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

I am writing this post to make aware and discuss ancient Israelites non-monotheistic beliefs. It's believed the cult of Yahweh began around 8 b.c. and before Babylonian captivity the Israelites most likely worshipped Baal, who is probably the model for Yahweh despite the negative view of him in the bible.
Baal had a Father (El Elyon or the Most High God) a mother (Asherah) who would later become his consort. Yahweh has been found in archeological artifacts to have once been believed to be Asherah's consort.
EL Elyon was both the Canaanite and Israelite Most High God. Yahweh was even believed to be one of his 70 offspring:

Deuteronomy 32:8 (using Hebrew for names) When El Elyon apportioned the nations, when he divided humankind, he fixed the boundaries of the people's according to the number of the Gods, Yahwehs portion was his people, Jacob his INHERITANCE.
You can only inherit something from someone else, it makes no sense he inherited Jacob from himself.
It doesn't help that many English translations have obscured this passage to hide what it really says, which is evident deception.
The lie that the ancient Israelites were Yahwist is from the people who combined the various traditions and merged them, making Yahweh the Most High God, which he never was.
So the writers of the Nag Hammadi texts were on the right track, Yahweh IS an abomination and not the father of Immanuel " Jesus" the Messiah.
Thoughts? Questions?

Oh, another one of those 'YHWH isn't God of Israel' threads. How original.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriestWell I am new, so forgive me. Unoriginal or not, it's true. What could be better news (Jesus aside) than the knowledge that we don't need to worship a "god" as cruel as Yahweh? A good God. People who would rather worship a war criminal (Yahweh) than the kind El Elyon confuse me. How is this bad news?

a reply to: BELIEVERpriestAnd Yahweh wasn't the original god of Israel. I don't know if he is even today. They call him Adonai which, like Baal, means lord.

a reply to: areyousirius360

Here is the verse (well, verses, as it is 8 and 9) from the Orthodox Jewish Bible (italicized translations are added from internet searches to clarify the word meanings):

Devarim 32:8-9, Orthodox Jewish Bible (OJB)

8 When HaElyon (The Most High, possibly a name and not a title) divided to the Goyim (nations) their nachalah (possession, property, inheritance), when He separated the Bnei Adam (all mankind, sons of Adam), He set the gevulot (borders) of the people according to the number of the Bnei Yisroel (sons of Israel). 9 For Hashem’s (God, the name, YHWH) chelek (part, portion) is His people; Ya’akov (Jacob) is the chevel (allotment) of His nachalah (possession, property, inheritance).

The reason that I felt it pertinent to do this is to (a) provide a source for the verse, and (b) because when it comes to the Old Testament, I feel that the OJB is probably the closest that we are going to get to the original verbiage used in the first documents of the OT.

In looking up the translations, it is neat that it led me on research in to "HaElyon," or as your source names the being, "El Elyon." It is postulated that the "Ha" or "El" was added to imply that "Elyon" was an epithet for YHWH and not a different being, but that the original intent was that this was a different god altogether, and like your OP says, it was the one who did the dividing and allotting of the earth and its people, giving YHWH a certain portion over which to reign as the patron god.

I love this type of research, and I don't know if you are correct or not. I do, however, believe that YWHW and El, for example, are different gods, and that YHWH and Allah are the same being. I also think that the idea of YHWH was condensed into one being from the attributes of multiple gods, basically balling up many polytheistic gods into a lump and calling the lump a single being.

It's all interesting to me, for sure, but like I said, I'm not certain that the verse that you cited necessarily holds the smoking gun of proof, but it certainly has some circumstantial evidence contained within.

I don't know. Kind of ties into the whole if you had known my father you would know me thing. I am not so good at transliteration, just a commoner. I wouldn't claim to know the name. Architect perhaps? It is this spark of intellect that helps get me out of bed in the morning so that I may question these things, spin yours how you will.

a reply to: SlapMonkeyThat bible is based off the Masoretic texts, which replaces Sons of God with sons of Israel. More evidence of the truth being obscured actually. That more or less proves something funky was going on.

a reply to: areyousirius360also Allah is El, not Yahweh.

a reply to: areyousirius360Allah is El. Yahweh is translated as Lord as is Baal. Allah means The God and is definitely not Yahweh.

a reply to: SlapMonkeyBut you are on the right track just do some research on Yahweh vs El Elyon there is a TON of evidence to support that they were different Gods and were merged as you say.
Talmudic and Kabbalistic Jews still believe in the 72 Gods they just call it the 72 "names" of God'

a reply to: areyousirius360

I am writing this post to make aware and discuss ancient Israelites non-monotheistic beliefs. It's believed the cult of Yahweh began around 8 b.c. and before Babylonian captivity the Israelites most likely worshipped Baal, who is probably the model for Yahweh despite the negative view of him in the bible.

So the cult began in 8 B.C. but judges was thought to be written around 550 B.C. and we find it discusses the Israelites departure from YHWH in Judges 3: 7, "7 And the people of Israel did what was evil in the sight of the Lord. They forgot the Lord their God and served the Baals and the Asheroth."

The semitic word El has multiple meanings and doesn't have to refer to the one true God. It can me big "G" God or little "g" god. So we know you are wrong about when YHWH worship began....

Yahweh has been found in archeological artifacts to have once been believed to be Asherah's consort.

You'll find that people on this site appreciate well documented threads or at least they use to. Why don't you post your source?

So the writers of the Nag Hammadi texts were on the right track, Yahweh IS an abomination and not the father of Immanuel " Jesus" the Messiah.
Thoughts? Questions?

The old testament and hebrew scholars I know of definitely don't agree with what you are saying so where are the sources?

a reply to: areyousirius360

Thats because Jewish people don't approve of using the name for God.



"This name is usually translated in English as "the Lord," following the Greek translation as kyrios. All this goes back to the Jewish practice of never pronouncing the name as it is written but as Adonai, "the Lord." In printed texts the vowels of this word are placed under the letters of the Tetragrammaton. (Hence the name was read erroneously by Christians as "Jehova," a name completely unknown in the Jewish tradition.) The original pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton has been lost, owing to the strong Jewish disapproval of pronouncing the name."

-The Jewish Religion: A Companion

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb
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. 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. If you want to learn about it study the Ugaritic texts and Canaanite mythology then you can speak on it. Until then don't try and dispute me on things you know nothing about.

Yahweh in my opinion is the insubordinate child whereas Jesus is the subordinate one. They represent two sides of the same coin, the coin being God the Father.

Asherah is the consort of Yahweh, Mary Magdalene is the consort of Jesus. Asherah is the insubordinate daughter whereas Mary Magdalene is the subordinate one. They are two sides of another coin, and that coin is God the Mother.

Yahweh is the darker side of humanity, Jesus the lighter side. Asherah is the whore, Mary Magdalene the bride.

The OT and NT are diametrically opposed to one another, though both are still tools used by TPTB to blind the masses to the truth and make them complacent about world events.

a reply to: ServantOfTheLambYes I obviously know that, but either way he is not El Elyon the Most High. That's a fact if you bother to study Canaanite mythology the pieces come together because Israel was really just a nomadic tribe of Canaanites and that is the source of the whole Jewish religion.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1Asherah was consort to El then Baal who was renamed YHWH. Asherah worship is forbidden in the OT.

a reply to: areyousirius360

There are a lot of things forbidden in the bible that still happen within it. "Thou shalt not kill" right? Except Yahweh ordered his followers to kill thousands of people within those same pages.

El is the Most High, the Father. Yahweh is the insubordinate Son, Jesus is the subordinate one. This is just a personal theory, not fact.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1Correct you are. Yahweh is a heavenly war criminal.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1Very good theory you have and evidence supports it. Jesus was talking about Yahweh some of the times people think he's talking about satan.

a reply to: areyousirius360

YHWH is the god the Israelites choose - or he chose them whichever way round it is. However YHWH was part of a Canaanite pantheon with a number of other Gods and Goddesses.

All three desert religious were contrived to give the priesthood and rulers a means of controlling the people. In fact it works well because if you give people enough rules to follow and run their lives around, they don't have much time to think about anything - add in the religious priestly bullies and bingo success for a few to live off the rest.

Chjristianity has slipped through the loop most because of the least amount of rules. So this is why its a much looser bond to the priesthood. Nothing is new in any of three religions its just how much force they are applied with against the population. If you look at the trouble people get into for moving away from both Judaism and Islam the cutting off from family and friends and even in dire circumstances one's head - you see the whole position.

What really counts is that not one of these supposedly powerful Gods can manage to make himself seen or heard in order to qualify his existence let alone manage a miracle. Neither are particularly good at helping their flocks and one only gets what one wants/needs, regardless of hours of bothering God's ear, if one deals with the situation oneself.