Current Events > Reminder that the Bible is in fact polytheistic.

(+) Yeah! (+)

The Israelites were constantly being told not to worship other gods. Not necessarily because they didn't exist, but because their god would get pissed off.

It's right there in the First Commandment: "I am the LORD thy god, thou shalt have no other gods before me"
Which implies that there are, in fact, other gods.

The whole "ACTHUALLY" the God of the Bible is the only god that exists" thing didn't come about until much much later.

I used to joke about that. The only real response I ever got, which was rare, was that it means to not idolize anything or anyone else. Not necessarily that there were other gods, but you shouldn't worship money, fame, xyz celebrity, that kind of thing.

OldNastyBastard posted...

I used to joke about that. The only real response I ever got, which was rare, was that it means to not idolize anything or anyone else. Not necessarily that there were other gods, but you shouldn't worship money, fame, xyz celebrity, that kind of thing.

Thats how I always interpreted it when I was growing up in Sunday school. Im not religious nowadays so I dont really care either way, but it is interesting to think about

Yeah, it means not to place God above anything else. You can worship Him or you can worship money, but not both.

The Bible is a collection of books by different authors & prophets over hundreds of years. Some academics think Genesis contains two creation myths that were joined. Textual criticism indicates people's beliefs evolved over time though to say "The Bible" as we know it today is polytheistic I would call an oversimplification at the very least. Other "spiritual powers" exist at varying levels of import depending on the author and era, but as a whole the Bible is pretty consistent that God is the top dog, the creator, and no other being's power rivals his and so there is nothing else that can be given the same title of "God." Those are other "spiritual powers" nowadays tend to be interpreted by Christians as demons aligned with Satan or Angel members of God's 'court'

Yeah, it's pretty widely accepted that the Jewish faith gradually evolved from "Yahweh is our god, he's the one watching out for us and protecting us from the other gods" to "Actually, Yahweh is stronger and better than all the other gods," to "Actually, Yahweh is the ONLY real god, and all the other gods are demons pretending to be gods."

I learned this in Catholic school.

Didn't he lose a fight against a god?

There is evidence the Jewish god was originally worshipped as one god in a pantheon, but that was a very long time ago, pre-Bible. Ive never been that religious myself, but I always took as just a rule not to worship those gods other people were worshipping, not necessarily an acknowledgment they thought those were real gods.

action52 posted...

Yeah, it's pretty widely accepted that the Jewish faith gradually evolved from "Yahweh is our god, he's the one watching out for us and protecting us from the other gods" to "Actually, Yahweh is stronger and better than all the other gods," to "Actually, Yahweh is the ONLY real god, and all the other gods are demons pretending to be gods."

I learned this in Catholic school.

That's actually kinda nuts that Catholic school would teach you the correct historicity of the evolution of the Abrahamic god bc that also basically suggests that religion is bs.

Maybe, but it wasn't written in English, so who knows what the actual original meaning in ancient Hebrew was.

Originally, Yahweh was just a god of storms, and just one member of an entire pantheon. But in time, things progressed so that he became the One True God of the religion.

So basically he's Trump

Strider102 posted...

So basically he's Trump

To his cult, perhaps.

During Exodus, Pharaoh's court magicians call upon their Egyptian gods to cast sticks-to-snakes, which succeeds. Later, Moses stops doing miracles for like five minutes and the Israelites immediately lose faith and make a golden calf idol. They didn't pick that out of nowhere, it was already a well-known representation of a competing god.

Also, Ba'al is mentioned by name in several places.

It's only later that other gods are retconned out of existence. But if that's the in-universe reality, then why have the first (or second, depending on your exact beliefs) commandment deal with something that's not even "real"?

lilORANG posted...

That's actually kinda nuts that Catholic school would teach you the correct historicity of the evolution of the Abrahamic god bc that also basically suggests that religion is bs.

They also told us the real dates that the four Gospels were written, which were almost certainly many years after they died (John would have had to be over 100 years old when he wrote his Gospel).

Keep in mind that the Catholic Church maintains that the Bible is inspired by God, and not the actual words of God himself, except for some parts where Jesus or the prophets were directly telling us things.

Also, in general the Catholic Church is much less literal in their interpretation of the Bible than evangelical faiths. So things like the two creation myths in Genesis, the book of Job, and the book of Revelations are considered parables that God used to teach us things, and not necessarily historical fact.

suchiuomizu posted...

There is evidence the Jewish god was originally worshipped as one god in a pantheon, but that was a very long time ago, pre-Bible. Ive never been that religious myself, but I always took as just a rule not to worship those gods other people were worshipping, not necessarily an acknowledgment they thought those were real gods.

It's not really pre-Bible either. It's very middle-of-the-Bible that Israelites are worshipping other gods. It's in fact a recurring theme across books that Israelites (or even the King of Israel, like Solomon) are worshipping multiple gods. And then our author tells us how messed up it is that those Israelites are worshipping multiple gods and how they're obviously committing sacrilege because a REAL Israelite worships only Yahweh (or El, depending on the century).

The only question is if you think the author in those cases represents the REAL Israelite belief. And the other Israelites or even the King of Israel don't represent the REAL beliefs.

HylianFox posted...

Which implies that there are, in fact, other gods.

No, It implies that people were worshipping other gods, not that those gods were real.

After the Israelites successfully escape from Egypt, the Bible explicitly states that God "punished" the Egyptian gods. Which confirms they exist.

Also I can't remember what verse it was, but there was some passage in the Old Testament (I think it was a book that started with A?), that sounded weird in the New American Standard Bible translation (the most accurate English one) because it made it sound like God and the Lord weren't the same entity. I checked the original Hebrew, and it indeed referred to Elohim and Yahweh, two different gods in the old pantheon, by name. They really tried to scrub that from English translations, but slipped up in a few spots.

It's an interesting tale of the fusion of an imported storm/warrior god Yahweh, and the father/creator god of Canaan El.

Wouldn't claim to have great knowledge of the archaeology and theology of this process, and the sublimation of various consorts and subsidiary gods into one focus of belief of course, but it's a fascinating area to dig into occasionally.

Please note that this post is related only to the studies of historians and archaeologists, and is not meant to be an attack on any beliefs board members might hold.

Torah gets crazy if you treat El and Yahweh as distinct deities.

Starks posted...

Torah gets crazy if you treat El and Yahweh as distinct deities.

I'd argue the Old Testament (apologies I haven't read the Torah), makes more sense when you realise these 2 distinct voices are there.

Ok? Whether these other deities really exist or are just something the people made up is frequently not relevant. The relevant point is that you shouldn't worship them. Whether the moral of the story is that God is more powerful than them, or has legitimacy to his rule that they don't, or is alive while the others aren't, the bottom line is still that: worship God and nothing else.

But you do have a handful of direct quotes from the OT that straight-up tell you they're fake. Two examples that come to mind:

https://www.biblestudytools.com/deuteronomy/32-17.html
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm%20115%3A4-8&version=NIV

And of course Paul tells about it many centuries later too.

You also have a couple of instances where you're actually shown the process of someone making a god out of metal. Aaron's golden calf is the most famous. Another good one is a guy in the book of Judges by the name of Micah (really underrated story, that one!).

Now, it's noteworthy that there are a few strange cases that have always just been left at face value, like Pharaoh's magicians, or the time Dagon bowed before the Ark of the Covenant, or the witch who necromanced Samuel. How these things happen, I really don't know. The scripture doesn't specify.

OldNastyBastard posted...

I used to joke about that. The only real response I ever got, which was rare, was that it means to not idolize anything or anyone else. Not necessarily that there were other gods, but you shouldn't worship money, fame, xyz celebrity, that kind of thing.

That's exactly what it means. This is why God simultaneously tells the ancient people not to worship them while also saying they're not real.

suchiuomizu posted...

There is evidence the Jewish god was originally worshipped as one god in a pantheon, but that was a very long time ago, pre-Bible. Ive never been that religious myself, but I always took as just a rule not to worship those gods other people were worshipping, not necessarily an acknowledgment they thought those were real gods.

It happened a lot, actually, even in the scripture. The books of Kings are essentially a cycle of one or two kings who worshipped God and one or two that worshipped some of the other nations' gods. This is actually related to the fall of Judah:

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Kings%2021%3A1-16&version=NIV
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20kings%2024%3A1-4&version=NIV

pokedude900 posted...

After the Israelites successfully escape from Egypt, the Bible explicitly states that God "punished" the Egyptian gods. Which confirms they exist.

Also I can't remember what verse it was, but there was some passage in the Old Testament (I think it was a book that started with A?), that sounded weird in the New American Standard Bible translation (the most accurate English one) because it made it sound like God and the Lord weren't the same entity. I checked the original Hebrew, and it indeed referred to Elohim and Yahweh, two different gods in the old pantheon, by name. They really tried to scrub that from English translations, but slipped up in a few spots.

You are probably talking about this passage
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2032%3A8-9&version=NRSVUE

Which indeed positions Yahweh as the national god of Israel, as appointed by the creator god El. It's not just an English translation thing though. The message in that verse has been scrubbed since far before those translations. Bible textual history is a lot to go into but in short, we now know what's probably very close to the original message of that verse because of the Dead Sea Scrolls, which were only discovered about 70 years ago. But they give us access to what's probably a very old Hebrew version of the verse and it's very clear it's polytheistic (scholars like to use the term "henotheistic" sometimes but same idea)

(also, I specifically linked the NRSVUE version above, because it incorporates our knowledge from the Dead Sea Scrolls. Most other English translations don't consider the Dead Sea Scrolls, and so the meaning in the verse is completely different)

Ah, we're not doing historical theology, we're doing bible study apparently.

That is significantly less interesting, so I'll bow out here.

Its as simple as people getting being the idea of a one while acknowledging other deities/spirits/forces that were common to different culture sects

I mean, the Bible talks about conversion for a reason. Not just from the heart of an unknowing person to having them know, but turning away from the things they already do know

Turbam posted...

Didn't he lose a fight against a god?

No he lost a wrestling match to Jacob

there is also I think mentions in the Bible, as well as found in Archeology, a "Queen of Heaven". An ancient Hebrew goddess. Who was perhaps the wife of Yaweh or El

Mussurana posted...

I'd argue the Old Testament (apologies I haven't read the Torah), makes more sense when you realise these 2 distinct voices are there.

It's a mess of different authors in and out of various Babylonian exile periods.

Zikten posted...

there is also I think mentions in the Bible, as well as found in Archeology, a "Queen of Heaven". An ancient Hebrew goddess. Who was perhaps the wife of Yaweh or El

I don't know of (and didn't find) any scriptural references for this. My search did find a Wikipedia page that says Catholics give that title to Mary the mother of Jesus, though.

The closest I can think of in scripture are that Solomon chooses to personify wisdom as a woman and handful of times in Proverbs (chapter 9 being a good example), while also suggesting Wisdom is the very first created being in Proverbs 8.

Zikten posted...

there is also I think mentions in the Bible, as well as found in Archeology, a "Queen of Heaven". An ancient Hebrew goddess. Who was perhaps the wife of Yaweh or El

IIRC, the original Hebrew there refers to Ishtar/Inanna, the Mesopotamian goddess of love, war, and fertility. Who is also the original basis for Aphrodite in the Greek pantheon.

ReturnOfDevsman posted...

I don't know of (and didn't find) any scriptural references for this. My search did find a Wikipedia page that says Catholics give that title to Mary the mother of Jesus, though.

I again forget the verse, but a Queen of Heaven is mentioned precisely once. I think somewhere fairly late in the Old Testament.

Zikten posted...

there is also I think mentions in the Bible, as well as found in Archeology, a "Queen of Heaven". An ancient Hebrew goddess. Who was perhaps the wife of Yaweh or El

Tbh it's been a while since I looked at the topic, so the following is potentially suspect, but I'll see what I remember.

It appears that El's consort was indeed worshipped alongside the combined El/Yahweh for sometime, particularly in the wealthier more sophisticated North.
Nb El also retained his Golden Calf iconography for longer in this area.

Some scholars feel that conquest by the Babylonians and subsequent exile helped the hardline monotheists of the South into the ascendancy. Bit beyond my level to make that kind of judgement though.

"I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me: That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else."

Turbam posted...

Didn't he lose a fight against a god?

HighSeraph posted...

No he lost a wrestling match to Jacob

He is probably referring to this brief episode
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Kings%203%3A21-27&version=NRSVUE

Where basically the Israelites are attacking the Moabites and look like they're about to win. But then at the last moment the King of Moab sacrifices his first-born son to their god, and immediately afterward some kind of divine wrath fucks up all of the Israelites. Elsewhere in the bible it says that the Moabites worship the god Chemosh, so you could say Chemosh defeats the Israelites.

Obviously there's mountains of apologetics to explain this in a way that doesn't acknowledge the Moabites having a god. I've seen some weird apologetics, like that the Israelites were just so grossed out at the idea of seeing someone sacrifice their son that they decided to go home. But anyway, it's pretty clear.

Doe posted...

Some academics think Genesis contains two creation myths that were joined.

Wait, what are the two? Like, the seven days story being separate from the Eden story? Or is this about the flood?

That's make me feel extra bad for the people who have gods living in their heads

Don't forget the Bible mentions the Canaanite god Moloch.

pokedude900 posted...

I again forget the verse, but a Queen of Heaven is mentioned precisely once. I think somewhere fairly late in the Old Testament.

Okay, found it. Jeremiah chapter 44.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jeremiah%2044&version=NASB1995

Not seeing a literal translation from Hebrew indicating that it's Ishtar/Inanna after a quick search, but I've definitely seen multiple sources saying that that's who the passage is in reference to.

pokedude900 posted...

Okay, found it. Jeremiah chapter 44.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jeremiah%2044&version=NASB1995

Not seeing a literal translation from Hebrew indicating that it's Ishtar/Inanna after a quick search, but I've definitely seen multiple sources saying that that's who the passage is in reference to.

Ah, that makes sense, as some other figure they worshipped. They did that a lot.

The Bible says a lot of things. Most/all of the other gods are still extant and many still worshipped to this very days. Some have graven images in major cities showing how people really never learn/change. *Shrugs*

There is nothing new under the sun.

You would think the fact that the lore is constantly being changed and retconned would be proof enough that its all bullshit >_>

BlueBoy675 posted...

You would think the fact that the lore is constantly being changed and retconned would be proof enough that its all bullshit >_>

Its really not. You can pick up an old Greek version anywhere. Greek is a mathematically precise language that really does not change. Or, theres old Ethiopian versions out there for those who seek. Most people are casuals and havent put in the work. You have to research to go past surface level discussions or understandings.

Its all open to interpretation but as far as I know, other than modern re-interpretation errors, theres basically nothing in the whole book that has ever been disproven. At most, you get someone giving their opinions but everything that can be verified factually (its faith based so obviously not everything can be) has been or at worst, not disproven.

Like the Great Flood, for instance. Was it like the Hollywood movie version? Lol, no. However, almost every single ancient civilization with records records some sort of cataclysmic flooding event and geology shows this in fossil records. Thats not saying what to believe but the lore is reflected.

Its also a fact that other, older religions did in fact exist and many practices of these are mentioned in there too. Most of them still exist too but nobody studies anything past Tic Toc levels of knowledge so these conversations tend to be angry and surface level.

the bible says that god's power level is above 70 million.

OniLink5000 posted...

the bible says that god's power level is above 70 million.

Only that much? Omnipotent my ass.

OniLink5000 posted...

the bible says that god's power level is above 70 million.

Ya know, what if in Apocalypse Lotto we look up in the sky and a health bar pops up?

CreekCo posted...

Ya know, what if in Apocalypse Lotto we look up in the sky and a health bar pops up?

Hell yeah, raid boss time!

The person who gets the last blow gets his power.

CreekCo posted...

theres basically nothing in the whole book that has ever been disproven.

I wasn't going to go there, but if you're going to make that claim...

The Egyptians didn't have Hebrew slaves, and 400,000 people did not live in the Sinai desert for 40 years. There is zero archeological evidence to support it.

There is no evidence that anyone name Daniel served under Nebuchadnezzar II.

The Bible claims (albeit indirectly) that the world is only several thousand years old, whereas we have scientifically proven that not only is it much older than that, but humans capable of using tools existed during the time before the Bible takes place as well.

The Bible openly contradicts itself many times. It goes so far out of its way to justify Jesus fulfilling prophecies from the Old Testament that it reads like fanfiction. What happened to Emanuel?

Then there's the matter of what Jesus said as he was dying on the cross. One book says that he said "Forgive them, Father, for they know not what they do", while two others say "Father, why have you forsaken me?"

And of course going back to Genesis again, how did humans propagate if Adam and Eve only had two sons?

CreekCo posted...

Its really not. You can pick up an old Greek version anywhere. Greek is a mathematically precise language that really does not change. Or, theres old Ethiopian versions out there for those who seek. Most people are casuals and havent put in the work. You have to research to go past surface level discussions or understandings.

Its all open to interpretation but as far as I know, other than modern re-interpretation errors, theres basically nothing in the whole book that has ever been disproven. At most, you get someone giving their opinions but everything that can be verified factually (its faith based so obviously not everything can be) has been or at worst, not disproven.

Like the Great Flood, for instance. Was it like the Hollywood movie version? Lol, no. However, almost every single ancient civilization with records records some sort of cataclysmic flooding event and geology shows this in fossil records. Thats not saying what to believe but the lore is reflected.

Its also a fact that other, older religions did in fact exist and many practices of these are mentioned in there too. Most of them still exist too but nobody studies anything past Tic Toc levels of knowledge so these conversations tend to be angry and surface level.

Greek is not the original writing so there's already some problems with that. (well, the New Testament is originally Greek. But from context I think most of this discussion is about the Old Testament). And funny enough, on precision, the original language, Hebrew, is actually horrifically imprecise.

I'm not sure I want to get too epistemological about what it means to prove or disprove any ancient religious writing. Like I think you could also say that we haven't "disproven" almost any major religion. Since you brought up the flood specifically though I feel the need to respond just because I always thought that specific line of thinking was weird. Even when I was a kid and believed in it all. The flood is always that thing people bring up like "look at how many other Ancient Mesopotamian religions had the flood story! a lot of them have flood stories even older than the bible! doesn't that make you think they're on to to something there?"

Why would that make you think they were on to anything? Isn't the more logical sequence here that the religion of the Ancient Israelites is just one of many in a long line of religions in the area with overlapping stories? If anything knowing that the flood isn't very original to this religion should make someone think "hm maybe a lot of things in this religion were just borrowed from other nearby religions". And this starts to be abundantly clear if you start actively looking for more examples. Like why does the bible mention Yahweh slaying Behemoth and Leviathan? Monsters/gods from other nearby religions, which don't make a lot of sense for Yahweh to be slaying anyway if he's the monotheistic creator of the universe who created everything. But make more sense for Yahweh to be slaying if it's yet another religion in the area borrowing motifs from all the other religions in the area. Just a peeve of mind every time I see the flood brought up like this...

tankboy posted...

During Exodus, Pharaoh's court magicians call upon their Egyptian gods to cast sticks-to-snakes, which succeeds. Later, Moses stops doing miracles for like five minutes and the Israelites immediately lose faith and make a golden calf idol. They didn't pick that out of nowhere, it was already a well-known representation of a competing god.

When I read that part to a Christian family member once, they told me there was something wrong with the Bible I was reading it out of, because none that was real.

I also enjoyed the part where God hardened Pharaoh's heart so he couldn't agree with Moses. That part flat out isn't in some of the newer, easier to read translations.

the entire story of Abraham is he leaves his family who worships a Pantheon of gods to follow the one God

later his grandson Jacob is fetching a wife and as they leave his father in law hunts them down to stop them because someone stole his idol god

he doesn't find it but it turns out Jacob's wife did steal it

but just because the bible describes these beliefs doesn't mean it narratively is calling them real
use of the term false god is explicit
does that imply just another god that exists and actually did stuff? no

this is more a moment of reading comprehension because it goes into great details to describe that God created everything and no one else and he is the only one who made anything blah blah blah

then you....come to the conclusion that the narrative stating all this actually believes because Rachel stole a god from her father and likely worshiped it that means the bible validates it was real too in their narrative?

you shall have no other gods before me doesn't mean, because they are real, but because as described in the actual text that was a thing they literally did such as Rachel

HylianFox posted...

The Israelites were constantly being told not to worship other gods. Not necessarily because they didn't exist, but because their god would get pissed off.

It's right there in the First Commandment: "I am the LORD thy god, thou shalt have no other gods before me"
Which implies that there are, in fact, other gods.

The whole "ACTHUALLY" the God of the Bible is the only god that exists" thing didn't come about until much much later.

ACKTHULLY that god doesn't exist either.