logo
Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
View
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline Theophilus  
#1 Posted : Tuesday, September 11, 2007 5:58:55 AM(UTC)
Theophilus
Joined: 7/5/2007(UTC)
Posts: 544
Man

Thanks: 4 times
I was aware that a recurring theme in the Scriptures is the Israelites going back and forth from remaining set apart to Yah and mixing with the religious traditions of their neighbors. I also knew that their neighbors were influenced by the Yahudim and made some attempt at accomodation possibly to dilute the Israelite people into their own nations. I assume it was for this reason that Yahuweh gave Moshe commandment #1 and the Shema, knowing the people did or would be tempted to revere other elohim (gods) in His presence.

With this in mind I came across a claim from a u-tube video claiming that the Israelites splintered off from a Pagan pantheon that uses names familiar to readers of the Tanahk such as El, Elyon, Elohim, Yahuweh, Baal, Asaroth etc.

Here is video in question: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llCm3gLU6tM

A response video was available that challenged the claim of the original, that had the same title except with Re: preceeding this one's title.

I for one, was unaware of the Ugaritic texts and have since done a little digging. In case you were as unfamilar with these as myself, I'll link the the following to get started:

http://www.logos.com/ugaritic

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ugarit

For starters, I'm suspicious about the claim of the texts refering to Yahuweh as a son of El date from 2200 BCE. If I recall correctly both Enoch (pre-flood), and Noah and sons (pre and post flood) called upon the specific name of Yahuweh and were montheists among polytheists. I see the same of Abraham and sons, yet Moshe was concerned about in whose name he should tell the Hebrews held in captivity he was sent to deliver them for.

If the 2200 BCE date is true it opens a few possibilities occur to me. While the conclusion of the initial video is that Moses/Israelites must have borrowed the name of Yahuweh from the Pagan Canaanites and used texts like the Ugaritic to base Judaism upon I don't see that this is so even if the video were an accurate report. I suspect that Noah's sons and some of their desendants retained knowledge even if somewhat corrupted of Yahuweh Elohim apart from (and even before?) Abraham was reintroduced to Him and later still Moses.

If the tabelets referencing Yahuweh were from Abraham's day it seems possible to me that Abraham's influence on his neighbors may have taken some root as I'd presume Esau's and possibly Ishmael's extended families that did not leave for Goshen would've retained aspects of Abraham's el, Yahuweh in or around the land of promise. If the earlier date for the Exodus is correct say 1447 BCE, it is possible that the Israelites who failed to obey Yahweh's /Joshua's instructions not to marry or associate with the people of the nations were similarly compromised leaving a blended Canaanite pantheon that used Yahuweh's name before the time that this city was destroyed. It also makes me wonder about blended practices of the northern tribes of Israel that split off after Solomon's death?

I also could see this as a possible reason why the exiled Jews in Babylon would make secret the name of Yahuweh. That is to prevent the same experience from reoccuring with the Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Muslims etc. from writing in Yahuweh's name into their writings and systems and prevent the blending /dilluting of their people set apart to Yahuweh?

I've written a few PMs (and hope to share shortly) about this and received some helpful replies, however, I hope that opening the discussion to the forum will alert people to this arguement and that we can all gain by seeing and sharing our reponses.

Offline Theophilus  
#2 Posted : Wednesday, October 10, 2007 3:21:36 AM(UTC)
Theophilus
Joined: 7/5/2007(UTC)
Posts: 544
Man

Thanks: 4 times
I mentioned that I had recieved some replies on this subject. Unfortunately I've only been able to locate a short one from Yada and hope that you'll also benefit from his analysis.

Here's a portion of what he wrote regarding the Logos article:

Quote:
"The Logos article is better written but far more deceptive. Initially, it confirms what I have been saying for some time regarding the fact that the Israeli community was literate and that bible stories didn’t come from Babylon. It also seems to confirm the recent finding of a paleo Hebrew inscription which suggests that it was one of the world’s earliest, if not first alphabet. It also confirms why Yah was so angry with His people’s infidelity.

That said, the author of the Logos article, like most scholars, makes conclusions without evidence regarding plagiarism. The fact someone else may have written something similar, doesn’t mean that one copied the other, only that they are reporting the same thing. And contrary to his assertion, El isn’t one of Yah’s names. So he’s completely wrong in that regard. It is just a word which serves as a title. But the confirmation of Ba’al as a pagan god who was worshiped here, serves to confirm the Word.

It’s frustrating when scholars claim that Yah’s Word is a copy of Satan’s doctrine, when it’s the other way around. The Daniel 7 example he sites is the opposite of what he asserts. Satan knows exactly what Yah’s throne looks like, so when Satan inspired his Ba’al worshipers, he told them what he had seen. Moreover the specific example in D7.13 is a prophetic picture of what will come when Messiyah returns. And contrary to the author’s claims, the Son of Man isn’t a “second power” but instead a manifestation set apart from the one and only power. Further, there is no reference to a “Godhead” in the RC, that’s simply an errant translation. And while the Trinity is part of “Christian doctrine,” it’s not part of Yahweh’s teaching so his primary claim is bogus."
Offline ΜαvΣяiכΚ ΛΩאΓ RαηGε  
#3 Posted : Wednesday, April 8, 2009 4:02:47 AM(UTC)
ΜαvΣяiכΚ ΛΩאΓ RαηGε
Joined: 4/8/2009(UTC)
Posts: 27

I agree. Satan is the greatest liar. It would be exactly the right thing for him to do: describe his kingdom, by copying God's kingdom. When scholars present the information on the Ugaritic texts a lot of inconclusiveness occurs. Also I haven't heard of the name YHWH or Yahweh being in any of the Ugaritic and Caananite texts. There is a sea monster or sea god called Yam/Yaw, but it has nothing to do with YHWH. I guess atheists simply like to think it's YHWH.
El is the supreme deity in Ugaritic pantheon but the word 'El' means 'god', it's not the name of God, it's a title. About the similarities in the Bible and the Ugaritic texts: it's not that hard to imagine that Satan would tell these copied stories to the ancient peoples, he thinks he is god and wants to convince people that he is God, by copying God's kingdom, God's word and so on. The coming Anti-Christ will try to present himself as the real Messiah and many will believe him, as he has done with the ancient peoples.
When I first heard about the Ugaritic texts, some doubts attacked me but when you realize where these doubts are leading to (->Atheism, which is probably the stupidest thing in the world), they are easy to be defeated. I am glad that there are people, who are refuting Satan's lies. God bless you!

Offline Matthew  
#4 Posted : Wednesday, April 8, 2009 6:21:15 AM(UTC)
Matthew
Joined: 10/3/2007(UTC)
Posts: 1,191
Man
Location: São Paulo, Brazil

Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 2 post(s)
Here's a quote from Yada Yahweh, Book II, Called Out Assemblies, Yowbel chapter:

Yada wrote:
In context, the story begins: “And when the Devil (diabolos — one prone to slander, the false accuser and calumniator, one who speaks maliciously and deceives; from diaballo, meaning to send out and throw away, to traduce (to fraudulently misrepresent and be exposed as blameworthy and shameful), to malign, misrepresent, slander, accuse and defame) had completed (synteleo — finished and ended) each and every (pas) temptation (peirasmos — experiment, attempt, trial, enticement, and test), he departed (aphistemi — withdrew, stood away, removed himself, and became aloof) for a measure of time (kairos — another opportune time).” (Luke 4:13)

The translators made a respectable attempt at transliterating Satan’s title but not, as we shall soon see, Yahushua’s name. It tells us whose side they were on.

It’s too bad we don’t know the meaning behind “devil.” We see him as an ugly horned cartoon character decked out in red with a pointy tail and pitchfork. In reality, the Devil is a slick performer, handsome, dressed in all the finest clothes. You’ve seen him misrepresent the truth as president, prime minister, chairman, pope, priest, pastor, professor, and anchorman.

This Scriptural introduction introduces us to Satan’s tools: slander, misrepresentation, and false accusations. He doesn’t have a creative bone in his spirit. All he can do is corrupt and counterfeit. We have also been made aware of Satan’s methods: experimentation, enticement, trials, and testing. He toys with people until he finds something that works—usually sex, power, and/or money. We know that there is a limit to the Devil’s recourses and patience. He gave up and left. From this we can deduce that the Devil isn’t omnipresent. However, Satan is infinite in time and that is an advantage most of us do not have.


Yada really explains Satan well in that chapter, who he is, what he does, how he does it, etc.

ΜαvΣяiכΚ ΛΩאΓ RαηGε wrote:
Atheism, which is probably the stupidest thing in the world!

Defintely!

Welcome to the forum Maverick!
Offline ΜαvΣяiכΚ ΛΩאΓ RαηGε  
#5 Posted : Wednesday, April 8, 2009 9:25:09 AM(UTC)
ΜαvΣяiכΚ ΛΩאΓ RαηGε
Joined: 4/8/2009(UTC)
Posts: 27

Thanks. And yes, I know that the devil was created very handsome, but nowadays, I think he is sort of a shapeshifter, as are his demons, that's why some people have the idea of shapeshifter aliens that have revealed themselves to ancient people. In fact, these demons, really, are aliens (alien - A foreigner residing in a country/ Any life form of extraterrestrial origin). I agree that Satan's power is in slandering, accusing, lying, counterfeiting, tempting, etc. After all that's what 'Satan' means. Thanks again, I'm new to this forum, but so far it looks very interesting. It's good to be able to have a civilized conversation with like-minded Christians, instead of arguing with frustrated, continuously-swearing atheists on YouTube, lol.
Offline sirgodfrey  
#6 Posted : Wednesday, April 8, 2009 11:18:19 AM(UTC)
sirgodfrey
Joined: 10/2/2008(UTC)
Posts: 512
Location: North Carolina

Welcome Maverick!
Users browsing this topic
Guest
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.