Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Dean Anderson · 10-09-2007, 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NinJay

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dean Anderson

²How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? Selah.

"Selah" here is used sort of like "amen", right? As an interjection?

Kind of. I think (and one of the more knowledgable Hebrew speakers may well correct me on this) that it is like a punctuation mark.

Since the Hebrew has no punctuation, in parts of the Bible that are supposed to be chanted or sung (like the Psalms) we sometimes get instructions like "Selah" which indicates that the reader should pause before continuing to sing the next part of the chant/song.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dean Anderson

<...snip...>
These are both clearly remnants of the older henotheistic elements of the Hebrew religion - where Yahweh, the tribal God of the Hebrews is one of the many sons of El, chief of the Canaanite pantheon.

In the Deuteronomy verse we see El portioning out Canaan to his children, giving the Hebrews to Yahweh. Then in the Psalm, we see Yahweh raised to pre-eminence judging the other gods as worthless and taking their land and followers.

It is a nice window into the gradual development from the Hebrew belief in Yahweh as their local tribal god to the eventual Monotheism of later Judaism.

Good word, henotheistic, and not one you see every day. I've not seen any apologetic efforts directed at refuting/denying the polytheistic/henotheistic roots of Hebrew religion.

Well, Dave might have some for us. One of his objections to the DH is that he claims that it presupposes a henotheistic/polytheistic origin to the Hebrew religion and that this has since been "disproved" (the DH presupposes no such thing, of course - the evidence does strongly suggest a henotheistic origin, but this is nothing to do with the DH).

Unfortunately, his "disproof" of this was a couple of quote-mines - one from Flinders Petrie - which had been taken out of context and don't actually mean what he claims them to mean.

Magdlyn · 10-09-2007, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JamesABrown

About the closest thing we see is the first chapter of Job, when all the supernatural deities come, Lucifer included, and hang around with YHWH in his palace. He and Lucifer even engage in a gentleman's wager concerning an innocent mortal (again, much like Babylonian mythology). I can easily picture Jesus, sitting at the right hand of YHWH, bored and sulking:

"C'mon, Father. Lucifer gets to wander around Earth and stuff..."

Just a nitpick: it wasn't "Lucifer" in Job, it was "the adversary," Hebrew word: the shaytan.

Lucifer is the Latin word used in the Vulgate in Isaiah 14:11. It means lightbringer. The word in the Hebrew is Heylel, or the god "Morning Star," which was used as a sarcastic nickname for the Babylonian king, Nebuchadnezzar. This is the "star" we know as Venus, and the diety associated with it was considered to be the son of the Goddess Shahar (traslated as dawn, with a lower case d, deceptively, in most Bibles).

Magdlyn · 10-09-2007, 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NinJay

I've not seen any apologetic efforts directed at refuting/denying the polytheistic/henotheistic roots of Hebrew religion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by No Robots

Here's what Spinoza says about the names for God that appear in the Bible:
[INDENT]God, in order to show the singular grace bestowed upon Moses, says to him: "And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob by the name of El Sadai (A. V. God Almighty); but by my name Jehovah was I not known to them" - for the better understanding of which passage I may remark that El Sadai, in Hebrew, signifies the God who suffices, in that He gives to every man that which suffices for him; and, although Sadai is often used by itself, to signify God, we cannot doubt that the word El (God) is everywhere understood. Furthermore, we must note that Jehovah is the only word found in Scripture with the meaning of the absolute essence of God, without reference to created things. The Jews maintain, for this reason, that this is, strictly speaking, the only name of God; that the rest of the words used are merely titles; and, in truth,[sic] the other names of God, whether they be substantives or adjectives, are merely attributive, and belong to Him, in so far as He is conceived of in relation to created things, or manifested through them. Thus El, or Eloah, signifies powerful, as is well known, and only applies to God in respect to His supremacy, as when we call Paul an apostle [huh?]; the faculties of his power are set forth in an accompanying adjective, as El, great, awful, just, merciful, &c., or else all are understood at once by the use of El in the plural number, with a singular signification, an expression frequently adopted in Scripture.

Which is, of course, bull hockey. See the last couple posts of mine and Toto's here for an explanation of the true difficulty with the god-name El Shaddai ("breasted goddess").

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=223086&page=3

-Jay- · 10-09-2007, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dean Anderson

Quote:

Originally Posted by NinJay

"Selah" here is used sort of like "amen", right? As an interjection?

Kind of. I think (and one of the more knowledgable Hebrew speakers may well correct me on this) that it is like a punctuation mark.

Since the Hebrew has no punctuation, in parts of the Bible that are supposed to be chanted or sung (like the Psalms) we sometimes get instructions like "Selah" which indicates that the reader should pause before continuing to sing the next part of the chant/song.

Thanks for the clarification.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dean Anderson

Quote:

Good word, henotheistic, and not one you see every day. I've not seen any apologetic efforts directed at refuting/denying the polytheistic/henotheistic roots of Hebrew religion.

Well, Dave might have some for us. One of his objections to the DH is that he claims that it presupposes a henotheistic/polytheistic origin to the Hebrew religion and that this has since been "disproved" (the DH presupposes no such thing, of course - the evidence does strongly suggest a henotheistic origin, but this is nothing to do with the DH).

Unfortunately, his "disproof" of this was a couple of quote-mines - one from Flinders Petrie - which had been taken out of context and don't actually mean what he claims them to mean.

Yeah, I'm aware of Dave's base assertions. I gave them all the credence I felt they were due. :devil1:
(Dave actually manages to make McDowell's abominable effort at dismantling the DH seem thorough, BTW. I never thought I'd say that about McDowell...)

Let me rephrase. I've not seen any original efforts...

regards,

NinJay

James Brown · 10-09-2007, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magdlyn

Quote:

Originally Posted by JamesABrown

About the closest thing we see is the first chapter of Job, when all the supernatural deities come, Lucifer included, and hang around with YHWH in his palace. He and Lucifer even engage in a gentleman's wager concerning an innocent mortal (again, much like Babylonian mythology). I can easily picture Jesus, sitting at the right hand of YHWH, bored and sulking:

"C'mon, Father. Lucifer gets to wander around Earth and stuff..."

Just a nitpick: it wasn't "Lucifer" in Job, it was "the adversary," Hebrew word: the shaytan.

All the English translations I checked call it "Satan" with a footnote meaning, "the accuser." Little more than a prosecuting attorney rather than the arch-enemy of the One True God.

Between Genesis, Job, Revelations, and Paradise Lost, the Christians can't seem to get their story straight about this character. Could it be because . . . he doesn't exist?

Toto · 10-09-2007, 10:52 AM

Selah

Quote:

Selah (Hebrew: סלה) may be the most difficult word in the Hebrew Bible to translate. Selah is probably either a liturgico-musical mark or an instruction on the reading of the text, something like "stop and listen". The Psalms were sung accompanied by musical instruments and there are references to this in many chapters. Thirty-one of the thirty-nine psalms with the caption "To the choir-master []" include "Selah" so the musical context of selah is obvious. Selah notes a break in the song and as such is similar in purpose to Amen in that it stresses the importance of the preceding passage. . . .

The significance of this term was apparently not known even by ancient Biblical commentators. This can be seen by the variety of renderings given to it. The Septuagint, Symmachus, and Theodotion translate διάψαλμα — a word as enigmatical in Greek as is "Selah" in Hebrew! The Hexapla simply transliterates σελ. Aquila, Jerome, and the Targum translate it as "always". According to Hippolytus (De Lagarde, "Novæ Psalterii Græci Editionis Specimen" 10), the Greek term διάψαλμα signified a change in rhythm or melody at the places marked by the term, or a change in thought and theme. Against this explanation Baethgen ("Psalmen," p. 15, 1st ed. Göttingen, 1892) notes that Selah occurs also at the end of some psalms.

source: Jewish Encyclopedia

-Jay- · 10-09-2007, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magdlyn

Quote:

Originally Posted by NinJay

I've not seen any apologetic efforts directed at refuting/denying the polytheistic/henotheistic roots of Hebrew religion.

<...snip...>

Which is, of course, bull hockey. See the last couple posts of mine and Toto's here for an explanation of the true difficulty with the god-name El Shaddai ("breasted goddess").

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=223086&page=3

Thanks, Magdlyn. This really demonstrates the need for the careful reader to not assume that a name is just a name, and points up how when contextual details are lost, the meaning of the whole text can change drastically. It also is suggestive of just why many denominations don't encourage their members to learn too much about church history.

regards,

NinJay

-Jay- · 10-09-2007, 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JamesABrown

All the English translations I checked call it "Satan" with a footnote meaning, "the accuser." Little more than a prosecuting attorney rather than the arch-enemy of the One True God.

Between Genesis, Job, Revelations, and Paradise Lost, the Christians can't seem to get their story straight about this character. Could it be because . . . he doesn't exist?

He's literary plasticine, able to be shaped into whatever sort of character the story needs at the time. (I've now got an Aardmanesque image of Satan in my head now, maybe sitting in an armchair eating cheese...)

The emphasis that many Christian groups place on Satan and the scope of his influence on, well, everything, has often made me wonder how they avoid the conclusion that God needs Satan, else there would be nothing to "save" mankind from. I also wonder how they rationalize Satan's apparently high degree of direct intervention in worldly activities as compared to God's aloof hands-off approach.

regards,

NinJay

Magdlyn · 10-09-2007, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JamesABrown

All the English translations I checked call it "Satan" with a footnote meaning, "the accuser." Little more than a prosecuting attorney rather than the arch-enemy of the One True God.

Jews pronounce it shaytan. I think it's respectful to pronounce words in the proper accent when possible.

Quote:

Between Genesis, Job, Revelations, and Paradise Lost, the Christians can't seem to get their story straight about this character. Could it be because . . . he doesn't exist?

Well, of course he doesn't. But what happened is syncreticism. You start with the shaytan of Job. You add a little "Lucifer." You mix in Angra Mainyu, Prince of Darkness, from Zoroastrianism, picked up during the exile. Then by the time of the gospels, even Jesus himself is equating Baalzebul (Beelzebub [2 Kings 1]), ancient god of Ekron, with Satan! Of course, we can't forget the little enlightening snake, who, by telling the truth in Gan Eden (you will not die, you will gain knowledge), was accused of being a devil (John 8:44), a murderer and liar from the beginning. Finally John of Patmos beefs it all up with a beast, a dragon and an anti-Christ.

Then the medieval Christians confuse all that with the Horned God of Northern Europe!

What a mess. :devil1:

shaytan, the adversary
Beelzebub
Lucifer
snake
Angra Mainyu
dragon
Horned God

=

The Devil, Satan

:huh:

And then they lay it all on thick in Sunday School and give little kids nightmares. Nice.

No Robots · 10-09-2007, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magdlyn

Which is, of course, bull hockey.

The divine appellation "Shaddai" is understood in rabbinic exegesis as an acronym "she-amarti le-olami 'dai'"—Who said to My universe, ‘Enough!'" Thus the verse, "I, the Lord Shaddai" (Genesis 17:1) is rendered by Midrash Rabbah 46:2, "I am the Lord who said to the universe ‘Enough!--Judaism and Healing: Halakhic Perspectives By J. David Bleich, p. 137.

"R. Nathan said in R. Aha's name, and R. Berekiah said in R. Isaacs name: I AM EL SHADDAI (GOD ALMIGHTY): It is I who said to My world, ’dai’ (enough)! And had I not said ’dai!’ to My world, the heaven would still have been spreading and the earth would have gone on expanding to this very day."--Rabbah 46:2

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.