Did the Hebrews believe in one god or many gods?
For a great read on the topic see this brief article: http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/ngier/henotheism.htm
biblical scholars
The many voices of the Bible often disagree
I once preached that “the bible is a elegantly cohesive book that contains one voice and story” which is a very common idea among the most conservative of Christians.
However, the Bible, as it turns out, does not really reflect this simple declaration, instead it’s a complex book with many voices, and sometimes, these voices disagree.
Ronald J. Allen, a New Testament Professors at ‘Christian Theological Seminary’ writes that:
“Some biblical writers disagree with one another. The Deuteronomist, for instance, assumes that obedience begets prosperity while disobedience calls forth a cures, but the book of Job says, “not necessarily.” Readers are advised in 1st Peter to be obedient to the emperor since the emperor is Gods agent, but the book of Revelation regards the Roman empire as an instrument of Satan. The Bible is not a rigid anvil… [there are] many forms of pluralism in the Bible.”
The Bible contains many voices
Fun biblical studies tidbit
Most people think the Bible contains one voice or and a one-sided story that is always in perfect agreement, however, biblical scholars say the Bible contains many voices, and often these voices disagree, or even debate with one another.
The Hebrews were not likely monotheists, but henotheists
Biblical and historical scholars think the evidence shows that the Hebrews were not monotheistic, but henotheistic, meaning they believed other gods existed, but theirs was the only one worthy of worship.
Alan T. Levenson, a professor of Hebrew history states that: “In the opinion of most Bible scholars, the ancient Israelites were monolaters or henotheists, who affirmed their allegiance to one God (YHVH), but acknowledged the presence of other gods for other nations. Not until a much later period… did Israel accept that God was one and omnipresent.”
“Archaeologists have turned up numerous statuettes of YHVS’s divine consort [wife] Asherah centuries after the prophet Amos had proclaimed Gods universal sovereignty. Synagogue services feature the verse from Exodus, “Who is like you among the gods, YHVH?” a question that makes more rhetorical sense if there are other gods, albeit false ones, with whom to compare the God of Israel.”
Dan Wallace thinks that 99% of liberal bible scholars started out as conservatives
According to one of the world’s leading conservative evangelical scholars, most “liberal” Biblical scholars start out as devout conservatives.
Daniel Wallace, a leading evangelical scholar of textual criticism writes:
“Some years ago, I was on a committee that was working on a revision of the standard Greek grammar of the New Testament. In one of our annual two-day meetings about ten years ago, we got to discussing theological liberalism during lunch. Now before you think that this was a time for bashing liberals, you need to realize that most of the scholars on this committee were theologically liberal.
And one of them casually mentioned that, as far as he was aware, 100% of all theological liberals came from an evangelical or fundamentalist background.
I thought his numbers were a tad high since I had once met a liberal scholar who did not come from such a background. I’d give it 99%. Whether it’s 99%, 100%, or only 75%, the fact is that overwhelmingly, theological liberals do not start their academic study of the scriptures as theological liberals. They become liberal somewhere along the road.” (1)
There are diverging traditions in the bible, like the two stories of Judas death
There are many cases where multiple traditions are interwoven in the Bible. Sometimes we know why these developed, other times, we can only guess.
One example of diverging traditions is the death of Judas, which has two different biblical accounts or traditions that cannot be fully reconciled. While some have tried to reconcile it (indeed one can find many conservative Christian pastors focus on one of the many differing elements of the story, the death itself, and try to hypothesize how a person can both hang himself, and die by falling head first, at the same time) yet most scholars generally agree these are different accounts. This discrepancy is acknowledged by academics from all traditions (Catholic, Evangelical, Protestant, & Secular), see below.
Kim Paffenroth, Catholic scholar:
“The actual details of the two accounts are irreconcilable. This difference in content creates quite a different meaning for Judas’s death in Acts. Luke’s version of Judas’s death does not include the poignancy (or notability) of suicide (as in Matthew), but rather portrays the death as the kind that should (or must?) happen to wicked people. He shows an interest in relating the death more graphically and grotesquely when he adds the detail that “all his bowels gushed out.” (1)
Bart Ehrman, secular scholar:
“According to Matthews Gospel, Judas hanged himself, and that after his death the chief priests used the betrayed money to purchase a field in which to bury strangers in Jerusalem. They called it the Field of Blood, because it was purchased with “blood money.” The book of Acts has a different account of Judas’s death and its relationship to this field. It is probably impossible to reconcile the details of these two accounts.” (2)
Craig A. Evans, Darrell Bock, Andreas J. Köstenberge, Conservative evangelical scholars:
“The two accounts appear to be independent traditions. A point often overlooked is that the existence of two distinct traditions suggests that Judas’ scandalous death was a widely known fact in the early church. Clearly we are not certain of all the details given the differences between Luke and Matthew.” (3)
Most scholars argue that the Pauline letters in the Bible are not all authentic
“A combination of philological, rhetorical, theological, and historical evidence has led most scholars to conclude that Paul did not write all letters attributed to him.
Nearly all scholars consider Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and Philemon as authentic.
Conversely, most would agree that Paul did not write 1 and 2 Timothy or the letter to Titus (the so-called Pastoral Letters), although a few scholars maintain that these letters are also authentic.
With regard to Ephesian, Colossians, and 2 Thessalonians there is an ongoing discussion regarding authorship, but most scholars think that Paul did not write Ephesians, and the same is the case for Colossians. The authorship of 2 Thessalonians is still an open question.
Thus the Pauline letters may be divided into three groups
(a) almost certainly genuine letters (authentic)
(b) letters concerning which there is an ongoing discussion (disputed)
(c) letters almost certainly not written by Paul (pseudonymous or deuteropauline)”
Most biblical scholars say the gospels are anonymous documents by unknown authors
“All four of the canonical gospels were originally anonymous. It was only in the second century CE, when the four gospels were published a a collection that the superscriptions were added to the gospels, attributing authorship to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John respectively. This is also the time that traditions begin to appear about the authors, claiming that they were either original apostles of Jesus or close acquaintances of other well-known apostles. in spite of these attributions, most scholars do not think any of these men were the original gospel writers. None of the gospels is written in a style that suggests the authors was present at the events being narrated. Nor is it likely that the disciples of Jesus were able to write in Greek, the language in which the gospels were written. So we are left with the reality that the gospels were written by anonymous Christians decades after the events that they relate.” (1)
Dr. David M. Carr (Union Theological Seminary) & Dr Colleen M. Conway (Seton Hall University)
“The four Gospels were published anonymously… they seem to have been written with no authors names attached. We don’t know how or when these names were attached to these Gospels’ that is lost to history.” (2)
Dr. Dale Martin (Yale University)
“The four Gospels were written anonymously between A.D. 70 and 100, and assembled into a collection about A.D. 125. The authors did not provide them with titles, others added them later.” (3)
Dr. David E. Aune (University of Notre Dame)
“Formally speaking, all four canonical Gospels are anonymous since their authors names are not mentioned anywhere within the context of the verses themselves… The superscript of each of the four Gospels is not an original part of the document.. it was likely later appended to the scroll for identification.” (4)
Dr. Ben Witherington (Asbury Theological Seminary)
Bible translators hide the reality of the ancient text to avoid shocking readers
Conservative biblical translators frequently change the reality found in the original languages to produce more sales. They sell a neat version of the Bible that people expect, not the one that is original.
“One area especially lacking in courage is Bible translation. Many translations do not convey exactly what the original biblical languages –Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek– say. In this way translators avoid shocking people by making the Bible seem like one book with internal consistency, rather than [what it is,] an anthology exhibiting development of doctrines and a concomitant inconsistency.”
Dr. Michael Coogan of Harvard (Editor of the New Oxford Annotated Bible and recognized as one of the top Hebrew Bible scholars alive.)
N.T. Wright, a leading Christian scholar promotes the theory of evolution
Fun theology fact
N.T. Wright is beloved by many Christians, and many of my conservative friends who say the theory of evolution is a horrific lie, frequently promote his books.
TIME Magazine called Wright “one of the most formidable figures in the world of Christian thought.” (1)
Newsweek labeled him “the world’s leading New Testament scholar.” (2)
Christianity today said “He is the most prolific biblical scholar in a generation. Some say he is the most important apologist for the Christian faith since C. S. Lewis.” (3)
Here is N.T. Wrights view on the evolution of man from other primates:
“The way I see it is that there were many hominids or similar creatures, part of the long slow [evolutionary] process of God’s good creation. And at a particular time God called a particular pair for a particular task: to look after his creation and make it flourish in a whole new way.” (4)
Facts about Religion 