Evolution of God

[Sophus]

Came across this nifty little video on the internet. Is this another Zeitgeist movie? I noticed a few factual inaccuracies in one of the Zeitgeist films, but from what I've read on the history of world religions this seems consistent:

[youtube:2hdqu9zd]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlnnWbkMlbg[/youtube:2hdqu9zd]

[elliebean]

Excellent video! Well-made and very informative.  

[Achronos]

Came across this nifty little video on the internet. Is this another Zeitgeist movie? I noticed a few factual inaccuracies in one of the Zeitgeist films, but from what I've read on the history of world religions this seems consistent:

[youtube:35xczl4k]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlnnWbkMlbg[/youtube:35xczl4k]

First off Prince of Egypt is a gorgeous film, I loved the animation in it.

Something interesting about the video is the idea that the genocides written in the Bible never happened, just a way in which one identifies a warrior Yahwe.

You have to realize though no one disputes there are some fiction in the Scriptures, the underlying reason for these stories are disputably there for a slightly different reason than the video presents (in Christian understanding, it's a veil of NT allegorical understanding).  In addition, some of the verses mentioned that are considered "proof" for polytheism is also disputed.  These verses are there to falsify other gods, not to say that Yahwe is the most powerful of other "existing" gods.  We argue that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob knew exactly of an only God, and cursed other "gods" showing the strength of a One true God.  I can say my sister is the best sister in the world, and yet she's my only sister.

So, these stories are offered as refutation of polytheism that exists around them, not "hidden" polytheism.  How do we know that the word "Yahwe" wasn't a coincidental word for a warrior God and at the same time the "One God" for the Hebrews?  It's like the word "Allah."  It has always been used to mean "God" but can also be the moon god of Hindu religions.

Finally, there remains no proof yet of this hypothesis of hidden polytheism.  You need to find manuscripts that show substantial differences and cutting out of verses that clearly indicate an exclusivity of the One God.  So far, we found the Dead Sea Manuscripts that show quite the opposite, an affirmation of the integrity of most of the OT scriptures.  We also have a religion, Zoroastrianism, that shows elements very similar to Monotheism, which claims its ancient roots along with pre-Judaic Abrahamic times, and perhaps Zorastrianism and Judaism share some sort of a common ancestor that has these Monotheistic tendencies.  This at least shows that Monotheism may have had a much more ancient root than what the video proclaims.

[Sophus]

I'll respond more in depth at a later time but I'll start by saying you cannot explain away "El Shaddai". Judaism had polytheistic roots, therefore so does Christianity. Really, all of the major religions today had polytheistic roots.

[Achronos]

Sophus, I think someone like you would be more edified on the topic through a reliable source:

http://oyc.yale.edu/religious-studies/i ... brew-bible

[Sophus]

Sophus, I think someone like you would be more edified on the topic through a reliable source:

http://oyc.yale.edu/religious-studies/i ... brew-bible

Now I'm just confused. What exactly are you saying? Christine Hayes has lectured about the redactions of the Bible to make it appear more monotheistic.

[youtube:2jkrg8zo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7RF_GoeOTg[/youtube:2jkrg8zo]

[wildfire_emissary]

So that's one way of explaining it. They re-create and revise as they go according to the will and caprice of the dominant culture.
Is there a second part? I'm gonna put this in my phone and show it to my sociology class.
Eh, did this come from a book?

[Sophus]

So that's one way of explaining it. They re-create and revise as they go according to the will and caprice of the dominant culture.
Is there a second part? I'm gonna put this in my phone and show it to my sociology class.
Eh, did this come from a book?

Well, it's just the history of the Abrahamic religions. It took a while for monotheism of any kind to come into the world, and all of the old revolutionary monotheists I can think of started with the building blocks of a polytheistic religion. This video mentions several sources. One of them being the book A History of God.

[terranus]

I sure wish they'd teach this stuff in history class down here in the South...man, would that cause an uproar!! :yay:

Got any more cool videos like this?

[Recusant]

Came across this nifty little video on the internet. Is this another Zeitgeist movie? I noticed a few factual inaccuracies in one of the Zeitgeist films, but from what I've read on the history of world religions this seems consistent.

This video does apparently contain some inaccuracies.  However, that's what they are, inaccuracies, whereas in my opinion, "Zeitgeist" has a number of what I can only describe as falsehoods.  For a very thorough critique of the "Evolution of God" video, you can watch these videos by ItsTheSuperFly:

 [youtube:z21malmh]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVN5VmuS5m8[/youtube:z21malmh]

 [youtube:z21malmh]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5tmWv2Fy3k[/youtube:z21malmh]

As ItsTheSuperFly says in the second video though, "I happen to completely and utterly agree with the overall proposition, with the overall hypothesis, if you want to call it, that Evid3nc3 is presenting.  So there's no disagreement there.  The issue is specifically in details."

[Achronos]

Sophus, I think someone like you would be more edified on the topic through a reliable source:

http://oyc.yale.edu/religious-studies/i ... brew-bible

Now I'm just confused. What exactly are you saying? Christine Hayes has lectured about the redactions of the Bible to make it appear more monotheistic.

[youtube:exr25arz]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7RF_GoeOTg[/youtube:exr25arz]

That's a rather simplified view of what she's lectured on.

My point was that her lectures are of far more credibility than the source you provided. You should not watch youtube-made demagogues to learn about history.

[Davin]

My point was that her lectures are of far more credibility than the source you provided. You should not watch youtube-made demagogues to learn about history.

You can also research the sources he cited. In the case of his wikipedia links, research the sources of those articles as well.

[Sophus]

That's a rather simplified view of what she's lectured on.

Please point me to where she states, as you have, the Bible does not have polytheistic roots.

[Achronos]

MYou can also research the sources he cited. In the case of his wikipedia links, research the sources of those articles as well.

Zeitgeist proponents say the same thing. If they really wanted to educate people they'd post the sources on a website and not make a sensational video on youtube that few people will fact check.

Please point me to where she states, as you have, the Bible does not have polytheistic roots.

Where did I state anything like that?

The Near-Eastern literary genres of the early books of the OT were obviously created within a polytheistic cosmology, and thus the oldest forms of those genres are polytheistic expressions. Granted we don't have manuscript evidence to prove this hypothesis, but it seems very so likely.Take the Sumerian-Akkadian story of Ziusudra and the river flood, or the Babylonian creation story the Enuma Elis.

The amazing thing about, say, Genesis, is not its similarities to other creation stories in the Near East. It's the *differences* that appear once you acknowledge the similarities.

I don't see a problem with the Israelites graudally coming to realize that their God is aboslutely the only God. Not sure how this contradicts the Christian faith at all. It contradicts protestant biblical fundamentalism, which is what you seem to always argue against (regardless of what tradition your *actually* arguing against!)

I have a feeling you just don't yet comprehend I am not a Biblical inerrantist and that if the Bible has been redacted it makes no difference to Orthodox and Catholics, nor does it make much of a difference to most Jews either. Even the Talmudic Rabbis admitted the Bible had been redacted over and over...not new information, not shocking unless of course you accept the Fundamentalist Protestant view that the Bible has never changed and is the "word of God" and is free from all errors.

[Davin]

MYou can also research the sources he cited. In the case of his wikipedia links, research the sources of those articles as well.

Zeitgeist proponents say the same thing. If they really wanted to educate people they'd post the sources on a website and not make a sensational video on youtube that few people will fact check.

Youtube is not a website? Education comes in many forms, as does misinformation. It's just as common for a site to misinform as it is a video, a book or any other form of media. Do you think more people will fact check a website article than a video? And from where do you draw this conclusion?