User talk:76.234.38.132

November 2017

Hello, I'm Jeff G.. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks.   — Jeff G. ツ 05:43, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Unsupported claim in article introduction

Greetings,

In the second sentence of the second paragraph of the introduction to the "Israelites" wikipedia page, there is an unsubstantiated claim. Rather than manually edit this myself, I wish to draw this to the attention of the moderators, since this page is semi-protected from edits.

"The Israelites and their culture, according to the modern archaeological account, did not overtake the region by force, but instead branched out of the indigenous Canaanite peoples . . . through the development of a distinct monolatristic—later cementing as monotheistic—religion centered on Yahweh, one of the Ancient Canaanite deities."

First, the bolded claim above is entirely unsourced. Moreover, when one navigates to the "Ancient Canaanite deities" page, the list of ancient Canaanite deities does not include the name Yahweh or any derivative of such name.

The claim that the Israelite God Yahweh was derived from an ancient Canaanite deity is one of significant dispute among scholars, both concerning its general veracity and the specifics thereof if true. To my knowledge, no reputable historians claim that the ancient Canaanites had a deity explicitly worshiped as "Yahweh"; rather, one hypothesis is that the Canaanite deity "El" and the Israelite God "Yahweh" share some degree of historical connection, to a lesser or greater extent. This is partly because in Genesis 14:18–20, Melchizedek -- king of Salem and high priest -- blesses Abraham in the name of אֵ֥ל עֶלְיֽוֹן or "El Elyon" ("God Most High"). This is prior to the time when the divine name יְהוָֹה ("YHWH" or "Yahweh" or "Yehovah") was officially revealed in the patriarchal/Mosaic portion of the Biblical narrative, though it is in fact employed earlier in Genesis (see, e.g., 2:4, 4:26). Of course, these tenuous links between the two titles alone are far from dispositive regarding the issue of Israelite and Canaanite overlap of deity worship, and are insufficient to substantiate the claim of the article referenced above.

As such, I respectfully request and recommend that the claim in the second sentence of the second paragraph, ". . . centered on Yahweh, one of the Ancient Canaanite deities." either be substantiated with the proper scholarly citations, or simply removed altogether.

Thank you for your time and attention.

Endnote: For a more in-depth and thorough analysis of the scholarly hypotheses regarding the proposed relationships between Yahweh and El in Israelite religious evolution, one may wish to review Dr. Michael S. Heiser's 2006 piece titled Are Yahweh and El Distinct Deities in Deut. 32:8-9 and Psalm 82?

Misstatement of fact under subsection "Origins of the narrative" (Re: Isaiah 63:16)

In "Abraham", section "Historicity and origins of the narrative", subsection "Origins of the narrative", in the second paragraph thereunder, the article states:

"Isaiah 63:16 similarly testifies of tension between the people of Judah and the returning post-Exilic Jews (the "gôlâ"), stating that God is the father of Israel and that Israel's history begins with the Exodus and not with Abraham".

The second half of this analysis appears to go significantly beyond mere exegesis and crosses over into editorializing. The actual verse reads as follows:

"For you are our father, though Abraham does not know us and Israel does not acknowledge us; you, O LORD, are our father; our Redeemer from of old is your name." (Isaiah 63:16, NRSV)

Nowhere in this verse or in the surrounding context does Isaiah state that "Israel's history begins with the Exodus and not with Abraham." In fact, the Exodus is not mentioned in the verse at all. The nearest Exodus reference is found in the preceding verses (63:12-13); however, nowhere in this chapter is any allusion made to Israel's history having "begun" with the Exodus as opposed to with Abraham.

Such a statement reads too much into the text. Therefore, I recommend that the statement be edited for accuracy.

---