The ancestral Semitic peoples from whom sprang the various Canaanite peoples, the Babylonians, Assyrians, Chaldeans and the Hebrews borrowed the Sumerian pantheon, substituting Semitic names for the various gods and goddesses. Maintaining the general structure, including the separation of the Divine Progenitors and the Assembly of Gods, the various peoples substituted their chief god for the king of the Assembly. A good example is the Babylonians, the chief god was El and his children were known as the Elohim, who individually presided over their individual stars, planets and earthly estates. Chief among the Babylonian Elohim was Marduk, originally the Thunder God and represented by the planet Jupiter. Know simply as Ba’al (Lord) to the Canaanites, his true and secret name Hadu was known only to his priests. Ba’al’s chief rival was the storm god Yamm, whose secret name was Yaw (also Yawu in some texts). The similarity of the name Yamm (Yaw/Yawu) and Yahweh (short form Yah) has led some scholars to speculate that the two (Yamm and Yahweh) are the same god, especially since Ba’al is shown in the bible as Yahweh’s chief competitor (mirroring the rivalry between Ba’al and Yamm in Canaanite mythology).

As did their Canaanite relatives, the Hebrew held idea that the name of their god (in this case Yahweh) was too sacred for common usage and instead referred to him as “Lord”, which was adonai or baal in Hebrew. Having become a separate peoples from the Canaanites during the Great Mycenaean Drought and the following aftermath of the civic collapse caused by that natural occurrence, the probability of Ba’al and Yahweh being the same deity is quite strong, especially considering the parallels between them. Most likely Yahweh is the Hebrew equivalent of the Canaanite Ba’al. He (Yahweh) was originally a son of Ba’al, as attested by a document from the library of the city of Ugarit (discovered in the 1920s). It reads sm, bny, yw, ilt, which translates as “The name of the son of God is Yahweh” (KTU 1.1 IV 14). This is borne out in Deuteronomy 32:8-9: “When the Elyon (another name of El and the name used in the Hebrew language version) apportioned the nations, when he divided humankind, he fixed the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of gods (i.e., each god controlled one nation of people0; Yahweh’s own portion was his people, Jacob (i.e., the nation of Israel) his allotted share.” That Yahweh ruled as as the preeminent god over El’s other children is repeatedly asserted in Psalms. In the Hebrew language version of Psalms 86:8, we are told that “There is none like you among the gods, O Yahweh” and in Psalms 89:5-7, we see more specifically that the gods in question are the sons of El, met as the Assembly of the God; “The heavens praise your wonders, O Yahweh
Your faithfulness in the assembly of the holy ones.
For who in the skies can be compared to Yahweh?
Who among the sons of god is like Yahweh?
A god feared in the council of the holy ones,
Great and awesome above all that are around him?

A major step towards monotheism was the elevation of the term Elohim to the role of a personal title (Elohim) form the supreme God. It was in the post-exilic temple-state that those involved in Temple worship of Yahweh in Jerusalem that the first usage occurred as exemplified in Genesis 1:1 “In the beginning Elohim created the heavens and the earth…”, a text that was likely first written for use in the Temple cults. No longer is it the collective Elohim who are involved in the creation, but Elohim (the Supreme God), who is portrayed as the Creator. The name Elohim retains the plural suffix – im, but its use for a single god is indicated by the verb form of “created” being in the singular vice plural. Despite the official recognition of Yahweh’s supremacy as the Elohim, the term of elohim was still used to refer to the pantheon of lesser gods, that included the gods of the other Semitic nations (these gods being the offspring of El who stood above them all). It is especially notable in Psalm 82’s early declaration of the Hebrew religion’s emphasis on justice and morality, "El has taken his place in the Divine Council; in the midst of the elohim he holds judgment: `How long will you judge unjustly and show partiality to the wicked? Give justice to the weak and the orphan; maintain the right of the lowly and the destitute. Rescue the weak and the needy; deliver them from the hand of the wicked." The Hebrew God, El, speaks scornfully of the gods of the Assembly, "They have neither knowledge nor understanding, they walk around in darkness; all the foundations of the earth are shaken" and speaks prophetically to them, "I say, `You are gods, children of the Most High [i.e., of El, himself], all of you; nevertheless you shall die like mortals, and fall as one man, O princes." Though El, the Father of the gods, is supreme, this is clearly not the "monotheism" of our modern understanding. Much of the primary information in the above is from Dr. Peter Crapo’s volumous works, combined with the findings of such archaeologists as Dr. Finklestein of Israel.

That was a good insightful read Mako- although it poses little room for questions.

I disagree. It doesn't matter how the ideology developed. It doesn't mean that God doesn't exist in whatever form.

Good find Mako....be interesting to see how this turns out.

Is it not possible that the Divine contacts each generation, tribe, nation, etc., through the subconscious and supraconscious in a form that they can accept (ah, those amusing Jewish psychiatrists, Jung, Freud and Adler, the Holy Trinity!)? What I haven't seen (since "Od") is any bonified scientists attempting to prove or disprove a "god-force", or whatever. Even the aura photography experiments are suspect. We should be trying to prove or disprove, using legitimate science, God, angels, auras, etc. I would to see proof that we know everything to be known about light and sound. There has to be a way of scientifically narrowing down the probabilities as to whether or not God, etc., exist. Either way, it would change everything forever. Real science is not about "proving" anything. It is about developing theories on the basis of empirical data, not the other way around. Only if the evidence acquired though controled experimentation shows that there is no God can you rule out God. This is why I proposed a couple of months ago that we adopt a variance in terminology. Normally, in English, we use God to mean YHVH, so I proposed to add one letter, making it "Godd" (pronounced as "Gawd"), to indicate a concept devoid of mythology and religion, a Godd that could be proven either to exist or not by scientific experiment. I thought that I had a clever thread idea, but there were only maybe two respondents. Most of you guys blew me off and ignored it. Was I wrong? Did I deserve to be blown off? Should we not be at the degree of civilization that we can do this? If no such force exists, science should be able to prove it. We know already that different religions develop from each other, just like languages. Momentarily forget YHVH, Jesus, Jove and Mithras. Is there a "Godd" or isn't there?

I must have missed it Gideon....sorry.

People sometimes have a hard time accepting a new and provocative idea and ignore things that do not agree with what ever creed/belief they believe in.

it does make sense, seeing that YHWH and Baal had their little rivalry

A new word to identify a universal governing force to identify an area of scientific study seems a logical thing to do.
Languages and religions are tools to use to understand and explore reality as much as science is.
Perhaps though, Godd is too close in appearence to God for many to be comfortable with.
How about just U.G.F. for universal governing force much as U.F.O. is used to cover a wide area of phenomena studied?

Thanks, but it wasn't that exciting. It was my not very famous "Thanksgiving to Godd" thread last Thanksgiving. I Guess I will just have to write that book. To those of us that hold that there is pretty much only a "symbolic" relationship to Godd, and that the true reality is beyond incarnate comprehension, the understanding is, of course all this stuff is made up, but it is a reflection of the "real thing". I suspect only a few people in each generation can see the real thing, but find it difficult to relate to others. Lao Tzu speaks of the Sage teaching a doctrine without words. The Buddha didn't originally think he was worthy to share his vision of the beginning and end of all things. A monk had to convince him to share it with the world. Moses felt about the same, especially since he stuttered. This is why the priesthood fell on his brother Aaron, since Moses had a speech impediment! I am sure there is a Christian nt similiar story, but you get the idea. The "hero" has to not even feel worthy of the journey. It is right up there with the miraculous birth predicted by astrologers, the attempt to murder the child, the early proof of his identity, the sacrifice, and resurrection; the whole bag of biscuits. Yes, I relize they cut out the resurrection on some of them.

too impersonal for my taste.

Well, you could set up a poll with your word, mine, and perhaps a few others to see what folks might like to use.
I am all for using what most find to their taste from the board.

Great topic Mako.

It is my personal belief that the early hebrews did adapt alot of their earlier OT/TORAH material from the summerians, who are by far older. Even things like the creation story, the flood (the epic of gilgamesh),and The God pantheon ( in a somewhat restricted sense).

Sitchin has also doen some great work on comparing the similarities between the summerians and the 'story's' in the early part of the OT.

Venom in case you did not know the Christian OT was copied from the Jewish Tanakh.

Hebrew Bible is a term that refers to the common portions of the Jewish and Christian canons. Its use is favored by most academic Biblical scholars as a neutral term that is preferred in academic writing both to "Old Testament" (which alludes to the Christian doctrine of supersessionism) and to "Tanakh" (an acronym used commonly by Jews but unfamiliar to many English speakers). For instance, see section 4.3 on page 17 of The SBL Handbook of Style by the Society of Biblical Literature.

Source

There is a link to compare verses between the two.

Gee, I guess that means Jesus' Grandpa is Ba'al! I can just see them sitting around heaven, Jesus sitting on Ba'al's knee and Yahweh saying, "You gonna spoil that kid if you keep it up, Daddy"!

lmao that was original and very funny

In Pagan circles I have often heard the Hebrews had a Goddess named Lilith, but as the religion became more patriarchal the Goddess was abandoned and was removed from the temples. I was wondering if you knew anything about it, Mako?

The Alphabet of Ben Sira is the earliest form we know of the Lilith legend familiar to most people (that is, to most people who are familiar with Lilith at all). It is here that we find Lilith as Adam's first wife. Scholars tend to date the Alphabet between the 8th and 10th centuries, CE. Whether the story itself is older, or, if so, how much older is not possible to say. Amulets like the one described in the first paragraph are, of course, much older. The author of the Zohar, R. Moses de Leon, was aware of the Alphabet's version of Lilith, at least according to Gershom Scholem (Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism, p. 174), but he also knows other, probably older, Lilith traditions which do not mesh well with this one. No attempt is made, apparently, to harmonize them. For one of these other traditions, and comments on whether the author was familiar with the Alphabet, see Treatise on the Left Emanation. The idea of Eve having a predecessor is also not new to Ben Sira, and can be found in Genesis Rabbah . But those traditions make no mention of Lilith, and, in fact, do not mesh well with Ben Sira's version of the story.

Source

Actually they had a Goddess named Asherah. In the old Semite religions, Asherah was the chief god's wife and became yahweh's wife under the original Hebrew polytheism. Asherah survived the slow change over to monotheism until well after the return from Exile. In fact some of the old prophets rant about the "Asherahs" located outside of the Jerusalem walls! Dr Dever of Arizona (one of the major players in Syrio-Palestinian archaeology has a book out about Asherah and Yahweh....very informative. Also the magizine Archaeology had an article on it last year...maybe a check of their website would let you read it. If not, PM me and I will try to go through my back issues to see if I can find it and give you a way to look it up.

This might explain more/better.

Lilith

Good one!

Thanks Mako and Zandore, with the correct name of the Goddess I was able to find the information I was looking for.
Pagans can be as bad as Christians for making up history. I like to try to find the truth and I love to see their jaws drop when I point it out to them.
I think I'll order that magazine. It should help with my Druidic studies this summer.