Q: The Ten Commandments…Thou shalt have no other gods before me…so is God acknowledging there are other gods?
A: I can understand at first glance that maybe someone could come to the conclusion that God is acknowledging that there are other gods; however, I think it is important to understand a little of the history of the Ancient Near East.
Israel was unique in the ANE exclusively because they maintained that there is only one God. This position is known as monotheism. Israel was unique because at that time the ANE was riddled with societies that believed in multiple gods. This position is known as polytheism.
The reason I mention this is to provide some context to the question. God was not necessarily acknowledging that there were others gods, as much as he was saying to all the people in the ANE and the world that there is only one God, the God of Israel. In other words, all those “gods” people were worshiping were not really gods at all because there is only one God.
Many people in the ANE participated in all kinds of idol worship and many of the “gods” people worshiped were simply created out of wood or metal. The God of the Bible is not a created object. The Bible is clear that God is the one and only God and all should recognize this fact and worship him.
Friday, February 8, 2008
Monotheism--One God
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
That's not necessarily true. We'd like to impose the idea that the ancient Israelites believed in one God. If you look at the Hebrew meanings of the words used for God in the Old Testament, you'll see that isn't the case. The term "Elohim" literally means, "Gods," and it came around when the Israelites and the Canaanites combined societies. So when you read Genesis in original Hebrew, it actually says, "In the beginning, Gods created the Heavens and the Earth."
Thanks for the comments! Actually, your information is a little incomplete. I am not imposing anything on ancient Israel. The Biblical and historical evidence supports my statements about the fact that Israel was and is completely monotheistic. They were intended by God to be a beacon of monotheistic light to the dark polytheistic cultures around them.
For a more complete teaching on the word Elohim look at
www.hebrew4christians.com/Names_of_G-d/Elohim/elohim.html
One particular paragraph that should be extremely helpful for you:
“The name Elohim is unique to Hebraic thinking: it occurs only in Hebrew and in no other ancient Semitic language. The masculine plural ending does not mean “gods” when referring to the true God of Israel, since the name is mainly used with singular verb forms and with adjectives and pronouns in the singular (e.g., see Genesis 1:26). However, considering the Hashalush HaKadosh (Trinity), the form indeed allows for the plurality within the Godhead.”
I believe this gives a pretty complete answer to your previous statement. There is really no way to support your claims except in relationship to the plurality within the Godhead, and I also wonder if you might be the one “imposing” on ancient Israel?
First of all, I'm not trying to argue anything about whether or not we believe in monotheism today or make any judgment about the truth of that statement. I'm also sure that the idea of Israel having a strict monotheism undoubtedly applies to later Israel, but I have some qualms with the idea that proto-Israelites believed in a singular God.
First of all, it is very evident that they had absolutely no conception of a Godhead, so the idea that "Elohim" could have been used to refer to the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost is wrong. The idea of the Trinity didn't come about until after the time of Christ, who reveals that He is leaving the Holy Spirit behind after His death.
There are a few other reasons they could have used "Elohim," but seeing as there were other terms available to them (Yahweh in particular), it is unlikely that they used it coincidentally. They were probably trying to shed some light on their conception of God.
Further, there is physical archaeological evidence to support the idea that the Israelites believed in a pantheon. One piece in particular is a pot found between the Jordan and the Mediterranean. It has a picture of two deities (you can tell by their dress and ritual masks) with the inscription, "Yahweh and his Asherah," which signifies that the people at the time believed Yahweh had a female deity counterpart. The archaeological evidence is there, too. It isn't just literary.
Mark,
First, I was just wondering if you were from our area or if you just found our blog online? The reason I am asking is if you live in our area I would love to get together for coffee and discuss some of these important issues further. I am really glad you are inter-acting with our little blog. The message series we have been doing has been challenging and exciting.
In regard to the Trinity and Elohim, there is no doubt that the doctrine of the Trinity was not developed until much later in the history of Israel; however, just because the doctrine had not been developed does not mean that the Trinity did not exist. The first chapter of Genesis tells us that the “Spirit of the Lord” was hovering over the water and also uses the word “us” to refer to the Godhead.
Also, in regard to the “pot” that was discovered by archeologists, I want to suggest that just because a pot has an inscription that is translated “Yahweh and his Asherah”, is not enough support to say that Israel believed in a pantheon. Furthermore, making the large logical leap that proto-Israel believed in multiple gods is a bite of a stretch. I am under no allusion that Israel was always faithful to God’s commands. Over and over in the Bible we see that Israel was not faithful to God’s command to have no other gods before him. How many times do we see a King of Israel worshiping or allowing the worship of other gods in the Scripture? My point is that just because Israel or some in Israel were living in direct disobedience to God’s commandment does not give us the ability to assume that the nation of Israel believed in a pantheon necessarily. If anything it simply tells us that proto-Israel or some at this time in the history of Israel were living in direct conflict with God’s standard, which would not be uncommon for Israel or for humanity for that matter.
Don't mean to jump in, but I have one observation. The covenant name for God, Yahweh, was given to Moses at the burning bush. That name would not have been an option in Genesis.
But didn't Moses write Genesis?
Yes, Moses wrote Genesis but out of respect for the divine revelation in the Sinai dessert, he wouldn't use a name for God until that name had been revealed. To use the name Yahweh in the early chapters of Genesis would detract from that revelation at the burning bush.
"To use the name Yahweh in the early chapters of Genesis would detract from that revelation at the burning bush."
Not sure that your argument is valid here, since the name Yahweh occurs more than forty times in the first ten chapters of Genesis.
As my teenagers would say, "My bad." Yahweh does appear repeatedly before Exodus 3. There is debate among scholars about what God's revelation changed (if anything) at the burning bush. Something changed; the exact scope of that change is uncertain.
Actually I think there's evidence the early Israelites were more henotheists than polytheists or monotheists. Just my two cents.
Exo 6:3 And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.
Although Moses wrote the Torah God was not known by his revealed name that he gave to Moses
Post a Comment