The history of Israelite religion (part 2)

    YHWH as head of the pantheon

    As we saw in the last post, after YHWH was introduced to Israelite religion, some (whose writings are preserved in Deut. 32 and parts of the ‘Deuteronomistic History’) saw him as a second-tier deity, the patron god of Israel who was appointed by the most high god El. By the end of the exilic period, all the evidence that we have points to YHWH as the head of the Israelite pantheon, having been conflated with the most high god El. We can see a transition between these two views in Psalm 82:

Elohim takes his stand in the council of El; he accuses among the gods.

“How long will you judge unjustly and show partiality to the wicked? Defend the weak and the orphan, give justice to the poor and needy. Rescue the weak and the needy, deliver them from the hand of the wicked. They have neither knowledge nor understanding; they walk around in darkness; all the foundations of the earth are shaken.”

“I presumed that you are gods, and all of you sons of the most high. Nevertheless, you will die like men and fall like one of the princes. Arise, Elohim, and judge the earth, for you will inherit all the nations.” (Ps. 82:1-8)

In this psalm, YHWH (called “Elohim” or “God”) is depicted as standing in “the council of El,” which is known from the Ugaritic texts to be a technical term for the group of second-tier deities (El’s children) below the most high god El. [1] This term shares the same connotation in Psalm 82, as we see that the gods of the council are “sons of the most high” (v. 6). But is YHWH conflated with El here, or is he one of El’s sons as in Deuteronomy 32?

    Several considerations support the latter view. First, if this were YHWH’s council, it would be more natural to say, “Elohim takes his stand in his council,“ rather than “Elohim takes his stand in El’s council” (v. 1). [2] Furthermore, rather than presiding over El’s council, YHWH is standing in the midst of the council as prosecutor. There’s no precedent in the ancient Near East texts, Israelite or otherwise, for the high god himself acting as prosecutor in his council. [3] YHWH is told, “you will inherit all nations” (qal imperfect; v. 8), which implies that he’s not already ruler of all nations. It’s probable that the speaker changes between YHWH and El from v. 5 to 6. After YHWH denounces the other gods before El, El condemns them to death, and as a consequence, YHWH inherits the nations that his former siblings once ruled. [4] This parallels the Ugaritic “Ba’al Cycle,” where Ba’al is declared to be ruler of the gods after defeating one of them in battle. [3]

    The likely setting of this psalm, and the other “psalms of Asaph,” is the exilic period. The “inheritance” of YHWH has been destroyed by the gentiles (Ps. 79:1-4), and his people have been driven from the land of Israel, making it impossible for them to worship YHWH (Ps. 137:1-4; see previous post). The solution is that YHWH must rebuke the other gods for their injustice, take his place as leader of the divine council, and inherit rulership of all nations (Ps. 82). [5]

    This transition can also be seen in the redactional history of Deuteronomy. Moses’ speech in Deut. 1:1-4:43 is known to have been written later than the rest of Deuteronomy, probably in the exilic period (but the precise dating doesn’t matter very much). [6] This speech modifies the account of Deut. 32:8-9 by putting YHWH in the place of the most high god, as the one who divided the nations among the gods, and who took Israel as his own possession (4:19-20). It also emphasizes that YHWH himself set the borders of the nations (2:4-5, 9). The Deuteronomistic account of the exile, which must date to the exilic period, also emphasizes YHWH’s sovereignty over the foreign armies that invaded Judah (2 Kgs. 24:2-4, 20), which shows that he was seen as ruler of all nations.

    To be sure, I’m not arguing for a linear development of Israelite religion, only that such a development can be seen in the Deuteronomistic literature. The J source of the Pentateuch, belonging to the monarchic period, already conflates YHWH with El, as the “sons of God” (Gen. 6:1-4) are depicted as YHWH’s offspring. [7] The view of YHWH as the leader of the second-tier deities, the “sons of El/God,” is also found in some of the poetic literature of the Hebrew Bible — pre-exilic (Ps. 29:1-2), exilic (Ps. 89:6-7), and post-exilic alike (Job 1:6; 38:7-9). [8] The commandment to have “no other gods before” YHWH, found in the Covenant Code (Exod. 20:3), may mean that El was no longer seen as a separate god. The prophet Hosea, writing in the mid-8th century BC, equated YHWH with El who wrestled Jacob (Hos. 12:2-5). The prophet Isaiah, writing slightly later, saw YHWH as sovereign over all nations including Assyria (Isa. 10:5-12).

    The inscriptions at Kuntillet ’Ajrud, dating to the late monarchic period, describe YHWH alongside a consort A/asherah (which may be a proper name or a generic noun), and may conflate YHWH with both El and Ba’al. [9] Thus, the conflation of YHWH with El as the head of the divine council occurred in some Israelite circles by the early monarchic period, and in others possibly as late as the exilic period.

    Through the Persian period, the view of YHWH as head of the Israelite pantheon continued in some areas. The Elephantine papyri, belonging to a group of YHWH-worshipping Israelite exiles in Egypt during the 5th century BC, testify to the conflation of YHW with the Aramean high god Bethel. Alongside him, they worshipped his consort Anat-Bethel and their son Eshem-Bethel, making a three-god pantheon out of the divine family. [10] In 408 BC, the Elephantine community petitioned the Judean high priest for help rebuilding their temple of YHW (Elephantine Papyri no. 30), but seemingly never received a response, which suggests a break between the YHW-centered polytheism of Elephantine and the monotheism of the post-exilic Judean community.

    YHWH as the only true god

    During the exilic period, some of the Judean exiles took the next step of not only seeing YHWH as the highest god and ruler of the pantheon, but as the only one worthy of being called “God” (Heb: elohim). This is most clearly seen in Second Isaiah (2Isa; Isaiah 40-55), a text written toward the end of the exilic period. 2Isa repeatedly says of YHWH that there is no god beside him, that no god was formed before him nor will outlast him, and that there is no one like him (Isa. 43:10-11; 44:6-7; 45:5-7, 14, 18, 21; 46:8-9). The uniqueness of YHWH is tied to his sole creation of the heavens and earth, with no one else beside him (40:12, 21-22; 44:24; 45:12, 18; 48:13; 51:13, 16).

    The prophet Jeremiah, writing in the late pre-exilic period, shared a similar view: “The gods who did not make the heavens and the earth shall perish from the earth and from under the heavens” (Jer. 10:11-12). Both Jeremiah and 2Isa went so far as to say that the idols of the nations have no breath in them, and are not gods at all (Isa. 40:9-22; Jer. 10:2-15; 51:17).

    However, none of this rhetoric is unparalleled in the ancient Near East. The statements about no god being beside YHWH, and his creation of the heaven and earth, is very similar to Egyptian and Babylonian statements about the superiority of their own favored gods. [11] Even the rhetoric about the idols of other nations having no breath and being “nothing” is paralleled in the statements of Ashurbanipal and Nabonidus about their enemies’ idols. [12] Furthermore, 2Isa acknowledges the existence of other divine beings, such as the “heavenly hosts” whom YHWH created and commands (40:25-26; 45:12), and the sea monster Rahab whom YHWH defeated (51:9-10). The real innovation of 2Isa is its refusal to call other divine beings “gods/God” (Heb: elohim). [13] Based on this, it should truly be classified as monotheistic, with its belief in only one God.

    By the late Persian and Hellenistic periods, monotheism became the hegemonic view in second-Temple Judaism. The other “gods” of the nations, formerly second-tier deities, had been downgraded to mere angels, fourth-tier heavenly beings totally subordinate to the one true God YHWH. This can be seen, for example, in the LXX translation of Deuteronomy 32 into Greek, which downgrades the “sons of God” to “angels of God” and exhorts the angels, not the “gods,” to worship the Lord. [14] The Dead Sea Scrolls, written by the Qumran community in the 2nd-1st centuries BC, frequently refer to “gods” (Heb: elim or elohim), but use this title to refer to angels and lesser spiritual beings, both those subordinate and opposed to God. [15] Like the LXX, the DSS replaces “sons of God” in the Hebrew Bible with “angels of God” (11QtgJob 30:5; 4Q180).

    Other second-Temple texts refer to the mythological motif of the most high god dividing the nations among the gods. However, in these texts, the lower gods are “angels” and/or “spirits,” who may be opposed to God and his angels (Dan. 10:20-21), or may have been sent by God to deceive the nations (Jub. 15:31-32) or to punish Israel (1 En. 89:59-60). These angels may overstep their bounds and themselves be punished severely (1 En. 89:61-70; 90:22, 25).

    Conclusion

    The Hebrew Bible doesn’t present a single, unified view of YHWH’s relationship with the other gods. The history of Israelite religion can be divided into a few stages or groups, starting with the religion of the patriarchs:

  1. The earliest Israelite religion was worship of the Canaanite high god El, creator of heaven and earth (Gen. 14:17-22; 28:19; 31:13; 33:20; 35:7, 15; 46:3; 49:24-25). This is where the name “Isra-El” (“El contends”) comes from in the first place. The patriarchs never even knew the name “YHWH,” a fact explained in Exodus 6:3.
  2. YHWH was introduced to Israelite religion, most likely from the south (in the region of Sinai and Edom), some time in the late 2nd millennium BC. Based on the very earliest Israelite texts that we have (preserved in Exodus 15:1-18 and Judges 5:2-31), it appears that YHWH began as a deity associated with storms and war.
  3. After YHWH was introduced, he was seen as the national god of Israel, and as such subordinate to the high god El who assigned the gods to their nations (Deut. 32:8-9). He could be worshipped only on Israelite soil (1 Sam. 26:16-20; 2 Kgs. 5:15-19; 17:24-28; Ps. 137:1-4), and could be defeated by other national gods like Chemosh in battle (2 Kgs. 3:17-27).
  4. YHWH was distinguished from the high god El in some circles of Israelite religion until at least the 8th century BC, perhaps as late as the exilic period (if that’s when Psalm 82 was composed). On the other hand, the J source of the Pentateuch, which most likely dates to the monarchic period, clearly conflates YHWH and El. The earliest clearly datable conflation of YHWH with El comes from the prophets of YHWH, Hosea and Isaiah, in the 8th century BC (Isa. 12:1-2; Hos. 12:2-5).
  5. In the late exilic and post-exilic periods, the status of other divine beings in Israelite religion was degraded from “gods” (second-tier deities) to merely angels (fourth-tier deities), making YHWH into the only true god (Isa. 40-55; LXX; DSS). This final step marks the transition from polytheism to monotheism.

    How can we reconcile this with faith in God? Can we do so? I believe it’s possible to be a consistent Christian while also accepting where this evidence leads. Rather than assuming that God directly revealed everything about himself to Israel, we can see the history of Israelite religion as a history of discovery and realization about their god. Perhaps God originally revealed himself to the patriarchs within the framework of their religion, as the most high god El, creator of heaven and earth. He also revealed himself to Israel as YHWH at a later date (the same solution proposed in Exodus 6:3). Some Israelites thought that YHWH, as the god of Israel, was subordinate to El and able to be defeated by other national gods. Others (notably, YHWH’s prophets) saw him as the highest god and the same as El. Finally, with the tragedy of the exile, the Israelites realized that YHWH was completely unique and sovereign over world events.

______________________________

[1] Mark S. Smith, The Origins of Biblical Monotheism, 42-49.

[2] As late as the 1st century BC, it was recognized that “Elohim” and “El” refer to two different figures in Psalm 82:1. However, in order to reconcile it with Jewish monotheism, “Elohim” was reinterpreted as the angelic figure Melchizedek, and “El” was reinterpreted as YHWH himself (11QMelch 2:9-14).

[3] Thom Stark, “The Most Heiser.”

[4] David Frankel, “El as the Speaking Voice in Psalm 82:6-8,” JHS 10 (2011), 3-12.

[5] Daniel McClellan, “The Gods-Complaint: Psalm 82 as a Psalm of Complaint,” JBL 137, no. 4 (2018), 833-851; however, a pre-exilic date and setting are also possible, see David Frankel, “El as the Speaking Voice,” 12-14.

[6] Joel S. Baden, The Composition of the Pentateuch: Renewing the Documentary Hypothesis (London: Yale, 2012), 129-132. It’s long been recognized that there are two introductions to Deuteronomy, both of which begin with the convening of all Israel (1:1; 5:1), a historical prologue about the defeat of Sihon and Og (1:4; 4:46-49), and a statement about the exposition of the law (1:5; 4:44-45). The second introduction (4:44-11:32) primarily focuses on the events of the giving of the law at Horeb, whereas the first introduction (1:1-4:43) complements it by adding details about the wilderness events, showing that it was written later.

[7] Aren Wilson-Wright, “Yahweh’s Kin,” 51-53. On the existence of the J source, see Joel S. Baden, The Composition of the Pentateuch, 45-81. If the J source didn’t exist, and something like the supplementary hypothesis is true instead (with D as the original form of the Pentateuch), then a linear development of Israelite religion would be more plausible.

[8] Aren Wilson-Wright (“Yahweh’s Kin,” 54-55) notes that Job 38:8-9 describes the birth of “Sea” (Heb: yam) in surprisingly naturalistic terms, which suggests that the author viewed the “sons of God” as a true familial relationship, similarly to Ugaritic literature about the children of El.

[9] B. A. Mastin, “The Inscriptions Written on Plaster at Kuntillet ’Ajrud,” Vetus Testamentum 59, no. 1 (2009), 110-113. However, see Ryan Thomas, “Plaster Wall Inscription 4.2: El, Baal, and YHWH,” who argues that El and Ba’al refer to the head of the pantheon (“holy one over the gods”), a separate deity from YHWH at Kuntillet ’Ajrud.

[10] Ryan Thomas, “Reconstructing the Pantheon of Judaean Elephantine,” Ugarit-Forschungen 51 (2020), 225-297.

[11] Saul M. Olyan, “Is Isaiah 40-55 Really Monotheistic,” JANER 12, no. 2 (2012), 197; Stephen O. Smoot, “An Egyptian View of the Monotheism of Second Isaiah,” CBQ 86, no. 1 (2024). For example, consider the Middle Egyptian Hymn to Amun-Re, which describes Amun as “sole one, unique among the gods... sole image who made everything that exists... single one, without his equal.”

[12] Nathaniel B. Levtow, Images of Others: Iconic Politics in Ancient Israel (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2008), 108, 124, 168-169.

[13] Saul M. Olyan, “Is Isaiah 40-55 Really Monotheistic?”

[14] Daniel McClellan, “What is Deity in LXX Deuteronomy,” Studia Antiqua 10, no. 1 (2011), 67-79.

[15] John J. Collins, “Powers in Heaven: God, Gods, and Angels in the Dead Sea Scrolls,” in Religion in the Dead Sea Scrolls (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000), 11-19; Cecilia Wassen, “Angels in the Dead Sea Scrolls,” Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature Yearbook (2007), 500-501.

The history of Israelite religion

    What does the Hebrew Bible say about gods other than YHWH? According to some (such as the late Michael Heiser), the other gods of the nations were viewed as second-tier deities in the divine council, above the angels but below YHWH, the one true and unique God. Others (including most second-Temple Jews) viewed these “gods” as merely angels. Most Christians today simply assume that, in the Hebrew Bible, YHWH is the only god whatsoever, and the gods of the nations don’t exist in any way. However, all of these views assume that the Hebrew Bible must share a single, unified view of the relationship between YHWH and the gods of the nations. Most scholars agree that the Hebrew Bible contains multiple views about YHWH and other gods. Let’s go over the evidence for this.

    YHWH as patron deity of Israel

    In the ancient Near East, it was believed that there was a patron god for each nation, allotted by the most high god of the divine council. As attested by many Ugaritic texts, this highest god of the Canaanite pantheon was El, a name that literally means “god.” This view is also attested in the Hebrew Bible, most notably in the poem of Deuteronomy 32:

When the most high divided the nations as an inheritance, when he separated the sons of men, he fixed the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of the sons of El. [1] YHWH’s portion is his people, and Jacob his share of the inheritance. (Deut. 32:8-9)

This passage attributes the division of the nations to “the most high” god (Heb: ’elyon), and says that they were divided among “the sons of El.” As in Canaanite mythology, El is the most high god who divides the nations. What’s truly striking is that in this passage, YHWH himself appears to be a son of El, and not identical to the most high god!

    This becomes especially clear when read in the original Hebrew. We’re told that the most high god gave the peoples (Heb: ammim) as an inheritance (Heb: b’hankhel) to the sons of El, and that the people (Heb: ammow) of YHWH are Israel, who are his share of the inheritance (Heb: khebel nakhalatow). The same root words are used in both cases, indicating that Israel was given to YHWH by the most high god. This becomes even clearer when we realize that a “share of the inheritance” is always something given by a superior, never something taken by oneself (Josh. 17:14; 1 Chron. 16:18; Ps. 78:55; 105:11). While a few scholars have argued against this conclusion, their arguments are remarkably weak and fail to account for the clear parallelism between vv. 8 and 9. [2]

    The rhetorical effect within the larger poem is to show that YHWH’s status as god of Israel is part of the divine order established by the most high god. YHWH has shepherded Israel from the beginning (Deut. 32:10-14), but Israel has abandoned this divine order and worshipped other gods (32:15-18).

    The existence of these other gods isn’t in question, and it’s possible that several lower-tier deities of Israel’s pantheon are actually named in this poem as YHWH’s allies (32:23-24). [3] Their characterization as “not-gods” is parallel to the characterization of Israel’s enemies as “not-people” (32:21) — it’s not that they don’t exist, but that they are insignificant. YHWH’s declaration, “I, I am he, and there is no god beside me” (32:39), parallels other ancient Near Eastern statements about the superiority of one’s own national deity. [4] After YHWH defeats his people’s enemies in combat, their gods will bow down to him and acknowledge his superiority (32:40-43).

    Thus, the poem in Deuteronomy 32 presents an Israelite pantheon in which (as at Ugarit) the most high god is El, who gave Israel to YHWH and the other nations to the other gods. In this view, YHWH is the best national god, but not the only one. This view is also found in several parts of the Deuteronomistic History (Joshua–2 Kings). The gods of other nations are acknowledged as real, but it’s wrong for Israel to worship them (Josh. 10:6; 1 Kgs. 11:33).

    YHWH, however, is tied to the land of Israel and can only be worshipped on Israelite soil. When Saul pursued David to the borders of Israel, he cried out that he was being driven “away from the presence of YHWH” and forced to worship other gods (1 Sam. 26:17-20). When the Aramean general Na’aman converted to Israelite religion and had to return to his home country, Elisha gave him two cartloads of Israelite soil so that he could continue to worship YHWH (2 Kgs. 5:15-19). The foreigners transplanted to Israel by Assyria initially failed to worship YHWH, “the god of the land,” and were punished as a result (2 Kgs. 17:24-28).

    YHWH’s authority outside of the land of Israel wasn’t total. When he promised that Israel would conquer Moab, but Moab’s king sacrificed his son to Moab’s patron deity Chemosh, the resulting divine fury drove Israel out — YHWH was defeated by Chemosh (2 Kgs. 3:17-27). [5] All of these passages belong to the first redactional stratum of the Deuteronomistic History, dating to the 7th century BC. [6]

    The earliest Isra-El-ite religion

    The ruler of the Israelite pantheon, according to Deut. 32:8 (and corroborated by the Ugaritic texts), was the most high god El. There’s much evidence that this was the god originally worshipped by Israel’s patriarchs. [7] In fact, this is evidenced by the very name Isra-El (meaning “El contends”). Unlike later in the Hebrew Bible, most of the theophoric names in Genesis involve the name El rather than YHWH — for example, “Beth-El” (house of El; Gen. 28:19; 35:7, 15) and “El-Elohe-Israel” (El, god of Israel; Gen. 33:20). There are other examples of “El” names in the patriarchal narratives (Gen. 16:11, 13; 32:28, 30, 31), in contrast to only one claimed instance of a “YHWH” name (Gen. 22:14).

    Abraham worships “El the most high” alongside the Canaanite priest Melchizedek (Gen. 14:17-22). [8] Jacob blesses Joseph by “El the mighty,” mentioned separately from YHWH (Gen. 49:24-25; cf. v. 18). One of the accounts of Moses’ commission says that the patriarchs didn’t know the name “YHWH,” but rather worshipped him as “El the mighty” (Exod. 6:3). This appears to be a later attempt, after YHWH and El were conflated within the Israelite pantheon, to explain why the patriarchs worshipped God as “El” and not “YHWH.”

    Recent findings from Tel Rehov, in the northern Jordan Valley, show that the cult of the high god El (as a separate deity from YHWH) continued in parts of Israel until at least the 9th century BC. [9] The Deir ’Alla inscription (KAI 312), dating to the early 8th century BC in the eastern Jordan Valley, testify to a belief in El as the leader of the pantheon at that date. [10] There is evidence from the biblical texts that El continued to be worshipped as the high god, distinct from YHWH, at Bethel well into the 8th century BC. [11] The evidence from personal theophoric names in the archaeological record shows that “YHWH” names grew in popularity, while “El” names became less common, from the 10th century BC onward. [12] This points to YHWH’s supercession of (and eventual conflation with) the god El.

    How was YHWH introduced to the Israelite pantheon as their patron deity, if the patriarchs of Israel originally worshipped El alone? All signs point to the south, especially Edom and the Sinai peninsula, as the origin of YHWH-worship. The Hebrew Bible repeatedly emphasizes that YHWH came from Sinai, from Seir, from Paran, from Teman — all locations to the south of Israel (e.g., Deut. 33:2; Judg. 5:4-5; Ps. 68:8-9; Hab. 3:3; cf. Kuntillet ’Ajrud pithos B). An inscription from 18th-Dynasty Egypt refers to the “land of the nomads of YHW” as a place in the southern Levant, before “Israel” is first attested as a people group in the 19th Dynasty. [13]

    Therefore, the earliest Israelite religion, practiced by Israel’s patriarchs, was most likely worship of the high god El. At some later time, the deity YHWH was brought in from the south (perhaps, though this is complete speculation, in a historical ‘exodus’ event) and became the patron god of Israel. YHWH was eventually conflated with El to become the most high god (this will be covered in my next post). To be clear, I am not suggesting the debunked idea of linear evolution of Israelite religion. There’s no reason to think Israelite religion was totally uniform, and there may have been groups that conflated YHWH and El from the start. However, it’s clear that there were groups — some of whose texts survive in the Hebrew Bible — that believed YHWH to be a second-tier deity beneath El.

______________________________

[1] The reading “sons of El” isn’t directly attested in any extant manuscript of Deut. 32:8, but it’s the best explanation for the widely variant readings that do exist: “sons of Israel” (MT), “angels of God” (LXX), and “sons of Elohim” (4QDeutj). Furthermore, this reading is indirectly attested in one of the Dead Sea Scrolls (1QHa XXIV 10a). For more information, see Aren Wilson-Wright, “Yahweh’s Kin: A Comparative Linguistic and Mythological Analysis of ‘The Children of God’ in the Hebrew Bible,” in Where Is the Way to the Dwelling of Light? (Leiden: Brill, 2022), 41-42. The fact that this verse was modified in so many different ways by later Jewish scribes shows how difficult it was to reconcile with Jewish monotheism.

[2] Michael S. Heiser, “Are Yahweh and El Distinct Deities in Deut. 32:8-9 and Psalm 82,” Hiphil 3 (2006); Thom Stark, “The Most Heiser: Yahweh and Elyon in Psalm 82 and Deuteronomy 32,” Religion at the Margins (blog), 16 July 2011; Chrissy Hansen, “The Many Gods of Deuteronomy: A Response to Michael Heiser’s Interpretation of Deut. 32:8-9,” ASRR (2022). The position that Deut. 32:8-9 distinguishes YHWH from “the most high” is by far the majority view among scholars; see Chrissy Hansen, “The Many Gods of Deuteronomy,” fn. 19.

Another fact which Hansen and Stark don’t discuss, but which strongly undermines Heiser’s argument, is the chiastic structure of Deut. 32:8-9 (see below):

A. When the most high divided the nations as an inheritance [Heb: b’hankhel], when he separated the sons of men...

B. ...he fixed the boundaries of the peoples [Heb: ammim] according to the number of the sons of El.

B’. YHWH’s portion is his people [Heb: ammow]...

A’. ...and Jacob his share of the inheritance [Heb: khebel nakhalatow].

Within this chiasm, “YHWH” is parallel to “sons of El,” not to “the most high.” This forcefully argues for a reading on which YHWH is a second-tier deity, given the nation of Israel as an inheritance by his father, the most high god El.

[3] Chrissy Hansen, “The Named Gods of Deuteronomy: Additional Comments on Deuteronomy 32:1-43,” ASRR (2023).

[4] See Thom Stark, “The Most Heiser,” ref. 1.

[5] 2 Kings 3:27 says that there was “great wrath” (Heb: qetseph gadowl) against Israel after Moab’s king sacrificed his son to Chemosh, using a word which elsewhere [except in late Persian-period writings] only refers to divine wrath (Num. 1:53; 16:46; 18:5; Deut. 29:28; Josh. 9:20; 22:20; 1 Chron. 27:24; 2 Chron. 19:2, 10; 24:18; 29:8; 32:25, 26; Ps. 38:1; 102:10; Isa. 34:2; 54:8; 60:10; Jer. 10:10; 21:5; 32:37; 50:13; Zech. 1:2, 15; 7:12; cf. Esth. 1:18; Ecc. 5:17). The parallel Moabite account of this battle, found in the Mesha Stele, also attributes Israel’s defeat to Moab’s patron god Chemosh. Later apologetic attempts by Jews and Christians to make YHWH the source of this divine wrath are utterly strained, as the context shows that YHWH was the one who promised Moab to Israel in the first place (2 Kgs. 3:18).

[6] Thomas Römer, The So-Called Deuteronomistic History: A Sociological, Historical, and Literary Introduction (London: T&T Clark, 2005), 91-104.

[7] For a lengthier summary of the evidence, see Mark S. Smith, The Origins of Biblical Monotheism: Israel’s Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Texts (New York: Oxford, 2001), 139-145.

[8] The Masoretic Text adds “YHWH” before “El the most high” at Gen. 14:22, but this reading is not supported by the LXX, the Peshitta, or the Samaritan Pentateuch, showing that it’s a much later addition.  Similarly, at Gen. 31:13 and 46:3, the definite article was added before “El” in the MT, transforming it into the generic noun “god.” As with Deut. 32:8, the very fact that these verses were edited shows that the references to “El” as the proper name of a deity were considered problematic for Jewish monotheism.

[9] Amihai Mazar, “Religious Practices and Cult Objects during the Iron Age IIA at Tel Rehov and their Implications regarding Religion in Northern Israel,” HeBAI 4 (2015), 25-55.

[10] This inscription, which is a story about the prophet Balaam son of Beor, sheds some light on the account in Numbers 22-24, which is also an account of Balaam’s prophecies and focuses more on El (whom he calls “most high”) than YHWH. Smith (The Origins of Biblical Monotheism, 146-147) argues that this text preserves the distinction between YHWH and El.

[11] Aren Wilson-Wright, “Bethel and the Persistence of El: Evidence for the Survival of El as an Independent Deity in the Jacob Cycle and 1 Kings 12:25-30,” JBL 138, no. 4 (2019), 705-720.

[12] Mitka R. Golub, “Israelite and Judean Personal Theophoric Names in the Hebrew Bible in the Light of the Archaeological Evidence,” ANES 54 (2017), 41.

[13] Titus Kennedy, “The Land of the š3sw (Nomads) of yhw3 at Soleb," Dotawo 6 (2019).

The justice of God

    According to Paul, the “righteous decree of God” is that anyone who practices injustice, malice, strife, murder, deceit, boastfulness, and ruthlessness, among other things, is “deserving of death” (Rom. 1:29-32). The telos of sin is death and destruction (Rom. 6:16, 21, 23; Phil. 3:18-19; cf. Rom. 5:12-14; 8:6, 12-13; 1 Cor. 15:55-56; Gal. 6:8). This perspective isn’t unique to Paul, but can be found all throughout the Scriptures. [1] But why is this the case? Some might think that God has arbitrarily picked certain things to call “sin” and decided to kill anyone who practices these things. But this makes God out to be utterly cruel and “sin” and morality to be ultimately subjective. There must be an objective basis for sin and its just punishment. But why is sin deserving of death?

    God as the foundation of all existence

    One of the key attributes of God in monotheism is his greatness above all other things. God is ultimate; his existence and properties can’t be explained by something more fundamental than himself, because he is above all other things (Gen. 1:1; 2 Kgs. 19:15; Ps. 95:3-5; 96:4-5; 97:9; 103:19; 113:4-6; 135:5-6; Isa. 37:15-16; Acts 14:15; Rom. 11:36; Eph. 4:6; Rev. 4:11). Furthermore, he is absolutely unique in this respect; there are no others like him (Deut. 4:35, 39; 32:39; 1 Kgs. 8:60; 1 Chron. 17:20; Neh. 9:6; Ps. 86:8-10; 89:5-8; Isa. 40:18; 43:10; 44:6-8; 45:5-6, 18-22; 46:9; Jer. 10:6-12; John 17:3; 1 Cor. 8:4-6; 1 Tim. 2:5). It follows from this that God explains the existence of everything else. [2]

    The fact that God explains the existence of everything else was recognized by Paul in his preaching to the Athenians:

The God who made the world and everything in it, he who is Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in shrines made by human hands, nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anyone, since he himself gives to everyone life and breath and everything. From one person he made every nation of people to inhabit the whole earth, and he allotted the times of their existence and the boundaries of their habitation, so that they would search for God and perhaps fumble about for him and find him, though indeed he is not far from each of us. For “in him we live and move and exist,” as even some of your own poets have said, “For we, too, are his offspring.” (Acts 17:25-28)

Likewise, the Hebrew Bible tells us that the continued existence of every living thing depends on God’s spirit, and if he removes his presence, we would cease to exist (Job 12:7-10; 34:13-15; Ps. 104:29-30). Jesus, in his exalted state, also holds together and sustains all things (Col. 1:17; Heb. 1:3).

    God as the foundation of morality

    God is not only the foundation of all existence, but the foundation of morality. If there are any objective moral facts, then he, as the ultimate principle beyond which there is no other, must explain the existence of such facts. Jesus confirms that God is “good” in a sense that absolutely nothing else is (Mark 10:18). God is perfectly good with no evil in him, and every other good thing is derivative from him (Jas. 1:17; 1 John 1:5). “God is love” (1 John 4:17). Just as darkness has no existence in itself, but is merely the lack of light, evil is just the lack of goodness and has no real existence. From a human perspective, some things that God creates are evil (Isa. 45:7), but he causes what appears to be evil to ultimately work out for our good; indeed, the creation was originally subjected by God to corruption “in hope” (Rom. 8:19-23, 28; cf. Gen. 50:20).

    Sin separates us from God

    Because God is perfect goodness and love, whenever we act contrary to goodness and love, we are removing ourself from him. This fact is stated in many places throughout the Scriptures (e.g., Deut. 31:17-18; Isa. 1:15; 59:2; Jer. 5:25-26; Ezek. 39:23-24; Mic. 3:4; Ps. 34:15-16; Prov. 15:29; Eph. 2:12; Col. 1:21). God is said to “hide his face” from those who do evil to others, so that he doesn’t listen to their prayers or act in their favor. God is love (1 John 4:17), and sin is anything that is contrary to God’s law (1 John 3:4), which is summed up in the commandment to love others. [3] Thus, anyone who fails to live up to the standard of love has darkness in them, whereas God himself is light with no darkness in him at all (1 John 1:5-7; 2:9-11). According to Paul, everyone has failed to live up to God’s righteousness (Rom. 3:9-23; cf. Ps. 14:1-3).

    We’ve already seen that God is the foundation of all existence, and actively sustains the life of every being. By sinning and removing ourself from God, the source of our very existence, by rights we should cease to exist (die). Thus, the fact that “the wages of sin is death” (Rom 6:23) isn’t because God is cruelly vindictive and enjoys killing people. Death, the cessation of existence, is the natural result of what happens when we try to distance ourselves from the ground of our own existence. Even when, by God’s mercy, our sin doesn’t result in physical death (see below), the result of that sin is called “death” (e.g., Matt. 8:22; Lk. 15:24, 32; Rom. 7:10; 2 Cor. 4:3; Eph. 2:1-5, 12; Col. 2:13; Rev. 3:1). Likewise, when by God’s grace we love and move closer to him, this is called “life” (John 5:24; 17:3; Eph. 2:5; 1 John 3:14); even though it doesn’t involve a literal return to existence, it is a return to the foundation of our existence.

    The mercy of God

    Every time that we sin (i.e., act contrary to love), we deserve to cease to exist. Indeed, it seems that this is integral to God’s very perfection. If “God is light, and in him there is no darkness at all” (1 John 1:5), and he sustains all existence, how can he allow any “darkness” to exist whatsoever? [4] But then, why do we continue to exist, and how can God save us? Paul recognizes this problem: if God is faithful to keep his merciful promises, then “how could God judge the world?” (Rom. 3:3-6) The question is answered by Paul later in the same letter:

God did this [put forth Jesus as a sacrifice] to demonstrate his justice, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over the sins previously committed; it was to demonstrate at the present time his own justice, so that he is righteous and he justifies the one who has the faith of Jesus. (Rom. 3:25-26)

The reason that we don’t die every time we fail to act in accordance with love is because God “passed over” our sins. The reason that David didn’t die when he raped Bathsheba is because God “put away” his sin; the implication is that if God hadn’t put away his sin, he would have died (2 Sam. 12:13). Every time that we sin and continue to live, this is a demonstration of God’s mercy toward us!

    How can he do this and still be righteous? Paul tells us that it’s because Jesus was put forth as a sacrifice. Because our Lord Jesus Christ died for our sins and was resurrected, death itself will be destroyed, and all people will be raised to immortality (Rom. 5:12-21; 1 Cor. 15:19-28, 51-57; 2 Tim. 1:10). In this way, God can be both perfectly just and perfectly merciful. How is it that Jesus’ death brought about our salvation from sin and death? To be honest, I’m not entirely sure, but the best explanation that I’ve seen so far is the satisfaction theory of the atonement, which is explained here by Aaron Welch. [5]

    Conclusion

    We know from the Scriptures that the judgment for sin is death, and anyone who sins (which is to say, everyone) is deserving of this punishment. This isn’t because God is cruel and arbitrarily chooses certain actions that he will kill people for, but in fact, because of his perfect goodness. Because he’s the ultimate principle, the foundation of all existence, as well as perfect in goodness and love, nothing that is contrary to goodness and love can exist. When we sin, we distance ourselves from the ground of our own existence (God), and by rights we should cease to exist! The fact that any of us continue to exist after we sin is a demonstration of God’s mercy. Because of Jesus’ sacrifice, God can remain perfectly righteous while also being merciful, and he will ultimately destroy both sin and death.

______________________________

[1] Gen. 2:17; 3:3; Deut. 24:16; 2 Sam. 12:13; 2 Kgs. 14:6; 2 Chron. 25:4; Prov. 5:3-5; 12:7; 14:12; 15:24; 16:25; 23:13-14; Ps. 9:17; 31:17; 37:9-10, 20; 73:27; Isa. 1:28; 51:7-8; Jer. 31:30; Ezek. 3:18-21; 18:4-28; 33:8-19; Matt. 7:13-14; John 8:21, 24; Heb. 2:14; 6:8; Jas. 1:15; 5:20; 2 Pet. 2:6, 12-13; 1 John 3:14.

[2] For the logical derivation of this fact, see the following argument:

(P1) There is only one independent thing, namely God.

(P2) Everything that is dependent has an external cause (by definition).

(P3) The totality of dependent things is itself dependent.

(C1) God explains the existence of all dependent things.

P2 is definitionally true, and P3 is very plausible. If P3 is true, then the totality of dependent things must have a cause that is external to it and independent, which by P1 must be God. But even if P3 is false, that means that the totality of dependent things is independent, and therefore (given P1) that it is God (pantheism). In either case, the existence of all other things is explained by God.

[3] The fact that the Law is summed up in the commandment to love others is repeated by almost every single New Testament author (Matt 7:12; 22:35-40; Mark 12:28-33; Luke 10:25-28; John 15:10-17; Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14; 1 Tim 1:5-7; Jas 2:8; 1 John 2:10; 3:14, 23-24; 4:7-12, 16-21; 2 John 5).

[4] Incidentally, this also removes the supposed ‘tension’ between God’s love and his justice. As it turns out, the fact that “God is love” is precisely why he must also be just, because he cannot allow anything contrary to love to exist.

[5] I don’t know how far the light-darkness metaphor can be stretched, but I see Adam’s sin as a darkness so great that it cast a shadow on everything that came after it, and Jesus as a light that is far greater and will ultimately overtake everything (Isa. 42:6-7; 49:6; Matt. 4:16; John 1:4-5; 8:12; 9:5; 12:46; Eph. 5:14; Rev. 21:23).

The history of Israelite religion (part 2)

    YHWH as head of the pantheon     As we saw in the last post, after YHWH was introduced to Israelite religion, some (whose writings are p...