Talk:Yahweh/Archive 12

Archive 5

←

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Tentative inaccuracy rectification (republished on the account of justified article correction)

(Scroll to the bottom to observe my requests, and behold the reasoning for this scripture.)

”“Say to the Israelites: ‘Any Israelite or any foreigner residing in Israel who sacrifices any of his children to Molek is to be put to death. The members of the community are to stone him. I myself will set my face against him and will cut him off from his people; for by sacrificing his children to Molek, he has defiled my sanctuary and profaned my holy name. If the members of the community close their eyes when that man sacrifices one of his children to Molek and if they fail to put him to death, I myself will set my face against him and his family and will cut them off from their people together with all who follow him in prostituting themselves to Molek.“ ‭‭Leviticus‬ ‭20‬:‭2‬-‭5‬ ‭NIV‬‬ https://bible.com/bible/111/lev.20.2-5.NIV

”He sacrificed his own son in the fire, practiced divination, sought omens, and consulted mediums and spiritists. He did much evil in the eyes of the Lord, arousing his anger.“ ‭‭2 Kings‬ ‭21‬:‭6‬ ‭NIV‬‬ https://bible.com/bible/111/2ki.21.6.NIV

”Ahaz was twenty years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem sixteen years. Unlike David his father, he did not do what was right in the eyes of the Lord. He followed the ways of the kings of Israel and also made idols for worshiping the Baals. He burned sacrifices in the Valley of Ben Hinnom and sacrificed his children in the fire, engaging in the detestable practices of the nations the Lord had driven out before the Israelites. He offered sacrifices and burned incense at the high places, on the hilltops and under every spreading tree. Therefore the Lord his God delivered him into the hands of the king of Aram. The Arameans defeated him and took many of his people as prisoners and brought them to Damascus. He was also given into the hands of the king of Israel, who inflicted heavy casualties on him.“ ‭‭2 Chronicles‬ ‭28‬:‭1‬-‭5‬ ‭NIV‬‬ https://bible.com/bible/111/2ch.28.1-5.NIV

”They built high places for Baal in the Valley of Ben Hinnom to sacrifice their sons and daughters to Molek, though I never commanded—nor did it enter my mind—that they should do such a detestable thing and so make Judah sin.“ ‭‭Jeremiah‬ ‭32‬:‭35‬ ‭NIV‬‬ https://bible.com/bible/111/jer.32.35.NIV

“Some critics of the Bible point to the story of Abraham, who laid his son Isaac on an altar and prepared to sacrifice him as directed by God (Genesis 22:1-14). However, in this case, God was testing the obedience and faith of Abraham. God stopped him from actually following through and provided a ram as a substitute sacrifice.” “Today, child sacrifice is practiced throughout the world. There has been a resurgence of child sacrifice in Uganda. Witch doctors have been implicated in the mutilation and death of children who were killed in an effort to bring good fortune and wealth to those willing to pay for it. There is also a correlation between child sacrifice and modern-day abortion. Unprecedented numbers of children have been “sacrificed” at the hands of abortionists for the sake of convenience, immorality, or pride. Hundreds of thousands of babies have been killed so that their parents can maintain a certain lifestyle. God hates “hands that shed innocent blood” (Proverbs 6:17), and we can be sure that God will judge this horrendous sin” -GotQuestions, https://www.gotquestions.org/child-sacrifice.html

I implore you with the love of God to read the scriptures once more, if or if it is not true that your collective are only purporting that you have before read them (I say this for your benefit). God Almighty relentlessly opposes all child sacrifice (excluding His very own Son), and it is highly unlikely that the Israelites of that particular time had sacrificed infants to Yahweh, considering that they had received the ordinance otherwise.

What is perhaps the most reliable and significant testimonial to this, is this passage:

”“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.“ ‭‭Matthew‬ ‭5‬:‭43‬-‭48‬ ‭NIV‬‬ https://bible.com/bible/111/mat.5.43-48.NIV

”For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.“ ‭‭Romans‬ ‭6‬:‭23‬ ‭NIV‬‬

The uncertainty in regards to child sacrifice to Yahweh is unnecessary, there was no (at least major, perhaps by some renegades) child sacrifice to Yahweh.

This is an appeal for the reconfiguration of a portion of the article, as I am incapable of editing it myself. RepentandbelieveinJesusChrist11 (talk) 16:32, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

"Molek" is usually rendered Moloch in English. And it seen as a divine title of the pagan god Yahweh, instead of an independent deity:

• • "Because the name "Moloch" is almost always accompanied by the definite article in Hebrew, it is possible that it is a title meaning "the king", as it is sometimes translated in the Septuagint. In the twentieth century, the philosopher Martin Buber proposed that "Moloch" referred to "Melekh Yahweh". A similar view was later expressed by T. Römer (1999). Brian Schmidt, however, argues that the mention of Baal in Jeremiah 32:35 suggests that "the ruler" could have instead referred to Baal." Dimadick (talk) 16:38, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Gotquestions is not WP:RS, it's WP:CB. tgeorgescu (talk) 16:39, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Perhaps this deserves an explanation: even a broken clock is right twice a day. So, even if Gotquestions got a few things right, it still does not comply with WP:RS. tgeorgescu (talk) 17:59, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

References

Liberty University

Hey @Potatín5 I saw that you sitecited Liberty University as a source here. However, I'm not entirely sure it is a reliable source.

I think it's inclusion here goes against Wikipedia:Reliable sources. CycoMa1 (talk) 14:44, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Issue with earliest biblical literature

Here, I have a slight issue with a certain claim in this article.

It is in regards to the claim about what Yahweh was like in earliest biblical literature.

That claims uses the Song of Deborah, buts here is the issue with that claim. The Wikipedia article on Deborah says this

The Song of Deborah is commonly identified as among the oldest texts of the Bible,[12] but the date of its composition is controversial. Many scholars claim a date as early as the 12th century BCE,[3] while others claim it to be as late as the 3rd century BC. Some hold that the song was written no earlier than the 7th century BC.[13]

Yes I know the source also talks about the Song of the Sea. But even the article on this says this:

The Song of the Sea is noted for its archaic language. It is written in a style of Hebrew much older than that of the rest of Exodus. A number of scholars consider it the oldest surviving text describing the Exodus, dating to the pre-monarchic period.[3] An alternative is that it was deliberately written in an archaic style, a known literary device.[4] As such, proposed dates for its composition range from the 13th to the 5th century BCE.[5]

CycoMa1 (talk) 06:13, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

I also forgot to mention that the source also talks about the Blessing of Moses. Which according to that article it was written somewhere between the 11th to 6th century.CycoMa1 (talk) 18:09, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

I understand your compunctions here, but the claim in this article is not a synthesis of sources. Rather, it comes directly from the Oxford History of the Biblical World, a pretty solid source. As such, I would support the wording as it currently stands, but reasonable minds may certainly differ. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 18:50, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

I am basically saying I feel like the claim goes against WP:VOICE. To me this just seems like an view point by one or a few scholars.

Or there is a possibility that some things in this article are going against WP:DUE.

I don't know there is so many contradictions.CycoMa1 (talk) 20:54, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Or maybe I'm just overanalyzing.CycoMa1 (talk) 21:22, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

By the way, I have more to say. I am just waiting for other people to reply.CycoMa1 (talk) 21:21, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

So, my sense is that the dating of the Song of Deborah as the oldest (or at least a very old) part of the bible is the prevailing theory in the academic community. Assuming I am correct about that, then I think our wording is just fine, but I am happy to look at evidence to the contrary! Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 22:39, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

That the archaisms in the texts may be a stylistic choice (instead of an indication of date) is not surprising. But in the absence of references to external events or geographic locations, I am not certain on what the modern estimations of dates are based on. Dimadick (talk) 07:14, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Can't edit but have a question regarding translation

Yeah I am just curiouse because "adonoy" is translated as "my lords" and while "lords" is acceptable (as ooposed to "masters") i'm pretty sure the word is singular, meaning the translation should be "my lord" CarryingTheMeme (talk) 19:12, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Shouldn't that be Adonai, as the plural form of Adon (lord)? That is the etymology of the name Adonis. Dimadick (talk) 21:51, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

You mean in the third paragraph? I just noticed it too and thought it was a mistake, so I came to this Talk page to bring it up. But then I looked a little more into it and I think it's just the "royal we". See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_God_in_Judaism#Adonai ("Adonai" אֲדוֹנָי literally means "my lords". There's also "Adoni" אֲדוֹנִי which means "my lord", but that's something different. Notice how the "Adonai" has a kamatz ("a" sound) beneath the "n", whereas "Adoni" has a hiriq ("i sound"). According to Wiktionary https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/אדוני#Hebrew , the two words have different etymologies. "Adonai" is "Adoni-" + the "-i" suffix, whereas "Adoni" is "Adon" + the "-i" suffix.) 2601:49:8400:26B:5C37:1DD:4D2F:4D1 (talk) 23:58, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

 Done Normally in Biblical Hebrew the singular possessive suffix is -i and the plural possessive is -ai but certain kinds of words (some names of God, terms for qualities like "youth" or "blindness", etc.) are given an abstract grammatical plural. GordonGlottal (talk) 19:08, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Child sacrifice to YHWH or Molech by Isreal?

The article states;<<A number of scholars have also drawn the conclusion that infant sacrifice, whether to the underworld deity Molech or to Yahweh himself, was a part of Israelite/Judahite religion until the reforms of King Josiah in the late 7th century BCE.>>. To this I must ask, why? YHWH in the Torah and Tanakh rejects and is angered by child sacrifice whether to Molech or himself multiple times. A few examples being;

”“Say to the Israelites: ‘Any Israelite or any foreigner residing in Israel who sacrifices any of his children to Molek is to be put to death. The members of the community are to stone him. I myself will set my face against him and will cut him off from his people; for by sacrificing his children to Molek, he has defiled my sanctuary and profaned my holy name. If the members of the community close their eyes when that man sacrifices one of his children to Molek and if they fail to put him to death, I myself will set my face against him and his family and will cut them off from their people together with all who follow him in prostituting themselves to Molek.“ ‭‭Leviticus‬ ‭20‬:‭2‬-‭5‬ ‭NIV

”He sacrificed his own son in the fire, practiced divination, sought omens, and consulted mediums and spiritists. He did much evil in the eyes of the Lord, arousing his anger.“ ‭‭2 Kings‬ ‭21‬:‭6‬ ‭NIV

So why do certain scholars think otherwise? To me it just seems like baseless speculation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.217.165.152 (talk) 10:12, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

This is not a place where we second-guess the whole guild of mainstream Bible scholars, nor are we required to give you adult education. tgeorgescu (talk) 10:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 July 2024

There is an inaccuracy which points to the topic of palestine and naming the land the israelites inhabited as such. In the time that it is being referenced the name would have been more appropriately the Land of Canaan. So I would like to suggest editing it to that to avoid confusion as well as political debate. The term Palestine did not come about for well over a 1000 years after the time period of which this topic came about. 2604:AF80:1C47:F870:1067:CFA9:8D46:840B (talk) 04:46, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 15:07, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

You are asking whether the name Palestine was existed at that time? It has started with the Roman Empire after the Jewish revolt was crushed.... I thought it's obvious!Meni111 (talk) 11:04, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

you are totally right, but it seems the editors do nothing about it Meni111 (talk) 11:02, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

We have a detailed Timeline of the name Palestine. The name was used in the Greek language since the 5th century BCE, and is predated by the Egyptian placename "Peleset" (12th century BCE) and the Assyrian placename "Palashtu" (8th century BCE). Palestine and its variations have been used for the last 33 centuries. Dimadick (talk) 08:15, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Coin caption

@Sinclairian, apologies. It wasn't clear to me how strong the consensus was. Maybe mention of the dissenting view should be relegated to a footnote, as its current presentation made the issue seem rather more contested to me than it is. Remsense ‥ 论 16:50, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

There's nothing to apologize for. I don't necessarily believe we need to relegate the dissent to a footnote per se, the main issue is that while dissent to identifying the coin's figure exists is comparatively sparse, it draws upon information with strong foundations to make its case (vis-a-vis the YHW vs YHD inscription which is still debated) –  I think the way it is presented now does not overplay its scholarly significance. Sinclairian (talk) 16:58, 28 August 2024 (UTC)