-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
and I was in hopes he would say that extraterrestrials,fallen angels or something was the correct train of thought,,but from his post an alien or fallen angel creating us would still equal an "god/creator",,the atheist thing is rather boring so is there a different assumption we should make,,,better yet in the next post will you just "spill the beans and state what you believe"
In that case neither are ours then, Nor is how any of us interpret the evidences you've provided any of your business what so ever, which makes this whole discussion irrelevant. Don't get upset just because we won't conform to your rules man, it was just an honest question. Here's one for you, why do you care what anyone else believes about the evidence you've provided? Is your own life so boring that you just sit around getting angry at others "stupidity"? Then get on Christian Chat to show us how dumb we are for your own amusement? If so that sounds like a very noble life. I do like you here though, you could visit worse sites and I think deep down something draws you to Him. Any way God bless you man, keep on being a role model.
Last edited:
T
Personally, I found that the provided evidence and facts were very interesting and well referenced.
Like it or not, at some point, churches will have to deal with such evidence and facts.
This should give birth to a stronger Christianity resting on clearer truth.
As it is written: “You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free”.
Like it or not, at some point, churches will have to deal with such evidence and facts.
This should give birth to a stronger Christianity resting on clearer truth.
As it is written: “You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free”.
K
Celsus is a muslim! Whenever someone comes at you with Jesus faked his own death, he's a muslim. Watch all the muslim apologists they all say that Jesus faked his own death. I'm going out on a limb here but as lowly educated as the apostles might have been on some things. I'm going to guess that they and professional roman soldiers knew what a dead guy looked like period.
According to the Word, Adam first knew God, but all men from Adam's time knew God, perhaps not on a conversational level, but they knew their origin. It was then man drifted away from God in favor of false gods, things made with their own hands. Abram was one of the last of the men who still honored God, and he was chosen from among them to be the father of all believers, that is, in the faith. This is all written in the Book.
It should be noted that it's not exactly clear who/what the Egyptians were refering to when they talked about the "Shasu" and there is some degree of ambiguity of what they meant when they associated the Shasu with "Yhw." It's not automatic that it's refering to a deity. If it were me, I wouldn't use them to form an arugment about theology or deity identification based on the lack of information.
Or, if we are going to use the Shasu in an argument of some sort about Israel and Yahweh, I'm going to argue that the Israelites were included in the Egyptian's references to the Shasu. Not because I think they actually were, but because the issue isn't clear and the needed information is lacking. If we're allowed to go beyond the evidence, we could build any story we want and what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
So is your argument that the texts refering to Yahweh as controller/power-over-the-storms are the earliest texts about Yawheh, therefore making him a storm-god? I doubt that can be substantiated with any degree of confidence. The only solid text you might have is Psalm 29, but I think you would have serious trouble substantiating the claim that (a) it is one of the earliest texts, (b) that it identifies Yahweh as a storm god (rather than being intentionally polemical or just plain poetry), or (c) that if it was one of the earliest and identified Yahweh as a storm god, that this was the only view of the Israelites at the time.
There is probably reason to believe that some of the earliest texts (assuming everyone here buys into the Documentary Hypothesis and forms of higher criticism, which I'm sure isn't a good assumption) do refer to Yahweh in warrior terms (eg: Deut 32, Jdg 5), where it's usually associated with his protection of and blessings/curses on Israel. I'm not sure why this is supposed to be significant though, other than just noting history. Yahweh was spoken of in terms of a divine warrior in some of the earliest texts and is relied on by Israel for protection and victory. Ok...nice.
Two of the best treatments of solar aspects of Yahweh have been done by JG Taylor and Steve Wiggins; Taylor being for the identificaiton and Wiggins being against.
http://www.religion.ucsb.edu/faculty/thomas/classes/rgst116c/taylor.pdf
http://www.religion.ucsb.edu/faculty/thomas/classes/rgst116c/Wiggins.pdf
Or, if we are going to use the Shasu in an argument of some sort about Israel and Yahweh, I'm going to argue that the Israelites were included in the Egyptian's references to the Shasu. Not because I think they actually were, but because the issue isn't clear and the needed information is lacking. If we're allowed to go beyond the evidence, we could build any story we want and what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
So is your argument that the texts refering to Yahweh as controller/power-over-the-storms are the earliest texts about Yawheh, therefore making him a storm-god? I doubt that can be substantiated with any degree of confidence. The only solid text you might have is Psalm 29, but I think you would have serious trouble substantiating the claim that (a) it is one of the earliest texts, (b) that it identifies Yahweh as a storm god (rather than being intentionally polemical or just plain poetry), or (c) that if it was one of the earliest and identified Yahweh as a storm god, that this was the only view of the Israelites at the time.
There is probably reason to believe that some of the earliest texts (assuming everyone here buys into the Documentary Hypothesis and forms of higher criticism, which I'm sure isn't a good assumption) do refer to Yahweh in warrior terms (eg: Deut 32, Jdg 5), where it's usually associated with his protection of and blessings/curses on Israel. I'm not sure why this is supposed to be significant though, other than just noting history. Yahweh was spoken of in terms of a divine warrior in some of the earliest texts and is relied on by Israel for protection and victory. Ok...nice.
Two of the best treatments of solar aspects of Yahweh have been done by JG Taylor and Steve Wiggins; Taylor being for the identificaiton and Wiggins being against.
http://www.religion.ucsb.edu/faculty/thomas/classes/rgst116c/taylor.pdf
http://www.religion.ucsb.edu/faculty/thomas/classes/rgst116c/Wiggins.pdf
Last edited:
C
That's false. They may teach that at evangelical seminaries but in real world scholarship at least some form of the DH is the consensus view. Again, you're providing no evidence for these fanatic claims. Why do I have to keep reminding you? Current thought about the Documentary Hypothesis | Richard Elliott Friedman
Maybe it's wrong, but at least in my opinion, the arguments can be pretty compelling. The best counter-arguments to the DH probably come from Cassuto, Rendtorff, Whybray, and Van Seters. However, traditionalists (ie, Moses was the author of the entire Penteteuch) might dislike their ideas on authorship even more. Whybray is probably the closest to a traditionalist.
And there are plenty of scholars who analyze the Penteteuch without resorting to the Documentary Hypothesis; Kugel and Alter come to mind. The DH is pretty much the consensus view, though being the consensus view doesn't automatically equate to "TRUE" or make it the only possible view on authorship.
I never realized Friedman had his own webpage.
You should check out Joel Baden at Yale too: Baden | Yale Divinity School His writings are a little more detailed while Friedman usually writes to a broader audience. Baden is one of the most recent to argue in favor of the DH.
And there are plenty of scholars who analyze the Penteteuch without resorting to the Documentary Hypothesis; Kugel and Alter come to mind. The DH is pretty much the consensus view, though being the consensus view doesn't automatically equate to "TRUE" or make it the only possible view on authorship.
I never realized Friedman had his own webpage.
You should check out Joel Baden at Yale too: Baden | Yale Divinity School His writings are a little more detailed while Friedman usually writes to a broader audience. Baden is one of the most recent to argue in favor of the DH.
C
It's not automatic, but scholars have reason to believe that it is referring to Yahweh.
One strong piece of evidence is the Shasu and Edom connection. Read here
at the bottom of the page reference #22 pg. 96-98
God in Translation: Deities in Cross-cultural Discourse in the Biblical World - Mark S. Smith - Google Books
For Van Der Toorn's hypothesis linking Saul with Yahweh read here pg. 281-286
Family Religion in Babylonia, Ugarit and Israel: Continuity and Changes in ... - K. Van Der Toorn - Google Books
Of course, there's a lack of information but based on the information that we do have
it is reasonable to come to these conclusions without being committed.
It's not just my opinion that Yahweh was originally a storm deity. It's the scholars! I've provided
many references. The DDD is a good place to start.
A lot of the storm language used for Yahweh comes from the god Baal in the Ugaritic texts.The Early History of God: Yahweh and the Other Deities in Ancient Israel - Mark S. Smith - Google Books
Some parallels between Yahweh and Baal:
• Yahweh, like Baal, is depicted as a storm deity (cf.. Ex 19-20; 1 Kgs 18; Ps 29, Jer 14:22).
• Yahweh like Baal, has thunder as his voice (cf. Ex 19:19, 20:18, 24:12; Deut 5:21, 33:2; Judg 5:4; Ps 18:13; 1 Sam 7:10; Isa 30:27; Am 1:2; Ps 29:3; Job 37:5;
38:34).
• Yahweh, like Baal, hurls the lightning as like a spear or shoots it like an arrow (cf. Ps 29:7; Job 37:12-13; 38:25; etc.).
• Yahweh, like Baal, is designated as a rider of the clouds (cf. Ps 18:13; Isa 19:1).
• Yahweh, like Baal, is depicted as a son of El (cf. Deut 32:8-9?; Job 1:6?).
• Yahweh, like Baal, defeated the serpent Leviathan (Ug. Lotan) (cf. Pss74:14; 89:11; Job 26:12; Isa 27:1).
• Yahweh, like Baal, had a conflict with Yam (the sea) (cf. Ex 15:1-12; Pss 89:10, 104:7, 136:13; Job 38:10-11).
• Yahweh, like Baal, is sometimes depicted in the form of a bull/calf (cf. Gen
49:24; Ex 32:4; 1 Kgs 12:28). University of Pretoria etd – Gericke, J W (2003) 235
• Yahweh, like Baal, is often referred to as Elyon, “Most High” (cf. Gen 14:18, Num 24:16).
• Yahweh, like Baal, has a divine cosmic mountain in the far north (Zaphon) (cf. Ps 48:3; Isa 14:13).
• Yahweh, like Baal, is depicted as victorious over Mot (death) and is designated “the living God” (cf. Isa 26:19; Sam-Kgs passim; Ps 42:3; etc.).
• Yahweh, like Baal, is called "Lord" (Baal/Adon) (cf. 2 Sam 4:4; 1 Chron 8:33,34; 14:7 and OT passim).
http://upetd.up.ac.za/thesis/available/etd-03192004-135203/unrestricted/05chapter5.pdf
I'd also like to add Mark S. Smith's
The Early History of God: Yahweh and the Other Deities in Ancient Israel - Mark S. Smith - Google Books
Who concludes "Both writers overargue an extreme view in my opinion, although Taylor's discussion better
captures what may have been a "popular" view of Yahweh as solar in the Iron II period."
and John Day's, if you're interested Yahweh and the Gods and Goddesses of Canaan (The Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies): John Day: 9780826468307: Amazon.com: Books
From the Wiggins link you provided pg. 99 John Day notes:
"Wiggins rightly points out that 'sun' would be metaphorical, but fails to note that
'rampart' is a more probable translation." pg. 159
Also, on page 100 Wiggins states "The parallel word hwpy' (hiphil of the root yp'),
'he shone', lends no support to a solar connotation, since it is used almost
exclusively of Yahweh, and never of the sun."
John Day points out "Wiggins is incorrect in saying it is never used of the sun"
"It is clearly used in connection with the light of the sun in Job 3:4." pg. 159
One strong piece of evidence is the Shasu and Edom connection. Read here
at the bottom of the page reference #22 pg. 96-98
God in Translation: Deities in Cross-cultural Discourse in the Biblical World - Mark S. Smith - Google Books
For Van Der Toorn's hypothesis linking Saul with Yahweh read here pg. 281-286
Family Religion in Babylonia, Ugarit and Israel: Continuity and Changes in ... - K. Van Der Toorn - Google Books
Of course, there's a lack of information but based on the information that we do have
it is reasonable to come to these conclusions without being committed.
It's not just my opinion that Yahweh was originally a storm deity. It's the scholars! I've provided
many references. The DDD is a good place to start.
A lot of the storm language used for Yahweh comes from the god Baal in the Ugaritic texts.The Early History of God: Yahweh and the Other Deities in Ancient Israel - Mark S. Smith - Google Books
Some parallels between Yahweh and Baal:
• Yahweh, like Baal, is depicted as a storm deity (cf.. Ex 19-20; 1 Kgs 18; Ps 29, Jer 14:22).
• Yahweh like Baal, has thunder as his voice (cf. Ex 19:19, 20:18, 24:12; Deut 5:21, 33:2; Judg 5:4; Ps 18:13; 1 Sam 7:10; Isa 30:27; Am 1:2; Ps 29:3; Job 37:5;
38:34).
• Yahweh, like Baal, hurls the lightning as like a spear or shoots it like an arrow (cf. Ps 29:7; Job 37:12-13; 38:25; etc.).
• Yahweh, like Baal, is designated as a rider of the clouds (cf. Ps 18:13; Isa 19:1).
• Yahweh, like Baal, is depicted as a son of El (cf. Deut 32:8-9?; Job 1:6?).
• Yahweh, like Baal, defeated the serpent Leviathan (Ug. Lotan) (cf. Pss74:14; 89:11; Job 26:12; Isa 27:1).
• Yahweh, like Baal, had a conflict with Yam (the sea) (cf. Ex 15:1-12; Pss 89:10, 104:7, 136:13; Job 38:10-11).
• Yahweh, like Baal, is sometimes depicted in the form of a bull/calf (cf. Gen
49:24; Ex 32:4; 1 Kgs 12:28). University of Pretoria etd – Gericke, J W (2003) 235
• Yahweh, like Baal, is often referred to as Elyon, “Most High” (cf. Gen 14:18, Num 24:16).
• Yahweh, like Baal, has a divine cosmic mountain in the far north (Zaphon) (cf. Ps 48:3; Isa 14:13).
• Yahweh, like Baal, is depicted as victorious over Mot (death) and is designated “the living God” (cf. Isa 26:19; Sam-Kgs passim; Ps 42:3; etc.).
• Yahweh, like Baal, is called "Lord" (Baal/Adon) (cf. 2 Sam 4:4; 1 Chron 8:33,34; 14:7 and OT passim).
http://upetd.up.ac.za/thesis/available/etd-03192004-135203/unrestricted/05chapter5.pdf
I'd also like to add Mark S. Smith's
The Early History of God: Yahweh and the Other Deities in Ancient Israel - Mark S. Smith - Google Books
Who concludes "Both writers overargue an extreme view in my opinion, although Taylor's discussion better
captures what may have been a "popular" view of Yahweh as solar in the Iron II period."
and John Day's, if you're interested Yahweh and the Gods and Goddesses of Canaan (The Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies): John Day: 9780826468307: Amazon.com: Books
From the Wiggins link you provided pg. 99 John Day notes:
"Wiggins rightly points out that 'sun' would be metaphorical, but fails to note that
'rampart' is a more probable translation." pg. 159
Also, on page 100 Wiggins states "The parallel word hwpy' (hiphil of the root yp'),
'he shone', lends no support to a solar connotation, since it is used almost
exclusively of Yahweh, and never of the sun."
John Day points out "Wiggins is incorrect in saying it is never used of the sun"
"It is clearly used in connection with the light of the sun in Job 3:4." pg. 159
Last edited by a moderator: