Loomis

Another problem with this is that now you have to invent a second apology for the similarities to Psalm 82. Like I said before, Psalm 82 appears to be “undoing” what Deuteronomy 32:8-9 is “doing.”

Taken together these two sections tell the story of how El divided up humanity into nations, and assigned his sons to guard over them. Over time the sons became fuck-ups, and another god (the single “judging Elohim” of Ps 82:1) stepped in to make things right. The “judging Elohim” condems the sons to die like mortals (this would include Yahweh), and then “inherits all the nations” (same language from Deut 32:8) himself.

Duh .. how bout dat.

Loomis

Mark S. Smith's web site (a much better source)

Most of the things I’ve mentioned in this thread can be found in Smith’s books.

Roller

I was wondering about that since I have The Early History of God (or via: amazon.co.uk). I better start reading it lol!

Toto

Early History of God - Preface to the Second Edition

Amaleq13

I realize that your interpretation is consistent with your prior-held conclusion but whether the god of Israel is consistently portrayed as singular throughout the Hebrew Scriptures is the question at hand. What you describe above is useless circular reasoning.

The first is far too vague to be of any use to you, you need to establish why a different author's statements should be understood as relevant in understanding the text-in-question, and the form doesn't appear to change the plain meaning of the contents.

This is an entirely inadequate attempt since, quite unlike either the original passage or my own, the text includes indications within the passage that "the Lord" and "Jesus Christ" should be understood as the same individual (ie "chose for his own" and "his chosen portion"). Do you really not see that what you have created contains precisely what is missing in the original passage?