Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,928 Year: 4,185/9,624 Month: 1,056/974 Week: 15/368 Day: 15/11 Hour: 3/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Not Influenced by Surrounding Nations
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1055 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 10 of 83 (501236)
03-05-2009 10:00 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Peg
03-02-2009 6:11 AM


quote:
It is recognized that many ancient religions are based on the natural world where the elements and nature are gods, this is called polyotheism.
Hinduism has many thousands of such gods, Egypt had the sun god, the moon god the crocodile god, the god of the nile river etc etc etc
This is in stark contrast to the hebrew religion which was based on one single almighty Creator God known in the OT as Yahweh or Jehovah.
The were not influenced in the slightest in believing that there were any other gods besides this one God.
This explains why the Mosaic law stipulates that 'You must not have any other gods against my face' and 'You must not make carved images/idols and be induced to serve them'
Somebody else has already pointed out the monotheistic Zoroastrian religion, but it's also interesting that there were ancient Egyptian monotheists (or at least one anyway). Pharoah Akhnaton of the 18th dynasty (incidentally the father of Tutenkhamen) worshipped the monotheistic Aton, and attempted to make all of Egypt do the same. This didn't last longer than his reign, but monotheism was not unique to Israelite culture.
It's also worth pointing out that Israelite culture wasn't wholly monotheistic. Some scholars have thought that the different names for God (Yahweh, Elohim, El-Shaddai etc.) may have stemmed from previously independent gods; in much the same way as Allah was part of the polytheistic pantheon of early Arab culture.
Also, an injunction against worshipping other gods doesn't necessarily mean the religion is monotheistic. Many ancient cultures worshipped their own god without doubting the existence of foreign gods. It's entirely possible the early laws were not 'don't worship fictional gods', but 'don't worship other gods like that Ba'al chap - I'm your god.'

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Peg, posted 03-02-2009 6:11 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Granny Magda, posted 03-05-2009 10:12 AM caffeine has not replied
 Message 13 by Coragyps, posted 03-05-2009 11:35 AM caffeine has not replied
 Message 20 by Peg, posted 03-06-2009 4:03 AM caffeine has replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1055 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 22 of 83 (501431)
03-06-2009 9:30 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by Peg
03-06-2009 4:03 AM


Yahweh is a personal name but Elohim is a title and is translated 'God' as is El-shaddai which means "God of the mountains," (according to wiki) and so is Allah..its a title and if you ask a muslim the name of their god, it doesnt have a name , they only know him as Allah.
This is all correct as to how these things are interpreted now, but that doesn't necessarily mean they all used to mean the same thing to the people of many many centuries ago. Taking Allah, for example, it's true that it just means 'The God'. However, Allah didn't appear in Arabic religion with the arrival of monotheism. In polytheistic Arab culture, Allah referred to the chief God - the creator; but he was not the only god. There were a whole host of other, subordinate, gods; including his daughters - the local deities al-Manat, al-Uzza and al-Lat.
In the same way, Yahweh may have been the chief God amongst a pantheon of lesser gods originally. The fact that the Bible shows Israelites worshipping other Gods and prophets having to convince them of monotheism would confirm this as a near certainty, in my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Peg, posted 03-06-2009 4:03 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by Peg, posted 03-08-2009 6:06 AM caffeine has not replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1055 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 31 of 83 (501995)
03-09-2009 9:51 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by Peg
03-08-2009 9:24 PM


Re: Influences
If you read the bible account you will see that sex had nothing to do with Adam and Eve being thrown out of the garden of eden. Unlike the epic of gilgamesh which portrays sex as something sinful, in the genesis account it wasnt sinful
that makes a huge difference of belief between the two. Genesis 2 if you want to read it... i can tell you now you'll find nothing in there about sex.
It's actually Genesis 3, but we'll let you off .
Either way, I always read this story as being about sex. At the end of chapter 2, it's pointed out that Adam and Eve are unashamed of their nakedness. As soon as they eat of the tree, all this changes - 'the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked.' God comes storming in and curses Eve and all her descendants with a future in which 'thy desire shall be to thy husband'. I had always interpreted this as the awakening of sexual desire. I looked through a few other translations to see if the King James interprets this passage different to most, but there doesn't seem to be much difference (except for the New Living translation, which changes it to a desire to control her husband).
And I'm not the only one who interpreted it this way. In the epistles Paul informs us that there was no sex in Paradise - it was man's original sin that brought sex into the world (too lazy to search for passages right now, but I can do if you disagree). Genesis 3 is all about sex - I thought that was the standard interpretation even for Christians.
Edited by caffeine, : spelling

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Peg, posted 03-08-2009 9:24 PM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by ICANT, posted 03-09-2009 10:22 AM caffeine has not replied
 Message 34 by Peg, posted 03-09-2009 7:19 PM caffeine has not replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1055 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 46 of 83 (502511)
03-11-2009 8:30 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by Modulous
03-09-2009 10:35 PM


Re: Influences
WARNING - what follows is a not particularly relevant nitpick. To Peg and ICANT; I'll get around to responding to you on sex and the forbidden fruit once I've got the time to craft a decent reply.
I'm not sure what the Occult is, so I can't say if Christianity was influenced by it. It is certainly derived from the real meaning of 'cult' which is to say 'religious practices' or 'attending to the gods'.
The occult isn't a specific religion that need be capitalised - it just refers to all manner of supernatural jiggerypokery like astrology, witchcraft and numerology. 'Occult' comes from the Latin root 'occultus' meaning 'to conceal'; because it was used to refer to all kinds of secret knowledge and mysteries that mystics were purported to possess. It's still used in the sense of hiding something in the word 'occultation'; which is how astronomers say 'eclipse' when they want to pretend they're talking about something clever that laymen don't understand. It's not etymologically related to cult*, which comes from 'cultus' - 'to worship'.
*The Latin roots might well be related, given how similar they look, but I mean that they're not related in the way they entered English.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Modulous, posted 03-09-2009 10:35 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by Modulous, posted 03-11-2009 9:01 PM caffeine has not replied
 Message 49 by Coragyps, posted 03-12-2009 7:51 AM caffeine has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024