So apparently YHWH was once a pagan god.
He had a wife and was the son of Elohim, who had many children including Baal (the one people sacrificed their children to), then the religion became monotheist, and even when they refer to other gods, they say the most powerful one is YHWH
My question is
Do you think other polytheist religions could become monotheist over time? Like in precolombine Mexico, there were many gods but the aztecs were followers mostly of Huitzilopochtli.
Do you think if giving the time, the aztec religion could become monotheist? I've red that even in ancient Egypt there was a time when they were monotheists.

>>17802882 (OP)

>>17802965
OP's thread is basically over
Good night

>>17802965
Doesn't answer my questions
And btw:

>>17802965
>jews stole egyptian religion
call me surprised. they also copied monotheism from Akhenaton later

>>17802882 (OP)
>Do you think other polytheist religions could become monotheist over time? Like in precolombine Mexico, there were many gods but the aztecs were followers mostly of Huitzilopochtli.

Probably

>Do you think if giving the time, the aztec religion could become monotheist? I've red that even in ancient Egypt there was a time when they were monotheists.

Moreso into Henotheism like Yahwists

>>17802965
That in no way proves that isn't how yhwh was seen as

>>17802882 (OP)
There's no God called YHWH.
David in Hebrew is דּוֹד. It only has 3 letters.
דּ = D
וֹ = V
ד = D

Would you say he is called DVD or David in English? Do you translate letter for letter or do you translate the pronunciation?

>>17802882 (OP)
>YHWH was once a pagan god
How is this possible?
>Do you think if giving the time, the aztec religion could become monotheist? I've red that even in ancient Egypt there was a time when they were monotheists.
Yes, Greeks invented platonism. This is like that crab evolution thing

>>17803247
If that's how YHWH was seen at the time, we'd expect to find more images such as that one, but we haven't. That is the only one there is.

>>17802882 (OP)
>Elohim, who had many children including Baal (the one people sacrificed their children to)
Baal is a title of "Lord". Sometimes the name of a god was tabooed and "Lord Name" became simply "Lord" = Baal. The Jews stopped using the title Baal at some point in order not to be associated with their neighbors.
According to the story of Isaac and the tradition of dedicating the firstborn, it is possible that Yahweh also once accepted human sacrifices.

>Do you think other polytheist religions could become monotheist over time?
I don't think. Some could, some couldn't. It does not depend on religion, but on socio-historical conditions.

>>17802882 (OP)
Huitzilopochtli was the patron god of a specific city/ethnic group, a very common and widespread Mesoamerican religious practice that was quite ancient and never got in the way of polytheism, as made quite evident by the fact that the Aztecs had dozens of temples dedicated to many different deities at Tenochtitlan, with the main one being dedicated to BOTH Huitzilopochtli and Tlaloc; the fact that their priesthood had Quetzalcoatl as its patron; and their nobility, rulers and warriors all holding Tezcatlipoca a very important deity; just to name a few examples.

You seem to be implying that the Aztecs were "followers of Huitzilopochtli" to the exclusion of other Mesoamerican and Nahua divinites when that was really not the case at all. So no, there's absolutely nothing to suggest that the Aztecs were ever on a path to becoming monotheists or henotheists.

>>17802882 (OP)
yes the bible contradicts history. what you're talking about was mainstream and well known for decades among archeologist and published peer reviewed academics. however it wasn't well known amongst every to day people. And this probably still the case to this day. Most people probably don't know that the bible's account of history contradicts the material evidence of those bygone eras. even in countries where belief in the bible is declining. And the people who stop beliving in the bible probably do so for reasons other than it's contradiction to history. I mean most people think biblical writings are bronze age and iron age writings. When the bulk of the bible is most likely from the Hellenistic period. not even from the Persian period.

>be archaeologist
>dig around Sinai for decades
>find literally zero evidence of millions of Israelites wandering for 40 years
>Exodus not even once
>read about Jericho walls falling from trumpet blast
>actually check Jericho
>city was already destroyed centuries before Joshua would’ve arrived
>bible cope intensifies
>open Bible
>David and Solomon had giga-kingdom with gold, palaces, empire vibes
>check archaeological record
>barely find a few huts and broken pottery
>“unified monarchy” my ass
>see Philistines mentioned in Abraham’s time
>they didn’t even exist yet
>bible.exe has stopped working
>global flood with Noah and zoo boat
>geology and archaeology: “nah bro, never happened”
>no flood layers, no mass extinction, no ark debris
>boat story just vibes
>look up ancient records from Egypt, Assyria, Babylon
>expect epic Bible battles and plagues
>records: “who?”
>Bible getting ghosted by history
>dig in Canaan
>expect foreign Israelite invaders
>instead find Canaanites slowly evolving into Israelites
>“conquest of Canaan” was just a rebrand
>analyze Hebrew texts
>turns out most were written centuries after events they describe
>tfw your holy book is historical fanfic

>>17802882 (OP)
>YHWH used to be a war god
>Grants his followers a chosen land
>It's a land of eternal war, conflict and struggle almost throughout the entire history
Makes a lot of sense come to think of it

>>17804474
>ghosted by history
there may be a real history there and perhaps not pretty. the actual foundational times well documented by egyptians. ohhh noo, all burned up. so rewrites and retcons abound and you get the so it is written shit.