.

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: Akragon

I had some time to think about our exchange. I won't take back what I said, because I was speaking honestly, but I will admit that it was not my place to call you out on what I perceive(d) to be condescension. For that, I apologize. It was an argument that I should have avoided.

its quite ok... people tend to take offence to me at times, though I never mean any harm...

As I say time after time, you're welcome to your beliefs, but I am also welcome to disagree with them...

that was a particularly bold claim, which made me spit out my beer...

a reply to: areyousirius360

I watched the Israeli archaeologist Israel Finbkelstein show two statuettes of both YHWH and Asherah, Queen of Heaven he had dug up who he said were part of the Canaanite Pantheon. When I looked it up YHWH appears to have been also called El with Baal one of his and Asherah's many children who formed the second tier of the Pantheon. I do find that the information on this seems to have changed over the years though from when I first researched this back in the 1980's.

I suspect it is unlikely due to the length of time and of course vested interest we will ever get to the real truth behind the different Gods all their different names and their places of origin.

The fact that the Gods are viewed differently by the various religious persuasions is quite fascinating because I suspect in the West most people thought God was God but apparently not, Allah isn''t the Christian God nor is he YHWH so yet more hissing fits are probably going to arise.