Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How the God of Israel Was Born

andreafontana.it

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 34 posts

Re: How the God of Israel Was Born

#11

Post by dragontamer »

everdrive wrote: post #5

I've done a lot of reading on this topic lately. What originally grabbed my interest was reading R. Crumb's "The Book of Genesis Illustrated." It's a comic that attempts in a relatively flat way to draw the events of Genesis without any interpretation. Of course, some interpretation and error is inevitable, but it's not a book that attempts to paint things aggressively in one light or another, and people expecting an…

Catholic here.

We don't actually place that much emphasis on Genesis or the Bible in general. A lot of Catholic traditions are outside of the books: the sacraments, the assumption of Mary, the Apostles and their connection to the Bishops (and Bishop of Rome/The Pope), etc. etc.

Some Christians overemphasize the written word of the Bible. But just gonna toss this out: Biblical Literalism is not part of the Catholic tradition. It simply cannot be, as many important traditions were never written down at that time.

------

The importance of the Torah is that Jesus was born as a Hebrew, so understanding his religion helps us understand the life he lived. As well as the prophesies he fulfilled.

But in terms of story? It's all an allegory or metaphor. Catholics are generally comfortable with saying that, ex evolution exists, even if it's not part of the book of Genesis.

Re: How the God of Israel Was Born

#12

Post by everdrive »

pram wrote: post #9
everdrive wrote: post #5

I've done a lot of reading on this topic lately. What originally grabbed my interest was reading R. Crumb's "The Book of Genesis Illustrated." It's a comic that attempts in a relatively flat way to draw the events of Genesis without any interpretation. Of course, some interpretation and error is inevitable, but it's not a book that attempts to paint things aggressively in one light or another, and people expecting an…

Genesis is the prologue for the rest of the Torah, which is about the Hebrews. It's not supposed to be read in isolation to everything else. "impossible to understand how the Book of Genesis could possibly form the foundation of the three major Abrahamic religions" Maybe because it is the thing introduces Abraham? lol

I was trying to paint a picture of what it looked like from the eyes of someone with no background and no context. I'm not saying that my conclusions were correct, but instead attempting to argue that a lot of the story is propped up by cultural context, different interpretations, etc. For instance, Milton's Paradise lost interprets Satan's fall from heaven in a way that the original authors of Isaiah almost certainly never intended. To someone who was both unaware of the cultural context with which both Isaiahs were writing, and also was unfamiliar with Milton's interpretations, I would also suggest that much of Isaiah would also make no sense.

Compare this to something like a Stephen King novel. A reader can pick it up, read it without any prep or study, and understand it readily.

I'm not saying that the Bible has no cohesion or anything like that -- but that a totally unprepared modern reader probably cannot make sense of the text. And also that until recently, most Americans would have been prepared with quite a bit of cultural context for the Bible via church and other things which laid out the colloquial interpretations of the text for people from an early age.

Re: How the God of Israel Was Born

#14

Post by mcphage »

everdrive wrote: post #10
andsoitis wrote: post #2

There are 3 major strands of monotheism: a) Atenism in Egypt (c. 1350 BCE) b) Israelite / Hebrew c) Zoroastrianism in Persia While some scholars (like Freud) have proposed a link between (a) and (b), it remains contested and unproven. What is, however, likely, is a link between (c) and (b), specifically that Zoroastrianism likely influenced Second Temple Judaism during the period of Persian rule over Judea, particula…

Somewhere on /r/academicbiblical there is some refutation of a link between (c) and (b) but I can't find it while I'm at work right now. I can try to dig it up tonight if you're interesting. I'm not claiming it's strictly correct, just that there is at least serious argument against the possibility that Zoarastrianism was the main driver behind the development of Israelite monotheism.

I’m not the person you’re replying to, but I’m interested if you could find that link later.

Re: How the God of Israel Was Born

#16

Post by jtr1 »

Brendinooo wrote: post #15

This tweet thread was pretty formative to me: makes one remember that textual criticism of the sort that’s linked here is by no means the final word on these matters. https://x.com/omnologos/status/1870847422454280672

This tweet is written as parody, but it seems self-evident from reading Trump's tweets that they do not all come directly from the president himself. Most political offices delegate social media to an internal team, presenting as if from a unified "source" when really they speak for an organization. Given the fierce competing factions within the administration - and the sort of kreminology political reporting has been reduced to in the current environment - this is precisely the kind of modern situation where textual analysis is helpful in determining who is speaking.

Re: How the God of Israel Was Born

#17

Post by lopsotronic »

andsoitis wrote: post #2

There are 3 major strands of monotheism: a) Atenism in Egypt (c. 1350 BCE) b) Israelite / Hebrew c) Zoroastrianism in Persia While some scholars (like Freud) have proposed a link between (a) and (b), it remains contested and unproven. What is, however, likely, is a link between (c) and (b), specifically that Zoroastrianism likely influenced Second Temple Judaism during the period of Persian rule over Judea, particula…

It's arguable that - pre-Exile - the majority of the vague coalition we today refer to[0] as "Israelites" did not practice monotheism outside of rural cult centers[1], if then.

Deuteronomy 32:8–9 (Qumran/LXX) Elyon apportions nations among divine sons, with Yahweh receiving Jacob - Yahweh one of El's sons (Masoretic fixes this). Kuntillet ʿAjrud, c. 800 BCE, blesses by "Yahweh of Samaria and his asherah" and "Yahweh of Teman and his asherah" -- i.e. plural localized Yahwehs, exactly how Near Eastern polytheism works. Psalm 82, God sentencing other gods to die like men.A flat denial of other gods arrives only with Deutero-Isaiah (44:6, 45:5–7), i.e., post-Persia.

I'd add a few things to your a-b-c list.

First, Mesopotamian and Egyptian summodeism: Marduk in Enūma Elish, the Ramesside Amun hymns. Akhenaten radicalized this trend.

Second, and this is unappreciated, soooooooo much of the faith passes through Greek[2] - Xenophanes "one god, greatest among gods and men," then Plato, Aristotle's unmoved mover, Stoics. Divine simplicity, immutability, omniscience, creation ex nihilo. Philo fuses all this crap, and Origen, Maimonides, Aquinas all run through Philo.

[0] "Refer to" aka with all the late-19th Century European baggage of what a "people" or a "nation" actually is.

[1] Note that even in the Bible, many centuries later, the prophets always come down from the hills into the cities, and once in the population center they generally yell at people and get yelled at. Solomon, as in biblical Solomon, built loads of temples to other gods, and it's extremely likely that the big temple - THE Temple, capitalized - was a multi-cult site. Good luck studyin any of this in the academy - I've known professional archaeologists who have changed their university rather than dip a little toe in biblical archaeology, due to how fraught everything is, and how nasty it gets very quickly.

[2] Unsurprising, since the foundational texts actually get written down in the Hellenic period. But I would argue even further than that, and would posit that the Hellenic period is the birth of the faith proper, where all the threads come together. Judaism and Christianity aren't parent and child, but more like a pair of siblings, with the latter child being something of a caboose baby. Although one could argue Islam would be the true caboose baby.

Re: How the God of Israel Was Born

#18

Post by RhysU »

dragontamer wrote: post #11
everdrive wrote: post #5

I've done a lot of reading on this topic lately. What originally grabbed my interest was reading R. Crumb's "The Book of Genesis Illustrated." It's a comic that attempts in a relatively flat way to draw the events of Genesis without any interpretation. Of course, some interpretation and error is inevitable, but it's not a book that attempts to paint things aggressively in one light or another, and people expecting an…

Catholic here. We don't actually place that much emphasis on Genesis or the Bible in general. A lot of Catholic traditions are outside of the books: the sacraments, the assumption of Mary, the Apostles and their connection to the Bishops (and Bishop of Rome/The Pope), etc. etc. Some Christians overemphasize the written word of the Bible. But just gonna toss this out: Biblical Literalism is not part of the Catholic tr…

Except that original sin thing is pure Genesis. It's what introduces the entire need for salvation throughout all Nicene Christianity.

The Gnostic Christians who rejected the Old Testament entirety had to insert some other reason to require Christ. My favorite mechanism is how Marcion handled it, purely because his was more interesting than "everyone starts broken."

But yes, generally Catholics are not sola scriptura while most Protestants are.

Re: How the God of Israel Was Born

#19

Post by dekervin »

everdrive wrote: post #8
dekervin wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That conclusion come from unknowingly defining monotheism as a religious tradition that is close or can be related to the israelite tradition. It's tautological. In reality many human societies throughout the ages have been monotheists.

What are some of the other ones?

[1] Dinka: History, Religious Systems, and Rituals https://link.springer.com/rwe/10.1007/978-94-024-2068-5_104

[2] Perspectives on Lozi traditions. https://repository.up.ac.za/bitstreams/cca7ee20-46fa-4585-b1...

Post reply on HN