It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I conclude, therefore, along with such scholars as Mark S. Smith and John Day, that El and YHWH were originally two distinct deities in ancient Israel, and that they were amalgamated at a fairly early stage in the development of Israelite religion, perhaps sometime in the Late Bronze Age, although traces of an El cult seem to appear in Israel even into the Iron I period.
originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: ChesterJohn
And you always flood threads with nothing more than one liners - do you have anything to refute the discussion,,,,
originally posted by: Seede
a reply to: SerapisChrist
I saw a program with a Jewish scholar admitting that there is no chance of the Canaanite conquest of Joshua being a real historical event and that Jews understand from the get go that the Tanakh is a mixture of history and esoteric teachings told in myths. Christianity has always felt it can interpret the Tanakh as though it is a Christian book when it's a Jewish masterpiece that should be interpreted Judaically.
Religion is very personal simply because it backgrounds eternity or our afterlife. That is the reason most all will defend their views with the determination that they must be right and those who disagree must be wrong. But what is not considered, by most, is that perhaps all are wrong or all are right. How could this be in this case?
I am from Christian Jewish background from the order of the synagogue of James. Perhaps that disqualifies me from this discussion but first hear me out. Before Yahusha came into the flesh of terrestrial substance He existed in the celestial world as the image of the unseen Yahuah or El. El is the most High and only existence known to our doctrine. Yahusha was begotten from Yahuah (El) as with the properties of His Father. He had both the life within Him as well as both image and spirit. He was the celestial representative of El to the Host of heaven. As one would gaze upon Yahusha that one would gaze upon El and as that one who gazed upon Yahusha would speak to Yahusha that one would speak to El.
This is the great mystery hidden from men. As Yahusha (El's Son) became flesh He shed his image of substance into the flesh of His creation and became known to us as Jesus. El (Yahuah) did not create but El (Yahuah) gave life to His son's (Yahusha's) creation. The Apostle John tells us this mystery in His gospel's first verses. As Yehosha's flesh perished, He once again took His celestial image where He reigns today.
As you digest this you may then understand that Deuteronomy 32:8 hinges upon the celestial Yahusha which was many centuries before His first advent. As Yahusha, at this time, represented His father El in both visibility and speech it may very well have been Yahusha who is the basis of this argument. Could both be right without proper understanding?
Now all of this was designed to show you word usage. I used Yahusha in place of "The Word" or "Logos" or Jesus. or many other identifications of the same entity. I used Yahuah in conjunction with El to differentiate Father and Son. The entire argument now hinges upon whether one would accept the Jewish Christian doctrine or the Roman Christian doctrine or perhaps Gnostic doctrines or many other avenues of beliefs. If one is not in the same mindset then perhaps the Son of El is not even considered as being El but then again it becomes clear to the one who accepts El and His Son.
The same can be directed as to genocide by the Son of El in the OT literature. Is it genocide? First one must again be in the same mindset. Were there antediluvian people for the first 1600 years of creation? Were they all of the Adamic seed? Could any of them be from the procreation of the fallen ones or serpent seedlings? Were the genocides of the OT actually the war on innocent humans or the war on the corrupt seeds of the Satans?
I won't go into any of that but my point is that when man judges El (Yahuah) then that man/woman should be aware that perhaps there is more than his/her understanding. Are we so knowledgeable that we can judge El Elyon?
You don't think that it is important that Jehovah is not El Elyon, but itis very iimportant. And that is not my opinion, that is also a fact and has been proven already in this thread several times so if younneed proof read it.
originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: SerapisChrist
I am not a conformist either.
But you "I understand NT better than you" will do nothing to win me or others to your view.
Who said I celebrate Christimas?
Who said I celebrate Easter?
You assume to much, I celebrate neither.