Judaism

>>2248251
Asherah was abolished by the patriarchy.

The Yahweh Jews probably Jewed the other Jewish gods so they could collect all treasure in one place.

>>2248251
When Jews betrayed the one true God and whored around with demon gods, notably the demon gods of their canaanite neighbors Ba'al, Molech and Asheroth, they were punished. Eventually they were cut free. They're still cut free.

There's at least 2 names for god in the Tanakh: YHWH and El. Some say it's the same god, others say it's the residue of an earlier polytheism that has been redacted over time. I think the latter is more plausible desu but it's contentious.

>>2248520
El is the canaanite god, the father of Ba'al, Molech and Asheroth. YHWH is never just "El" in the bible; if "El" is used, it is in connection with another word, like El Shaddai, or El Elyon.

Just "El" is the canaanite patriarchal demon god.

In the bible, God is referred to as "Elohim", the plural of "Eloha", not El, and not the plural of El.

If you can't tell God from a demon God made, you're gonna have a bad time.

>>2248520
The tetagrammaton is the personal name while el means "god" in the general sense

>>2248251
>Jewish polytheism

It's an oxymoron, for one.

The Hebrew form (אל) appears in Latin letters in Standard Hebrew transcription as El and in Tiberian Hebrew transcription as ʾĒl. El is a generic word for god that could be used for any god, including Hadad, Moloch,[25] or Yahweh.

In the Tanakh, ’elōhîm is the normal word for a god or the great god (or gods, given that the 'im' suffix makes a word plural in Hebrew). But the form ’El also appears, mostly in poetic passages and in the patriarchal narratives attributed to the Priestly source of the documentary hypothesis. It occurs 217 times in the Masoretic Text: seventy-three times in the Psalms and fifty-five times in the Book of Job, and otherwise mostly in poetic passages or passages written in elevated prose. It occasionally appears with the definite article as hā’Ēl 'the god' (for example in 2 Samuel 22:31,33–48).

The theological position of the Tanakh is that the names Ēl and ’Ĕlōhîm, when used in the singular to mean the supreme god, refer to Yahweh, beside whom other gods are supposed to be either nonexistent or insignificant. Whether this was a long-standing belief or a relatively new one has long been the subject of inconclusive scholarly debate about the prehistory of the sources of the Tanakh and about the prehistory of Israelite religion. In the P strand, YHWH says in Exodus 6:2–3:

I revealed myself to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob as Ēl Shaddāi, but was not known to them by my name, Yahweh.

>>2248582
Before El's revelation with the name of Yahweh, it is said in Genesis 14:18–20 that Abraham accepted the blessing of El, when Melchizedek, the king of Salem and high priest of its deity El Elyon blessed him.[26] One scholarly position is that the identification of Yahweh with Ēl is late, that Yahweh was earlier thought of as only one of many gods, and not normally identified with Ēl. Another is that in much of the Hebrew Bible the name El is an alternate name for Yahweh, but in the Elohist and Priestly traditions it is conceived as an earlier name than Yahweh.[27] The name Yahweh is used in the Bible Tanakh in the first book of Genesis 2:4; and Genesis 4:26 says that at that time, people began to "call upon the name of the LORD".[28][29]

In some places, especially in Psalm 29, Yahweh is clearly envisioned as a storm god, something not true of Ēl so far as we know (although true of his son, Ba'al Hadad). It is Yahweh who is prophesied to one day battle Leviathan the serpent, and slay the dragon in the sea in Isaiah 27:1. The slaying of the serpent in myth is a deed attributed to both Ba’al Hadad and ‘Anat in the Ugaritic texts, but not to Ēl.

>>2248586
Such mythological motifs are variously seen as late survivals from a period when Yahweh held a place in theology comparable to that of Hadad at Ugarit; or as late henotheistic/monotheistic applications to Yahweh of deeds more commonly attributed to Hadad; or simply as examples of eclectic application of the same motifs and imagery to various different gods. Similarly, it is argued inconclusively whether Ēl Shaddāi, Ēl ‘Ôlām, Ēl ‘Elyôn, and so forth, were originally understood as separate divinities. Albrecht Alt presented his theories on the original differences of such gods in Der Gott der Väter in 1929.[30] But others have argued that from patriarchal times, these different names were in fact generally understood to refer to the same single great god, Ēl. This is the position of Frank Moore Cross (1973).[31] What is certain is that the form ’El does appear in Israelite names from every period including the name Yiśrā’ēl ("Israel"), meaning "El strives" or "struggled with El".

>>2248589
According to The Oxford Companion to World Mythology,

It seems almost certain that the God of the Jews evolved gradually from the Canaanite El, who was in all likelihood the "God of Abraham"... If El was the high God of Abraham—Elohim, the prototype of Yahveh—Asherah was his wife, and there are archaeological indications that she was perceived as such before she was in effect "divorced" in the context of emerging Judaism of the 7th century BCE. (See 2 Kings 23:15.)[32]

The apparent plural form ’Ēlîm or ’Ēlim "gods" occurs only four times in the Tanakh. Psalm 29, understood as an enthronement psalm, begins:

A Psalm of David.

Ascribe to Yahweh, sons of Gods (bênê ’Ēlîm),

Ascribe to Yahweh, glory and strength
Psalm 89:6 (verse 7 in Hebrew) has:

For who in the skies compares to Yahweh,
who can be likened to Yahweh among the sons of Gods (bênê ’Ēlîm).

>>2248251
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlnnWbkMlbg
This video explains pretty much everything.

>>2248527

Elohim is a grammatical convention similar to the royal we. It indicates the holiness of El by always pluralising it. It is the plural of El sorry. The root of Eloha is also El.

>>2248528
>>2248531

Anachronisms

>>2248592
Traditionally bênê ’ēlîm has been interpreted as 'sons of the mighty', 'mighty ones', for ’El can mean 'mighty', though such use may be metaphorical (compare the English expression [by] God awful). It is possible also that the expression ’ēlîm in both places descends from an archaic stock phrase in which ’lm was a singular form with the m-enclitic and therefore to be translated as 'sons of Ēl'. The m-enclitic appears elsewhere in the Tanakh and in other Semitic languages. Its meaning is unknown, possibly simply emphasis. It appears in similar contexts in Ugaritic texts where the expression bn ’il alternates with bn ’ilm, but both must mean 'sons of Ēl'. That phrase with m-enclitic also appears in Phoenician inscriptions as late as the fifth century BCE.

One of the other two occurrences in the Tanakh is in the "Song of Moses", Exodus 15:11a:

Who is like you among the Gods (’ēlim), Yahweh?

The final occurrence is in Daniel 11:36:

And the king will do according to his pleasure; and he will exalt himself and magnify himself over every god (’ēl), and against the God of Gods (’El ’Elîm) he will speak outrageous things, and will prosper until the indignation is accomplished: for that which is decided will be done.

>>2248602
There are a few cases in the Tanakh where some think ’El referring to the great god Ēl is not equated with Yahweh. One is in Ezekiel 28:2, in the taunt against a man who claims to be divine, in this instance, the leader of Tyre:

Son of man, say to the prince of Tyre: "Thus says the Lord Yahweh: 'Because your heart is proud and you have said: "I am ’ēl (god), in the seat of ’elōhîm (gods), I am enthroned in the middle of the seas." Yet you are man and not ’El even though you have made your heart like the heart of ’elōhîm ('gods').'"

Here ’ēl might refer to a generic god, or to a highest god, Ēl. When viewed as applying to the King of Tyre specifically, the king was probably not thinking of Yahweh. When viewed as a general taunt against anyone making divine claims, it may or may not refer to Yahweh depending on the context.

In Judges 9:46 we find ’Ēl Bêrît 'God of the Covenant', seemingly the same as the Ba‘al Bêrît 'Lord of the Covenant' whose worship has been condemned a few verses earlier. See Baal for a discussion of this passage.

Psalm 82:1 says:

’elōhîm ("god") stands in the council of ’ēl
he judges among the gods (Elohim).

>>2248606
This could mean that Yahweh judges along with many other gods as one of the council of the high god Ēl. However it can also mean that Yahweh stands in the Divine Council (generally known as the Council of Ēl), as Ēl judging among the other members of the Council. The following verses in which the god condemns those whom he says were previously named gods (Elohim) and sons of the Most High suggest the god here is in fact Ēl judging the lesser gods.

An archaic phrase appears in Isaiah 14:13, kôkkêbê ’ēl 'stars of God', referring to the circumpolar stars that never set, possibly especially to the seven stars of Ursa Major. The phrase also occurs in the Pyrgi Inscription as hkkbm ’l (preceded by the definite article h and followed by the m-enclitic). Two other apparent fossilized expressions are arzê-’ēl 'cedars of God' (generally translated something like 'mighty cedars', 'goodly cedars') in Psalm 80:10 (in Hebrew verse 11) and kêharrê-’ēl 'mountains of God' (generally translated something like 'great mountains', 'mighty mountains') in Psalm 36:7 (in Hebrew verse 6).

For the reference in some texts of Deuteronomy 32:8 to seventy sons of God corresponding to the seventy sons of Ēl in the Ugaritic texts, see ’Elyôn.

As a Christian, I see no contradiciton between the findings of archeology and textual criticism with orthodox (small 'o') Christianity.

The interpretation of Yahweh as the chief El presiding the council of the elohim, the elohim being his sons, is consistent with the Bible.

Most, but not all of the elohim are the sons of god who sinned with the daughters of men in Genesis 6, and were imprisoned in Tartarus, in the Sheol. In other words, the angels. Elohim is also used for Yahweh, depending on the context. So the angels were indeed elohim, gods, but not in the same sense and on the same level that Yahweh is. There's no polytheism here, because the word god didn't mean the same thing as it does today, it simply meant heavenly being, with Yahweh being the chief of them.

The 'el' (god) of the Canaanites can be due to ancestral memory of the true God mixed with local legends, from before the confusion of tongues and scattering of the nations, or it could be another fallen angel, or son of God, perhaps even the Satan himself. Satan said that he wished to be like the most high (El-Elyon), so it makes sense that he would want his followers to call him El.

>>2248586

Again, your source is conflating the God of the Jews with one of the demon gods of the canaanites.

>>2248599

I don't take correction from canaanites, sorry.

Elohim is so much a foreshadowing of the revelation of the Trinity (Plural, yet Singular) that to not see it requires being blinded by YHWH himself.

>>2248701
>The interpretation of Yahweh as the chief El presiding the council of the elohim, the elohim being his sons, is consistent with the Bible.

What absolute foolishness.

El is exactly one of those fallen angels who raped human women; he is the leader of them.

>"As a Christian".

You mean "As a Liar".

>>2248701
To make a comparison with another religion, Hinduism: the angels are the devas and Yahweh is their bhagavan or supreme god. Deva is commonly and accurately translated as god, but no Hindu would put the two on the same level, ontologically speaking. One is uncreated and supreme, the others are created and occupy a lower rank.

>>2248743
All 330,000,000 hindu "gods" are demons.

>>2248740
The Bible itself calls Yahweh El. You're moronic.

>>2248756
>The Bible itself calls Yahweh El.

kek

>You're moronic.

Yeah, okay demon worshiper.

>>2248755
It's just a comparison.

>>2248760
>It occurs 217 times in the Masoretic Text: seventy-three times in the Psalms and fifty-five times in the Book of Job, and otherwise mostly in poetic passages or passages written in elevated prose. It occasionally appears with the definite article as hā’Ēl 'the god' (for example in 2 Samuel 22:31,33–48).
You're a moron.

File: shemayza.jpg (162KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

162KB, 600x600px

>>2248740
>he is the leader of them
The leader of the Enochian sedition was named Shemyaza and he let Azazel take the fall for it.

>>2248735

What's the logical fallacy called where you interpret historical evidence so as to justify your current theological beliefs again?

>>2248774
I always knew there would come a day when Evangelical Amerifats would denounce the Hebrew texts as not being faithful to the KJV, but wow...

>>2248774
>This took 10 seconds on Google to find

El and Eloah are different, though Eloah comes from El. El has it’s own development; El-singular, Eili-plural and Elim-collective plural. It is also use for G-d and pagan deity (one individual) or deities (many individuals, separated or collective). El simply means strenght (as in mighty one). Elohim or Eloahim is derived from Eloah, the plural of Eloah is Eloahi. However, both Eloahi and Elohim are the plurals of Eloah, but Eloahi is simple plural (Jurors) while Elohim is a collective plural noun (Jury). Most dictionaries states that a collective plural noun is a ‘singular noun denoting a group of individuals’. Apparently, Elohim (Eloahim) and Elohi (Eloahi) is used interchangeably. That is, where Elohim is said to be in DUE 6:4 it can also read Eloahi or some say it reads that. Eloahi is also often translated Elohe. Nevertheless, as stated, the plural form can be used for a singular subject, that is, one person, to denote majesty; as is the case with using Elohim for G-d.

>>2248791
Authority comes from the top down. That's how things work.

>>2248805
I think it's called

>"what is hidden in the OT is revealed in the NT; the OT is a foreshadowing of the NT"

but maybe there's a catchier way to say it.

>>2248828
If you think the God of the Jews is the same as the god of the Canaanites, it's clear you have a grasp on neither Old nor New testament.

>>2248828

The KJV adopted the tanakh en toto, as explained to you above.

>>2248875
If you dont think that its clear you interpret the old and new testaments as infallible truth rather than a collection of folk histories and myths.

>>2248854

You realise that this actually isn't a textual or historical argument but a statement of faith right?

>>2248774

Hey, look what you left out!

The theological position of the Tanakh is that the names Ēl and ’Ĕlōhîm, when used in the singular to mean the supreme and active 'God', refer to the same being as does the name, Yahweh. All three refer to the one supreme god who is the god of Israel, beside whom other gods are supposed to be either non-existent or insignificant. Whether this was a longstanding belief or a relatively new one has long been the subject of inconclusive scholarly debate about the prehistory of the sources of the Tanakh and about the prehistory of Israelite religion. In the P strand, YHWH says in Exodus 6.2–3:

I revealed myself to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob as Ēl Shaddāi, but was not known to them by my name, Yahweh.

Just as I said above.

>>2248904
Did that make sense in your head when you posted it?

Want to take another run at it, champ?

>>2248910
It's a statement of truth.

It's a shame you think faith and truth are mutually exclusive, when you need the former to find the latter.

>>2248843
And Shemyaza rejected any higher authority when he convinced his bros how fire human pussy was.

>>2248927

You're the only LARPer here dude. Maybe go back to /x/.

>>2248923

>i need faith to know the truth of whether the window is open

No you don't.

File: C2QuK9eUUAA2DTH.jpg (67KB, 749x1097px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 749x1097px

>>2248933
>not an argument

>>2248946

You need faith to believe that my window is open, when I tell you that it is open, and you cannot see for yourself whether or not it is open.

Faith is just believing things you cannot see. By faith, you know I exist, even though you cannot see me.

>>2248960

So back to /b/ then.

File: this_is_fine_by_damare-d9sbuuo.jpg (88KB, 800x399px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 800x399px

>>2248978
I'm simply pointing out that if we're talking angelic sedition and (possibly) human interbreeding, only two leadership names matter, Shemyaza and Azazel.

>>2248971

Now this is a crazy post.

>Faith is just believing things you cannot see. By faith, you know I exist, even though you cannot see me.

I know you exist cos you are fucking posting lmao wtf

The fact is that you need to manipulate evidence so that it conforms to and bolsters your faith because you're scared of death and want to be with mummy and daddy in heaven forever.

>>2248839
Yahweh is called El (God) in the Bible. You're condeming the Bible itself as pagan. Congratulations!

I'll just drop these for the sake of the other anons and be done with it.

Genesis 17:1
I [am] the Almighty God;
šad·day, ’êl ’ă·nî-
(I am the almighty El)

2 Samuel 22:32
For who [is] God, save the LORD?
ū·mî Yah·weh; mib·bal·‘ă·ḏê ’êl
(Who is El, save Yahweh?)

1 Samuel 2:3
KJV: for the LORD [is] a God of knowledge,
Yah·weh, dê·‘ō·wṯ ’êl
(Yahweh is a God of knowledge)

אֵ֤ל transl. ’êl trans. [is] a God

Another 160 occurences:

http://biblehub.com/hebrew/el_410.htm

>>2248989

You are insane. Nothing you ever post on any topic makes any sense. You just drop esoteric bullshit to obfuscate the fact that you can't make a clear point.

>>2249021
People will go to intense lengths to make themselves distracted from whats going on right now. These retards go to hell.

File: 60-fbd1426822.jpg (127KB, 904x678px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 904x678px

>>2249021
>You are insane.
No professional psychologist or psychiatrist I've ever spoken with seems to think so, and they've all known about my passtimes.

>Nothing you ever post on any topic makes any sense
I'm simply relating the contents of the Book of Enoch as it relates to leadership of the angelic sedition.

>the fact that you can't make a clear point.
I've made it clearly three times now. I'm sorry you'd rather shitfling than discuss it.

>>2249012
Again, YHWH is called El Shaddai, El Elyon, etc., in the bible.

Not just "El". Ever.

Maybe don't get your biblical knowledge from Wiki.

kek

>>2249010

You can't see me.

By faith, you know I exist.

The crazy thing is you having the human ability to believe what you have not seen, i.e. faith, and you think it's a religious term.

When you see leaves blowing in the wind, do you see the wind?

But does the wind exist?

>>2249021
But he's considerate enough to put his beliefs in his trip.

Anyway if you're interested in the other Semitic entities in the long-neglected pantheon, I humbly suggest Philo's/Eusebius's's summary of Sanchuniathon's history of the Gods but he goes pretty far Northwest of Judea.

>>2248919
it does make sense

>>2249058
>does the wind exist?
yeah it fucking does. You can scientifically observe wind.

File: byzantium.png (931KB, 800x770px) Image search: [Google]

931KB, 800x770px

>>2249573
But are you scientifically observing wind right now?

>>2248527
>YHWH is never just "El" in the bible; if "El" is used, it is in connection with another word, like El Shaddai, or El Elyon.
Oh boy do I have a quote for you:
>Genesis 33:18
>Jacob arrived safe in the city of Shechem which is in the land of Canaan-- having come thus from Paddanaram--- and he encamped before the city. The parcel of land where he pitched his tent he purchased from the children of Hamor, Shechem's father, for a hundred kesitahs. He set up an altar there, and called it El-elohe-yisrael (El, god of Israel)

>>2249663
That isnt how faith works, faith isnt simply believing is something you cannot directly observe at all times, its believing something despite having no logical reason to.

And while everyone has degrees of that, they are usually at least based off inductive logic. Believing in something because its backed by mathematical models is different than believing something because someone wrote it down

>>2249663
Yeah, just like I'm scientifically observing gravity and light all the time, and electricity when I use an electical device.

You fucking lunatic.

File: Model_of_Megiddo,_1457_BCE..jpg (581KB, 1424x870px) Image search: [Google]

581KB, 1424x870px

Often Yahweh and Baal are depicted as being deities whose cults are in conflict, but this is nothing more than propaganda from the biblical authors. Those who believe that Ahab actually did persecute the prophets of Yahweh and promoted Baal's cult in opposition cannot explain why Ahab's son has a Yahweh theophoric name. However the Bible also gives evidence to Israelites who considered Baal and Yahweh to be the same god, which is no surprise considering the number of parallels between Yahweh and Baal Hadad from the Ugarit texts.

>1st Kings 18:21
>Elijah approached all the people and said, "how long will you keep hopping between two opinions? If Yahweh is Elohim, follow him; and if Baal, follow him!"
This passage attests to both Yahweh and Baal being identified as names of the Supreme god Elohim. A similar passage is in Hosea 2:18:
>And in that day -declares Yahweh-
>You will call [me] Ishi (husband),
>And no more will you call me Baali (alternately husband or lord
Baal polemics are not against another god, they are simply against the use of Baal as an epithet of Yahweh. This is not to say that early Israelites were not polytheistic, this simply attests to another one of the identities that Yahweh's cult absorbed like an amoebae in the lead up to monolatrism.

Polytheism =/= Henotheism


/thread

>>2248728
Where do you think the god of the Jews came from?

You know the Jews were Canaanites, right?

El = Cronus
Yahweh = Zeus

The early Israelites were polytheistic, and there's no doubts about that. However, as with many other polytheistic traditions, one god in particular was honored as a 'patron' god. In this case, Yahweh was the national war god of both the kingdoms of Judah and Israel, but was worshiped along with El, Ba'al, Asherah, and Chemosh.

The change to henotheism was due to politics, not actual religious convictions; the transition from henotheism to monotheism was the result of Persian influence and more politics.

For fuck's sakes, we have evidence that the Israelites believed that Yahweh had a consort in Asherah, or with Anat.

>>2251691
It's a little more complicated than that. Yahweh has attributes of El and Baal

>>2248989
Angels and humans cannot breed with each other, the book of Enoch is a horseshit forgery.

File: 1472920576232.jpg (188KB, 426x500px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 426x500px

>>2251691
El = Woden
Yahweh = Thor

>tfw you see what I did there in the past because you're a god that can see the future.

>>2253129
Yes they can.
Forcefully and you get Nephilim.

File: 2c31d03e26a260540d41b43d6d752f70.jpg (44KB, 404x500px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 404x500px

>>2253120
Wouldn't that just make them brothers?
Two brothers at strife trying to win their fathers favor.

>>2253190
well Yahweh and Baal considered different names for the same god during monarchical times. I posted about it here>>2250439

>>2253183
Not they cannot. Nephilim aren't the children of angels, ENOCH IS A FORGERY are you illiterate?

>>2253264
What do you mean by forgery? most books in the bible were not written by the named author

>>2253264
so is Deuteronomy and several of Paul's letters.

>>2253264
>A FORGERY
For what it's worth the Qayinite hypothesis w/r/t the Elioud/Nephilim is pretty legit too via materials like Jubilees. But enlighten me, a forgery of...what...exactly? Do you mean to imply that there's a version of Chanokh that's more "orthodox" or are you just referencing its status as pseudepigrapha?

>>2249573

Can you see it?

Or do you have to believe it exists without seeing it?

>>2249712
A triple usage.

Neat.

>>2249732

Nonsense.

Faith and logic and reason are not mutually exclusive.

>>2250439

That confrontation was not unclear. After the priests of Ba'al lost to Elijah, the 450 of them lost their blood in the river.

The fire from the heavens sent by YHWH was no joke.

This is not a manufactured conflict.

>>2251637

He is eternal.

He made the angels that turned into demons that the canaanites called their gods.

>>2253120
No, no he does not.

>>2253129

False and then true.

>>2253285
>But enlighten me, a forgery of...what...exactly? Do you mean to imply that there's a version of Chanokh that's more "orthodox" or are you just referencing its status as pseudepigrapha?
well fundies will defend that James quoted the book of Enoch by saying that some of the book of Enoch is true, just not all of it, so I guess they could expand on that and say that the forger reused some of the material from the real true book of Enoch

>>2253254
You can post a lie a billion times and it will never be the truth.

>>2253306
Jude quoted it, and it almost kept Jude out of the bible.

But the quote seems legit.

Just not the source, and it was not written by the same Enoch who was taken up to heaven before the flood.

>>2253297
whether the conflict was real or not does not concern my argument. it's right there in what Elijah says, Israelites considered Elohim to go by the names Yahweh and Baal.

>>2253313
I always mix the two brothers up
>But the quote seems legit.
why? it's from the book of Enoch you consider to be a forgery

>>2253315

Holy shit.

It's right there that they had to CHOOSE between YHWH and Ba'al.

The contest was BETWEEN YHWH and Ba'al.

This is what Joshua had to say:

Joshua 24:15 And if it seems evil to you to serve the Lord, choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the River, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you dwell. But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.”

>>2253319

First, remember that none of Jesus' brothers thought he was the messiah until after the resurrection. That helps put James and Jude into perspective.

Then note that neither of them is an apostle. That helps to weigh their opinions.

The quote is thus:

“Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of His saints, 15 to execute judgment on all, to convict all who are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have committed in an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him.”

I have no problem with that quote.

>>2253313
>it was not written by the same Enoch
I don't even think Chanokh makes that claim (that Chanokh was the author) given he ascends as Metatron like Azra in 2 Esdras.

>>2253354
Even logistically speaking, it would be difficult to imagine a man living alone, who vanishes, and then the world is buried under water and mud, having his book that he wrote in whatever language he had back then, on what, bark, survive 4600 years.

>>2253345
>It's right there that they had to CHOOSE between YHWH and Ba'al.
that's how Elijah CHOOSES to frame the issue. If you wish to continue to deny that some Israelites considered Baal and Yahweh to be the same god, then check out my quote of Hosea 2:18, which I'll repost:
>And in that day -declares Yahweh-
>You will call [me] Ishi (husband),
>And no more will you call me Baali (alternately husband or lord)
additionally please explain why Saul and David both have children with Baal theophoric names. this isn't so much of a problem if you consider the possiblity that they were pagans, but I know you won't accept this. either they were naming their children after Baal to refer to Yahweh or they chose to honor a "foreign god"

>>2253363

Two altars
Two sacrifices
Two groups of people
One winner

The other side could have written their account, as there were also priests of Asheroth there who were not slaughtered.

But for you to say this was some sort of misunderstanding is ludicrous.

As to the naming of people, I have absolutely no idea what you mean.

Are you aware that Ba'al means "lord"?

>>2253360
But a story similar to that is exactly the narrative of Jubilees w/r/t the Qayinite seed of witchblood.

>>2253264
>A FORGERY
Turbo pleb. You think the books of "Moses" were written by Moses too?

>>2253378
>But for you to say this was some sort of misunderstanding is ludicrous
I didn't reread what Elijah said. they "confused" between two opinions of names for Elohim. only Elijah saw this "confusion" as a problem. Ahab, despite being a promoter of Baal's cult gave his children Yahweh theophoric names. if Jezebel was such an anti-Yahweh Baal worshiper, why would she be fine with her child having this kind of name? And you still haven't addressed the Hosea passage which is much more clear-cut than the Elijah passage.

>Are you aware that Ba'al means "lord"?
You are obscuring the issue. Why would they give their children baal names with the meaning of lord unspecific to baal when they were surrounded by cultures that did give theophoric names to Baal with baal. also why would the writer of Samuel feel the need to censor these names if they innocently refered to "lord" rather than Baal? you can say maybe the names refer to Yahweh with baal, but that's exactly what I'm arguing, that Yahweh was known by Baal

>>2248593
That was really nicely compiled together. Thanks for posting.