CX

Bad form, Spin. Please try to keep your frustration from getting the better of you.

Cheers,

CX

CX

I'm noting a general decline in decorum in this thread. Let's stick to discussing the arguments and not the personalities making them.

Cheers,

CX

Celsus

In summary then:

Ancient Canaanites: polytheistic
Ancient proto-Israelites: polytheistic
Ancient Israelites: henotheistic
Earlier strata of Biblical writers: monolatorous (monolatory emphasising practice of religion)
Later strata: monotheistic (monotheism emphasising beliefs and inner being)
Hebrew Bible: combination of henotheistic, monolatorous, and monotheistic beliefs. The Exodus? Monolatorous.
Ancient Judaism: Monotheistic

Am I correct CX?

Joel

CX

Looks close to me. I think this is the tach both Dever and Finkelstein take (though they heartily disagree with respect to dates and historicity). You are much well versed in Judaica then I am, however, so what do you think? Am I reading the arguments correctly?

Cheers,

Jimi

Celsus

No one versed in scholarship would seriously disagree with that picture, though there might be intense bickering over which gods specifically were worshipped. Dever and Finkelstein generally aren't scholars of ancient religious practice. Have you tried out Mark Smith's The Early History of God? The new edition is excellent.

Joel

spin

Ya know, de Vaux did a survey of a site which was outside of old Jerusalem at Malhah (and which is now buried under a new suburb), See his Ancient Institutions (I'm going on memory). The site was a high place, which was in operation throughout the seventh century, ie through the period of Josiah's reign (you remember him, the one who did away with the high places), The high place was usually a site of worship of the divine pair Yahweh and Asherah.

Then again, there's a Persian era site in the area which has a favissa which contained mother goddess figurines -- ahh, Asherah was popular alright.

When did Judahites stop worshipping under every green tree? Asherah's symbol of course was the green tree. And Ezekiel 6:13 is still talking about the naughty people doing naughty things. Are we to believe that we are referring back to before the exile started??

Samuel/Kings was, if started before the exile (I strongly doubt it), not finished until after it... Chronicles obviously after that, yet Chronicles still mentions Ishbaal and Meribbaal as descendants of Saul, though Samuel has doctored them to read Ishbosheth and Meribosheth. The scribal intervention was therefore relatively late on Samuel, so that the need to change it was late also. When did Baal stop being cool?

I think the Jews, or -- let's be hopeful -- at least most of them, were still polytheistic in the Persian period.


spin

Celsus

Dammit spin! I just mentioned Meribbaal and Ishbaal in the thread on the DH and said the practice of replacing "baal" with "bosheth" is first attested by Jeremiah 3:24. 2 Sam 11:21 also shows signs of a similar replacement, so it's not only in Chronicles. Let me see if I can find the reference. Also, what do you make of the lack of theophoric Judahite names with baal in all known ostraca? What do you think of "Baal" being merely an epithet for "Lord"? Earlier scribes may have known the difference and ignored it. Actually, it doesn't matter: Smith sees Baal as popular until the end of the southern kingdom, and I see no reason why it shouldn't therefore have been popular until much later when Ezra or whoever returned begin their reforms.

Joel

spin

The replacement is in Samuel, not Chronicles. Chronicles, the later text, preserves the original form of the names!

But how many ostraca are we talking about? from where?

Baal is only a title. It was used constantly at Ugarit and Hadad was almost never mentioned. Makes for easier syncretism, spose.

What's the difference between the names Jerubbaal and Jeroboam? -- LAMED/MEM.


spin

Celsus

Woops. Scratch up another blunder to my growing list. I had written a longer bit about my ideas of Chronicles being convoluted by it but I deleted it because I was digressing, so I got it the other way round. I should write a book.
Ostraca in Judahite or southern regions. Eh, I'll check my references and get back to you.
Saul's uncle too. Perhaps the Chronicler knew of the affiliation, and the Deuteronomistic writer didn't, hence the separate traditions.
That's still not really an argument, just a suggestion. What does "Jeroboam" mean though?

Joel

Amlodhi

Knowing you, I suspect that this is intented as a rhetorical question. However, so that I can be sure that I'm correct on this, Jeroboam means roughly "the people will contend" or perhaps "the people have founded", with Jerubaal then, meaning roughly "baal will contend" or "has founded". Rehoboam, Jeroboam's contemporary, can convey the same sense with, "the people will enlarge". It has been my understanding, though, that Jeroboam is a "throne" name (which would seem to make sense in the light of its obvious political advantage), for all we know Jeroboam might have been originally named Jerobaal or Jerubaal, which should render the sense of "baal has founded". Straighten up any crooked places here for me, would ya' spin?

I have read your discussion of the name changes in Sam./Chron. (in the other thread). Personally, I have never been able to come up with a satisfactory explanation as to why the Sam. references would be censored with "-bosheth" (as you mentioned, indicating a shameful thing), while Chron. would retain the allusion to baal.

I will be interested in what you can dig up regarding references on ancient ostraca. As far as I am aware, it is precious little. However, I don't think it can be discounted that the so called "silver bracelet scroll" (IIRC, dated to the 7th cen.) references YHWH by name.

I'm trying to keep up with you & spin on this. I will reply to your post on the other thread soon, and perhaps throw in the occasional question here and also on your forum.

Namaste'

Amlodhi