1 edit
Originally posted by frogstompThe transition from polytheism to monotheism is a fascinating subject
Moses and Abram were not contemporaneous and neither were modern Jews.
There were cuneiform tablets at Ebla and Ugarit written in hebrew prior to Moses that refer to EL. The Jewish Religion doesn't seem to have begun.
...[text shortened]... sition from polytheism to monotheism is a fascinating subject
How religious faiths develop and emerge is indeed fascinating. There is no question, I think, that the Hebrew Scriptures contain different strands and borrowings from other, older cultures—especially linguistic ones. There are also the J, E, P and D strands. (I read that the OT has a few Sanskrit-derived words—I forget which ones, but I believe they referred to such things as trade goods that might have been imported by caravan from India.)
I suppose that Judaism as a religion begins with the Avram/Avraham story. But the “religion of the Old Testament” is not Judaism either. Judaism is the religion of the “dual Torah” (i.e., written and oral: the Talmud). Orthodox tradition traces the Oral Torah back to Sinai; it probably goes back to the fourth century BCE anyhow, although the Talmuds were not written down 380 CE (the Jerusalem Talmud) and 500 CE (the Babylonian Talmud). They record discussions and arguments and interpretations by sages going much further back (Hillel and Shammai for example). Modern Rabbinical Judaism dates from the fall of the second Temple in 70 CE. One cannot understand the Judaism of the time of Jesus (or earlier), for example, without having some understanding of Talmud and Midrash.
My comments on YHVH were from a rabbinical Jewish perspective. Jews do get to say what their religion is, and they get to “read” their tradition through that lens (a strictly “historical” reading of any of the OT seems of little interest from that rabbinical viewpoint). Since I am currently more interested in understanding Rabbinical Judaism, I file away your historical findings as interesting information—but I do not dismiss it! I value it, and am appreciative of your comments (and the fact that you respond to my posts).
With all that said, when do you think El quit being the bull-god for the Jews, and devolved into something else? There still were obviously vestiges left at the time of Moses and Sinai. And then there were the “household gods” that Rachel stole from her father. So I think that the Torah does show a slow movement toward monotheism…
Originally posted by vistesdThe full story probably won't be discovered, although there probably are more texts out there that will help. An Aramaic text of the Gospel would probably shake a few translations. Except for the "folk linguistics" as a lingustics site called the claim of the Hare Kristnas' and a few similar meanings of Greek and Sanskrit words ,my quick search came up empty. Caravans weren't the only methods there were shipping routes too.
[b]The transition from polytheism to monotheism is a fascinating subject
How religious faiths develop and emerge is indeed fascinating. There is no question, I think, that the Hebrew Scriptures contain different strands and borrowings from other, older cultures—especially linguistic ones. There are also the J, E, P and D strands. (I read that the O ...[text shortened]... stole from her father. So I think that the Torah does show a slow movement toward monotheism…
[/b]
The "christians' have a far different take on the old testament than Rabi's do
I have to run I'll finish this post later today
as always: nice talking to you.
Originally posted by frogstompAn Aramaic text of the Gospel would probably shake a few translations.
The full story probably won't be discovered, although there probably are more texts out there that will help. An Aramaic text of the Gospel would probably shake a few translations. Except for the "folk linguistics" as a lingustics site called the claim of the Hare Kristnas' and a few similar meanings of Greek and Sanskrit w ...[text shortened]... to run I'll finish this post later today
as always: nice talking to you.
There is a version called the Peshitta, written in Syriac, a western Aramaic dialect, used by some eastern Christians. Although the oldest known MS of the Peshitta only dates from the 4th century CE, those who use it believe that it is closer to the original, and that the Greek texts were translations from earlier copies of that. It is certainly a minority view, however.
The "christians' have a far different take on the old testament than Rabi's do
They operate from such different “paradigms”—some of which, I think, has to do with cultural/linguistic differences—that the way one group exegetes the texts looks like gobbeldy-gook to the other. Of course, there are other reasons for it too.
Differences in the “culture” of language, how a language works, how the native speakers hear it (without having to translate in their heads) and feel it—these are things that I think are difficult, if not impossible, to capture in any word-for-word translation. Hebrew words and phrases, for instance, have “layers” of meaning, all of which the native hearer/reader would imbibe at once. Then there are cultural idioms and euphemisms. The whole system of word-associations based on consonantal roots makes it also very complex, albeit very rich. Aramaic, I suspect, is the same, which goes to your first point…
I wish I had some real language skills, so I could do more than just scratch the surface.
as always: nice talking to you.
Same here… 🙂