4 ms·

"Baal" was less a name than a title. In modern Hebrew, it just means "lord" or "husband". It was also apparently a title that could, at some stages of Israel's

"Baal" was less a name than a title. In modern Hebrew, it just means "lord" or "husband". It was also apparently a title that could, at some stages of Israel's history, even be applied to YHWH, much like "Adonay" ("My lord"). For instance, the individuals named "Mephibosheth" and "Ish-bosheth" (two of the sons of Saul, a clear if imperfect Yahwist) were originally named "Meribaal" and "Ish-baal". Whoever put together 1 and 2 Samuel changed their names from "May Baal Contend" and "Man of Baal" to various plays on "shame" (bosheth). Their original names are preserved, oddly enough, in 1 Chronicles. If you could go back and ask, say, Samuel or David or Saul about how many gods existed and what their names were, I suspect all of them would have been clear that YHWH was the chief of the gods, and the only one that Israelites should worship, but beyond that you would have gotten some complicated and perhaps confused answers. Even some parts of the Bible take for granted that other gods besides YHWH exist - see, for instance, Psalm 82. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm%2082&version=NIV https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm%2082&vers... Over time, "Baal" began to denote a specific agricultural deity, and it became less appropriate to use as a title for YHWH. That seems to have kicked off (or was kicked off by) the well-known conflict between Yahwism and Baal worship - see, ad infra, 1 Kings 18. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20kings%2018&version=NIV https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20kings%2018&...

schuyler2d 1y ago
I don't want to completely refute this because I'm also an amateur and there are a lot of instabilities of consensus, but Baal was at least also the son of El in Canaanite religion which predated an Israeli kingdom. My understanding is more that Yahvists had more nomadic origins and populated (/conquered, possibly the Levites[1]) a Canaanite cultural context and then there was religious syncreticism and interest in merging them. Depending on the specific passage's history there's either a ret-coning of "all one god" or at least the interpretation that way (including how your links translate those passages). [1] https://www.amazon.com/Exodus-Richard-Elliott-Friedman/dp/0062565249 https://www.amazon.com/Exodus-Richard-Elliott-Friedman/dp/00...
- thaumasiotes 1y ago
  > Baal was at least also the son of El in Canaanite religion which predated an Israeli kingdom Where are you getting this from?
  - ThalesX 1y ago
    Have you tried googling "baal son of el"? I have no idea on who Baal is, or El, but the discussion sparked my curiosity and that's all I needed to do in order to answer for myself the question "where are you getting this from?".
  - smithkl42 1y ago
    The Wikipedia article is a good place to start: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baal Like all matters concerning the gods in the ancient near east, it's complex, and every answer has to be qualified. So apparently in some traditions, Baal was the son of Dagan (another fertility god), and in some the son of El (the head of the Canaanite pantheon, often identified with Yahweh even by orthodox Yahwists).
    - thaumasiotes 1y ago
      > often identified with Yahweh even by orthodox Yahwists This seems totally unsurprising, given that the Old Testament freely uses both terms while insisting there is only one god. What else are orthodox Yahwists supposed to think?
griffzhowl 1y ago
There's also evidence that even the exclusive worship of YHWH is something that's written in to the history at a later date, e.g. the Elephantine papyri predate any known manuscript of the Hebrew bible, and seem to show a polytheistic community of Jews in Egypt in the fifth century BC. This community was in contact with the Jerusalem temple, and there's no suggestion in their correspondence that what they were doing was unorthodox at the time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elephantine_papyri_and_ostraca https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elephantine_papyri_and_ostraca
- smithkl42 1y ago
  I don't know that I would draw that sharp of a distinction between archaeological and Biblical evidence. Pretty much every strata of the Bible that we have, from pretty much every age, assumes that even Yahweh's worshipers are aware of and frequently worshiping other gods. Rachel has her period on a pile of household idols (Gen. 31:26-35). Jacob gives up all his household's idols at God's request (Gen. 35:1-4). The Israelites in the desert worship first a golden calf (Ex. 32) and then the Baal of Peor (Numbers 25). David's wife Michal has an idol just sitting around, available to be used in a subterfuge (1 Sam. 19:11-17). And that's before we get to the prophets, whose message everywhere assumes that other gods are present in Israelite civil religion. The question isn’t whether ancient Israelites worshiped other gods. Every single source we have, including the Bible, says that they did. The real question is how early and how consistently such behavior was objected to, and on what grounds. And there, the evidence shows that even the earliest traditions seem to expect loyalty to YHWH alone, even if they don’t always explain why. Over time, those objections become sharper, more theological, and more absolute. But there is no point in the biblical tradition, early or late, where YHWH is not a jealous God; just as there is no point where he doesn’t have cause to be.
  - oh_fiddlesticks 1y ago
    [dead]
  - griffzhowl 1y ago
    > The real question is how early and how consistently such behavior was objected to, and on what grounds. Yes, ok. I'm claiming that the Elephantine papyri show no direct evidence that it was objected to in the late fifth century BC. There might be more indirect evidence which is more a matter of interpretation, e.g. some claim the other gods' names are really names of aspect of YHW, and it's noteworthy that in the letter petitioning the Jerusalem temple for support in rebuilding the Elephantine temple, no god other than YHW is mentioned. But I think it's hard to make a definitive case either way. Probably the more you look into it the more complicated it becomes, like everything
SAI_Peregrinus 1y ago
Even the 10 commandments imply the existence of other gods, just their inferiority to YHVH and forbidding their worship. E.g. King James version of Exodus 20:1-6 And God spake all these words, saying, I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before me. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; and shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments. "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." not "There are no gods but me". The original word translated as "before" is "עַל", literally "above", "over", "upon". That's not denying the other gods exist, it's forbidding the tribes of Israel from worshiping them or treating them as greater than YHVH. Modern doctrine insists that other gods aren't real, but that's not directly supported in the torah.

schuyler2d 1y ago

I don't want to completely refute this because I'm also an amateur and there are a lot of instabilities of consensus, but Baal was at least also the son of El in Canaanite religion which predated an Israeli kingdom. My understanding is more that Yahvists had more nomadic origins and populated (/conquered, possibly the Levites[1]) a Canaanite cultural context and then there was religious syncreticism and interest in merging them. Depending on the specific passage's history there's either a ret-coning of "all one god" or at least the interpretation that way (including how your links translate those passages). [1] https://www.amazon.com/Exodus-Richard-Elliott-Friedman/dp/0062565249 https://www.amazon.com/Exodus-Richard-Elliott-Friedman/dp/00...

thaumasiotes 1y ago
> Baal was at least also the son of El in Canaanite religion which predated an Israeli kingdom Where are you getting this from?
- ThalesX 1y ago
  Have you tried googling "baal son of el"? I have no idea on who Baal is, or El, but the discussion sparked my curiosity and that's all I needed to do in order to answer for myself the question "where are you getting this from?".
- smithkl42 1y ago
  The Wikipedia article is a good place to start: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baal Like all matters concerning the gods in the ancient near east, it's complex, and every answer has to be qualified. So apparently in some traditions, Baal was the son of Dagan (another fertility god), and in some the son of El (the head of the Canaanite pantheon, often identified with Yahweh even by orthodox Yahwists).
  - thaumasiotes 1y ago
    > often identified with Yahweh even by orthodox Yahwists This seems totally unsurprising, given that the Old Testament freely uses both terms while insisting there is only one god. What else are orthodox Yahwists supposed to think?

griffzhowl 1y ago

There's also evidence that even the exclusive worship of YHWH is something that's written in to the history at a later date, e.g. the Elephantine papyri predate any known manuscript of the Hebrew bible, and seem to show a polytheistic community of Jews in Egypt in the fifth century BC. This community was in contact with the Jerusalem temple, and there's no suggestion in their correspondence that what they were doing was unorthodox at the time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elephantine_papyri_and_ostraca https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elephantine_papyri_and_ostraca

smithkl42 1y ago
I don't know that I would draw that sharp of a distinction between archaeological and Biblical evidence. Pretty much every strata of the Bible that we have, from pretty much every age, assumes that even Yahweh's worshipers are aware of and frequently worshiping other gods. Rachel has her period on a pile of household idols (Gen. 31:26-35). Jacob gives up all his household's idols at God's request (Gen. 35:1-4). The Israelites in the desert worship first a golden calf (Ex. 32) and then the Baal of Peor (Numbers 25). David's wife Michal has an idol just sitting around, available to be used in a subterfuge (1 Sam. 19:11-17). And that's before we get to the prophets, whose message everywhere assumes that other gods are present in Israelite civil religion. The question isn’t whether ancient Israelites worshiped other gods. Every single source we have, including the Bible, says that they did. The real question is how early and how consistently such behavior was objected to, and on what grounds. And there, the evidence shows that even the earliest traditions seem to expect loyalty to YHWH alone, even if they don’t always explain why. Over time, those objections become sharper, more theological, and more absolute. But there is no point in the biblical tradition, early or late, where YHWH is not a jealous God; just as there is no point where he doesn’t have cause to be.
- oh_fiddlesticks 1y ago
  [dead]
- griffzhowl 1y ago
  > The real question is how early and how consistently such behavior was objected to, and on what grounds. Yes, ok. I'm claiming that the Elephantine papyri show no direct evidence that it was objected to in the late fifth century BC. There might be more indirect evidence which is more a matter of interpretation, e.g. some claim the other gods' names are really names of aspect of YHW, and it's noteworthy that in the letter petitioning the Jerusalem temple for support in rebuilding the Elephantine temple, no god other than YHW is mentioned. But I think it's hard to make a definitive case either way. Probably the more you look into it the more complicated it becomes, like everything

SAI_Peregrinus 1y ago

Even the 10 commandments imply the existence of other gods, just their inferiority to YHVH and forbidding their worship. E.g. King James version of Exodus 20:1-6 And God spake all these words, saying, I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before me. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; and shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments. "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." not "There are no gods but me". The original word translated as "before" is "עַל", literally "above", "over", "upon". That's not denying the other gods exist, it's forbidding the tribes of Israel from worshiping them or treating them as greater than YHVH. Modern doctrine insists that other gods aren't real, but that's not directly supported in the torah.