A little while ago I caught half a documentry on TV which claimed that there was a female counterpart for the YHWH that is found in the Torah. This bit in a column by the Dopers could be interpreted as suggesting more than one deity as well.
There are a couple of articles on the internet, but then again, there is also plenty of stuff which proves that Elvis faked his death…
So basically, is this theory that Judaism was once polytheistic accepted in mainstream archaeology/sociology/whatever?
Also, apologies to the mods if this needs to be moved to GD.
Religious Jews will deny that it was normative, but there is some evidence that early Judaism was henotheistic. G-d was seen as being the greatest of all the gods, but there were a lot of little gods and goddesses (the baalim and ashteroth)
Modern, religious Judaism admits this occured, but says that it was an aberation…that originally, Israel worshiped just one G-d, but because of moral corruption and contact with their neighbors, she started worshiping the baalim also.
The Torah was monotheisic in the sense of only believing in one God, but certainly mentions other gods in the context of the general polytheistic culture of the time. Their being mentioned does not indicate that they actually existed as gods.
As far as the names of God, the rabbinic belief is that each name represents a different attribute of God, or the way we perceive Him.
Elenfair, paging Elenfair…
She’s actually written an academic article on this, I believe.
The Torah (first five books of the Bible) is certainly monotheistic, although “other gods” are mentioned in the sense that other peoples worship them – the gods of the Egyptians, for example. The Bible itself, in some places, can be read to imply that these other gods have power; but it can also be read as a poetic shorthand to mean that BELIEF can be power, even pagan belief.
In short, mainstream Jewish leaders were always monotheistic. However, there is some archaeological evidence that the common people were not so dedicated, and may have had little household idols. (The Bible says that Rachel’s father, for instance, had such.) But finding such idols among the ruins of houses doesn’t tell us what the people thought of them. They may have been viewed as good-luck charms, for instance, not necessarily worshipped.
To address the OP, however, no, the fact that two words were used in no way implies polytheism. “Elohim” is a word, meaning “god” (or “God,” idunno). “YHWH” is a name, God’s name (or at least a version of it).
[nitpick] Laban, Rachel’s father, wasn’t Jewish, Judaism being restricted at the time to Isaac, Rebecca, Jacob, and his family.[/nitpick]
Other evidence from a bit later on in the Bible might be the relentless campaigns of the prophets against idol worship, which presumably implies that at least some of the common people were engaging in the practice. Heck, the Evil King Menasseh (unsure of the English spelling) set up an idol in the Temple (Kings II, 19:2-9). Did the religious leadership approve? Definitely not. Does this mean that this was an “accepted practice in Judaism”? Depends on your definitions.
Elohim indeed means “god”; it’s most commonly used Biblically to mean G-d. The root word is the same in commandment one, “I am the Lord thy G-d,” as in commmandment two, “Thou shalt have no other gods before me.” Y-H-V-H is one of the names of G-d. I guess “Elokim” is a title, or a position, or a term of address, (like, more secularly, “Mr. President”), while the names of G-d are, well, names, proper nouns.
“Elohim” actually looks like a Hebrew plural, but most scholars don’t think this is a remnant of polytheism. For one viewpoint, you can read the Catholic Encyclopedia article. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05393a.htm
So, if I can get this straight: While the Hebrews may have acknowledged the existance of other gods, they only generally worshipped the one god.
Great link there rowrrbazzle, very informative. It also covers baalim, which was the thing I was trying to think of. It seems that name was used to describe multiple localised nature spirits.
So I guess that settles that, unless anyone has anything else…
Well, except for Solomon
And King Saul named one of his sons Ish-baal, and there’s a question about whether the baal referred to is G-d or some other baal.
Quickly, some possibilities :
-The Jewish religion could originally have been born from a mix between a tribal god (YHWH) of unknown origin(though some people think he could have been a personnified mountain), and a city henotheistic religion, worshipping essentially El, which was a common name for the main deity of various cities of this area.
These urban religions weren’t exactly henotheistic (which means that the existence of several gods is accepted, but only one is worshiped), but somewhat close (a pantheon was still existing but the main god had “swallowed” most of the other god’s attributes, making them very secondary figures, and the official cult was essentially directed toward this main god : El here, Bhaal there, etc…).
Concerning El : "In the Ougarit pantheon, El fathered the other gods and the humans…the sons of El (refered to in the OT as “sons of Elohim”) are his messengers and subservients. God of wisdom, El keeps his role as a referee and judge…the Cananeans still worship him during the 1st millenium BC, like some Hebrews for whom he is “El the god of Israel” " (sorry for the poor translation)
This mix between two religions would have happened after the Hebrews had conquered urbanized areas and settled down, living and then mixing with people with a different tradition.
-It seems (and certainly some references to this have survived in the bible, if only to condemn the practice) that the cult of secondary deities survived for quite a long time. For instance, the Elephantine papyrii (5th century BC), are a response from the temple of Jerusalem to an enquiry by Jewish mercenaries in Egyptia who asked whether or not they could build a sanctuary for not only “Yahou” (YHWH) but also several other gods (including Bethel, Shaddai, and apparently Yahou’s spouse). The priests of Jerusalem apparently didn’t mind, except that the mercenaries weren’ t allowed to sacrifice animals by fire (practice reserved to the temple of Jerusalem).
YHWH/El’s cult would have subsquently evolved by absorbing other deities like Shaddai and by suppressing some idolatric practices, and the religion would have been influenced in its concepts by other major religions in the area like the dualist zoroastrian religion (Ahura Mazda) and the Assyrian dynastic god (Asour) until it became an official and henotheistic religion. Only after the exile to Babylone, the Jewish religion would have taken the monotheistic and exclusive form it has now.
-Some people think that the first king of Isral, Saul, wasn’t a worshipper of YHWH, but of Baal, since he called his son “Ishbaal” (“the man of Baal”).
Personal quibble here. The angels were believed in, right? They’re not a new addition?
I’ve always had trouble with them. Why are they not considered to be gods? A lot of pantheons have lesser gods. If we had discovered them in another pantheon, we would certainly call them gods. They’re not collected souls either, they were never constrained to physicality.
Jewish doctrine is absolute and unmistakeable, and has been for a long time: there is EXACTLY one God. No more, no less. YHWH is not, like Thor, one of many gods. He is not, like Zeus, the most powerful of many gods. He is the one and only god.
But no matter how hard one tries to impress that notion on a people that had once been pagan (and was STILL surrounded by pagan nations), old ways of thinking are very difficult to shake. TO use a more RECENT historical example, look at how things like Voodoo and Santeria came about:
African slaves and Native American peoples were pagans who practiced spirit religions, in the centuries before European colonialism. The Europeans who conquered the Americas imposed Christianity on the tribes they found there, and on the slaves they brought in. And, on the surface at least, it looked as if the Indians and slaves had abandoned paganism. At least, they adopted all the Christian rituals they’d been taught.
But old, long-established ways of thinking don’t go away quickly or easily. Though a monotheistic religion had been imposed on these former pagans, the Indians and slaves never fully gave up their old beliefs. Instead, they incorporated what they perceived as a new batch of gods (Jesus, the saints, the prophets) and goddesses (the Virgin Mary) into their pantheon. The end result in Haiti was Voodoo. In other places, it was Santeria and other similar practices.
Now, thousands of years from now, if alien archaeologists sifted through artifcacts from Haiti, and pieced together Voodoo relics, they might well find “evidence” that Christianity was a polytheistic religion. But that wouldn’t be accurate. Christianity is a monotheistic religion… but over the centuries, it’s constantly been infected by pagan practices, customs and attitudes.
Well, in ancient times, Judaism was in a similar bind. Moses laid down the law for his people: there is only one god, and you must not worship any others! But people who’d been pagans for centuries before Moses didn’t readily give up their old ways. Some honored YHWH while still paying homage to their old gods. Others accepted YHWH by identifying Him with another god they used to honor, and ascribing the old god’s characteristics to YHWH.
Does ANY of this mean that Jewish doctrine included multiple gods? No, not at all. But MANY Jews continued to follow pagan practices. Heck, that’s never been a secret- the Old Testament is filled with stories documenting how prophets had to battle resurgent paganism.
Did Jewish doctrine EVER teach that YHWH had a consort (a Hera to his Zeus, so to speak). No. Never. Absolutely not. But did individual Jews ever embrace pagan gods and goddesses, including one that some identified as “Mrs. Yahweh”? Entirely possible, even very likely.