OtherGround Forums The Invention of God by Thomas Romer

14 days ago
10/21/13
Posts: 1206

In

14 days ago
8/10/17
Posts: 232

I've read that YHWH means "I AM WHO  I AM"

  God said to Moses, “I am who I am.
” And he said, “Say this to the people of Israel: ‘I am' has sent me to you.’”

14 days ago
7/15/02
Posts: 19699

I clicked this thread based on the title.. and of course OP remembers my Bible thread!

Now I need to go back and read a bunch of the early posts here to discuss. VU fren. 

14 days ago
3/28/02
Posts: 8160
LiveWire -
EazyG - 
The Green Bastard -

I think most Christians would be surprised that Judaism wasn’t the first monotheistic religion, and that Judaism didn’t start out monotheistic. 

What was 1st monotheistic religion?

Akhnaten and his followers with their Sun god?

 


Zoharastarianism, I thought?

Is it really monotheism?  And when?

14 days ago
3/28/02
Posts: 8161
fartastic -

I've read that YHWH means "I AM WHO  I AM"

  God said to Moses, “I am who I am.
” And he said, “Say this to the people of Israel: ‘I am' has sent me to you.’”

I think Yahweh is making a word play on his name in that statement.  Scholars love that phrasing

Edited: 14 days ago
3/28/02
Posts: 8162
Yossarian -

I clicked this thread based on the title.. and of course OP remembers my Bible thread!

Now I need to go back and read a bunch of the early posts here to discuss. VU fren. 

Dude,

welcome!

Your Bible thread was ( and still is) legendary!

I still remember you asking what all the incest in the Bible was about.......  very funny and also fair questions 

14 days ago
11/15/04
Posts: 39218
EazyG -
LiveWire -
EazyG - 
The Green Bastard -

I think most Christians would be surprised that Judaism wasn’t the first monotheistic religion, and that Judaism didn’t start out monotheistic. 

What was 1st monotheistic religion?

Akhnaten and his followers with their Sun god?

 


Zoharastarianism, I thought?

Is it really monotheism?  And when?

6th Century BC or BCE for you pagans

Oldest continually practiced religon in the world. 
 

In fact, a friend of mine from college was a Zoarastrian. I was shocked when he said it to me, because it was always just a religion I learned about in history and to meet someone from Pakistan in the early 1990s that was a member of a 8,000 year old religion was mind blowing. 
 

But this being the 90s and the kid coming from a family with money...he was more of a pothead than anything else. Great guy though, we’re still friends to this day. 

14 days ago
8/18/06
Posts: 4844

I don't have time to refute everything.   This is just old hacky revisionist history redressed. 

 

I often wonder how people with no background in ancient history or theology can read one book or watch one zeitgeist video and suddenly believe it hook line and sinker then use it to say religious people are uneducated about their own beliefs and just gullible. 

 

Most of the experts on ancient languages, texts and religious practices and cultures are either Christian or Jewish.   You may have discovered 10 interesting things that you've discovered but your book won't sell because it's a proven orthodox view of history or religion.  You have to have a shocking new take, like click bait and shape it into some narrative that and uneducated 20 something can then go hold court at his family's Thanksgiving dinner and smugly show how smart he is by regurgitating the same revisionist crap.

14 days ago
1/1/01
Posts: 1762

N

13 days ago
11/21/15
Posts: 4371
EazyG -
Yossarian -

I clicked this thread based on the title.. and of course OP remembers my Bible thread!

Now I need to go back and read a bunch of the early posts here to discuss. VU fren. 

Dude,

welcome!

Your Bible thread was ( and still is) legendary!

I still remember you asking what all the incest in the Bible was about.......  very funny and also fair questions 

Can someone post a link to the bible thread?

Edited: 13 days ago
3/28/02
Posts: 8166
okiebug -

I don't have time to refute everything.   This is just old hacky revisionist history redressed. 

 

I often wonder how people with no background in ancient history or theology can read one book or watch one zeitgeist video and suddenly believe it hook line and sinker then use it to say religious people are uneducated about their own beliefs and just gullible. 

 

Most of the experts on ancient languages, texts and religious practices and cultures are either Christian or Jewish.   You may have discovered 10 interesting things that you've discovered but your book won't sell because it's a proven orthodox view of history or religion.  You have to have a shocking new take, like click bait and shape it into some narrative that and uneducated 20 something can then go hold court at his family's Thanksgiving dinner and smugly show how smart he is by regurgitating the same revisionist crap.

You have strong views - excellent!  Lets have a discussion and presentation of differing views.

Would you care to demonstrate what about Romer's book is "...old hacky revisionist history redressed..."?

Why not pick a few key areas that you think Romer is wrong and make a careful evidence based case why. 

Then folks here can see which vews are more evidence based.........

 

Some of the leading critical scholars are also people of faith.  

Are you familiar with Mark Smith at Princeton Theological who is a committed Catholic? Or James Kugel who is emeritus at Harvard and also Orthodox Jewish?

 

13 days ago
3/28/02
Posts: 8167
cfochs -
EazyG -
Yossarian -

I clicked this thread based on the title.. and of course OP remembers my Bible thread!

Now I need to go back and read a bunch of the early posts here to discuss. VU fren. 

Dude,

welcome!

Your Bible thread was ( and still is) legendary!

I still remember you asking what all the incest in the Bible was about.......  very funny and also fair questions 

Can someone post a link to the bible thread?

its probably 8-10 years old

maybe Yossarian can?

13 days ago
4/23/02
Posts: 94719

it's not the same romer book but this is an interest Answer to of another of Romer's books

 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277150634_In_Conversation_With_Thomas_Romer_The_So-Called_Deuteronomistic_History_A_Sociological_Historical_And_Literary_Introduction_London_T_T_Clark_2005

 

some agreement, disagreement.

 

i find the first answer the best (may be a bit of comfirmation bias in that analysys ill admit)

13 days ago
4/23/02
Posts: 94720

reading those answers to that book demonstrate a strong difference in North American (not just USA) and European theologians  (most asian theologians i've read tend to lean to the NA side).

 

that makes a lot of sense in understanding progressive theology...where "newer is better" and why someone like Romer gains acceptance more in the european contingency and not as much in the NA side.

 

 

13 days ago
11/15/04
Posts: 39226
Pretjah -

reading those answers to that book demonstrate a strong difference in North American (not just USA) and European theologians  (most asian theologians i've read tend to lean to the NA side).

 

that makes a lot of sense in understanding progressive theology...where "newer is better" and why someone like Romer gains acceptance more in the european contingency and not as much in the NA side.

 

 

What’s your take on radical theology?

13 days ago
4/23/02
Posts: 94721
LiveWire -
Pretjah -

reading those answers to that book demonstrate a strong difference in North American (not just USA) and European theologians  (most asian theologians i've read tend to lean to the NA side).

 

that makes a lot of sense in understanding progressive theology...where "newer is better" and why someone like Romer gains acceptance more in the european contingency and not as much in the NA side.

 

 

What’s your take on radical theology?

if my understanding is correct about radical theology  i'm not a fan and find it hollow and with out biblical authority its my only complaint about someone who civically was so important to america, MLK Jr. (while he might not of been labeled a radical theologian his religious teachigs clearly were in line with it and lead to the wide acceptance of social justice theology )

 

the basic concepts behind the idea and thesis aren't horribly but the weight and importance placed on them over the central theme of Christ's life and Biblical exegesis is way off.  such as the above mentioned idea of social justice, social justice and equality of personal value is no doubt taught biblically  however not at the expense or reduction of other "more important" (for lack of a better term right now) theologic points.

13 days ago
4/23/02
Posts: 94722

over the years i think i've been clear that i'm a pretty evangelic reformed theologian.  (i'll add a non calvinistic one)

13 days ago
3/28/02
Posts: 8169
Pretjah -

it's not the same romer book but this is an interest Answer to of another of Romer's books

 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277150634_In_Conversation_With_Thomas_Romer_The_So-Called_Deuteronomistic_History_A_Sociological_Historical_And_Literary_Introduction_London_T_T_Clark_2005

 

some agreement, disagreement.

 

i find the first answer the best (may be a bit of comfirmation bias in that analysys ill admit)

Thanks

I actually have that book on my computer and just started reading it.

So you come from a faith based approach?  Do you view the Bible as the infallible word of God?  

 

13 days ago
4/23/02
Posts: 94723
EazyG -
Pretjah -

it's not the same romer book but this is an interest Answer to of another of Romer's books

 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277150634_In_Conversation_With_Thomas_Romer_The_So-Called_Deuteronomistic_History_A_Sociological_Historical_And_Literary_Introduction_London_T_T_Clark_2005

 

some agreement, disagreement.

 

i find the first answer the best (may be a bit of comfirmation bias in that analysys ill admit)

Thanks

I actually have that book on my computer and just started reading it.

So you come from a faith based approach?  Do you view the Bible as the infallible word of God?  

 

yes

 

infalilible

Inspired

13 days ago
8/18/06
Posts: 4845
EazyG -
okiebug -

I don't have time to refute everything.   This is just old hacky revisionist history redressed. 

 

I often wonder how people with no background in ancient history or theology can read one book or watch one zeitgeist video and suddenly believe it hook line and sinker then use it to say religious people are uneducated about their own beliefs and just gullible. 

 

Most of the experts on ancient languages, texts and religious practices and cultures are either Christian or Jewish.   You may have discovered 10 interesting things that you've discovered but your book won't sell because it's a proven orthodox view of history or religion.  You have to have a shocking new take, like click bait and shape it into some narrative that and uneducated 20 something can then go hold court at his family's Thanksgiving dinner and smugly show how smart he is by regurgitating the same revisionist crap.

You have strong views - excellent!  Lets have a discussion and presentation of differing views.

Would you care to demonstrate what about Romer's book is "...old hacky revisionist history redressed..."?

Why not pick a few key areas that you think Romer is wrong and make a careful evidence based case why. 

Then folks here can see which vews are more evidence based.........

 

Some of the leading critical scholars are also people of faith.  

Are you familiar with Mark Smith at Princeton Theological who is a committed Catholic? Or James Kugel who is emeritus at Harvard and also Orthodox Jewish?

 

Yep.  What was posted has nothing to do with faith.  It's concerns the early development of Judaism.   The fact that you would point to both of them shows you lean towards that school of thought.   I would discuss early Mesopotamian religions and thier influences on early Judaism and later hellenic influences with anyone whose put alot of study into it, but 30 minutes of internet musings doesn't suddenly catch you up.  

 

On your original note, to teach and be tenured at Harvard or Princeton divinity schools isn't necessarily a sign of intellect these days.  That said I do love some guys who taught there.

13 days ago
8/18/06
Posts: 4846
EazyG -
okiebug -

I don't have time to refute everything.   This is just old hacky revisionist history redressed. 

 

I often wonder how people with no background in ancient history or theology can read one book or watch one zeitgeist video and suddenly believe it hook line and sinker then use it to say religious people are uneducated about their own beliefs and just gullible. 

 

Most of the experts on ancient languages, texts and religious practices and cultures are either Christian or Jewish.   You may have discovered 10 interesting things that you've discovered but your book won't sell because it's a proven orthodox view of history or religion.  You have to have a shocking new take, like click bait and shape it into some narrative that and uneducated 20 something can then go hold court at his family's Thanksgiving dinner and smugly show how smart he is by regurgitating the same revisionist crap.

You have strong views - excellent!  Lets have a discussion and presentation of differing views.

Would you care to demonstrate what about Romer's book is "...old hacky revisionist history redressed..."?

Why not pick a few key areas that you think Romer is wrong and make a careful evidence based case why. 

Then folks here can see which vews are more evidence based.........

 

Some of the leading critical scholars are also people of faith.  

Are you familiar with Mark Smith at Princeton Theological who is a committed Catholic? Or James Kugel who is emeritus at Harvard and also Orthodox Jewish?

 

On Romer specifically I haven't read this book nor probably will knowing the path he's taking which presupposes a remarkable bunch of imaginative dot connecting that's been done and done again. 

 

The fact is from abraham to moses, we just don't know.  It's hundreds of years of tribal oral tradition.  Whether or not you think it was divine providence or the evolved tribal gaga it's not relevant. 

 

Now to look at its consistency post moses is a legitimate pursuit.   I only know because I went down those pointless rabbit holes and it was alot more work before the internet. 

13 days ago
8/18/06
Posts: 4847
EazyG -
okiebug -

I don't have time to refute everything.   This is just old hacky revisionist history redressed. 

 

I often wonder how people with no background in ancient history or theology can read one book or watch one zeitgeist video and suddenly believe it hook line and sinker then use it to say religious people are uneducated about their own beliefs and just gullible. 

 

Most of the experts on ancient languages, texts and religious practices and cultures are either Christian or Jewish.   You may have discovered 10 interesting things that you've discovered but your book won't sell because it's a proven orthodox view of history or religion.  You have to have a shocking new take, like click bait and shape it into some narrative that and uneducated 20 something can then go hold court at his family's Thanksgiving dinner and smugly show how smart he is by regurgitating the same revisionist crap.

You have strong views - excellent!  Lets have a discussion and presentation of differing views.

Would you care to demonstrate what about Romer's book is "...old hacky revisionist history redressed..."?

Why not pick a few key areas that you think Romer is wrong and make a careful evidence based case why. 

Then folks here can see which vews are more evidence based.........

 

Some of the leading critical scholars are also people of faith.  

Are you familiar with Mark Smith at Princeton Theological who is a committed Catholic? Or James Kugel who is emeritus at Harvard and also Orthodox Jewish?

 

Oh and as an after thought,  kugel would probably abhor this conversation. 

13 days ago
8/18/06
Posts: 4848
okiebug -
EazyG -
okiebug -

I don't have time to refute everything.   This is just old hacky revisionist history redressed. 

 

I often wonder how people with no background in ancient history or theology can read one book or watch one zeitgeist video and suddenly believe it hook line and sinker then use it to say religious people are uneducated about their own beliefs and just gullible. 

 

Most of the experts on ancient languages, texts and religious practices and cultures are either Christian or Jewish.   You may have discovered 10 interesting things that you've discovered but your book won't sell because it's a proven orthodox view of history or religion.  You have to have a shocking new take, like click bait and shape it into some narrative that and uneducated 20 something can then go hold court at his family's Thanksgiving dinner and smugly show how smart he is by regurgitating the same revisionist crap.

You have strong views - excellent!  Lets have a discussion and presentation of differing views.

Would you care to demonstrate what about Romer's book is "...old hacky revisionist history redressed..."?

Why not pick a few key areas that you think Romer is wrong and make a careful evidence based case why. 

Then folks here can see which vews are more evidence based.........

 

Some of the leading critical scholars are also people of faith.  

Are you familiar with Mark Smith at Princeton Theological who is a committed Catholic? Or James Kugel who is emeritus at Harvard and also Orthodox Jewish?

 

Yep.  What was posted has nothing to do with faith.  It's concerns the early development of Judaism.   The fact that you would point to both of them shows you lean towards that school of thought.   I would discuss early Mesopotamian religions and thier influences on early Judaism and later hellenic influences with anyone whose put alot of study into it, but 30 minutes of internet musings doesn't suddenly catch you up.  

 

On your original note, to teach and be tenured at Harvard or Princeton divinity schools isn't necessarily a sign of intellect these days.  That said I do love some guys who taught there.

I also apologize if it seemed my rant was aimed towards you personally.   It was not.  It's an old man ranting at generalities.   

 

Clearly these types of books set me off.  I have at least a half dozen similar books in boxes in my basement. 

13 days ago
8/18/06
Posts: 4849
Pretjah -

over the years i think i've been clear that i'm a pretty evangelic reformed theologian.  (i'll add a non calvinistic one)

How can you be non calvinist and reformed?  I'm not being critical,  I'm genuinely curious. 

Edited: 13 days ago
3/28/02
Posts: 8170
okiebug -
EazyG -
okiebug -

I don't have time to refute everything.   This is just old hacky revisionist history redressed. 

 

I often wonder how people with no background in ancient history or theology can read one book or watch one zeitgeist video and suddenly believe it hook line and sinker then use it to say religious people are uneducated about their own beliefs and just gullible. 

 

Most of the experts on ancient languages, texts and religious practices and cultures are either Christian or Jewish.   You may have discovered 10 interesting things that you've discovered but your book won't sell because it's a proven orthodox view of history or religion.  You have to have a shocking new take, like click bait and shape it into some narrative that and uneducated 20 something can then go hold court at his family's Thanksgiving dinner and smugly show how smart he is by regurgitating the same revisionist crap.

You have strong views - excellent!  Lets have a discussion and presentation of differing views.

Would you care to demonstrate what about Romer's book is "...old hacky revisionist history redressed..."?

Why not pick a few key areas that you think Romer is wrong and make a careful evidence based case why. 

Then folks here can see which vews are more evidence based.........

 

Some of the leading critical scholars are also people of faith.  

Are you familiar with Mark Smith at Princeton Theological who is a committed Catholic? Or James Kugel who is emeritus at Harvard and also Orthodox Jewish?

 

Yep.  What was posted has nothing to do with faith.  It's concerns the early development of Judaism.   The fact that you would point to both of them shows you lean towards that school of thought.   I would discuss early Mesopotamian religions and thier influences on early Judaism and later hellenic influences with anyone whose put alot of study into it, but 30 minutes of internet musings doesn't suddenly catch you up.  

 

On your original note, to teach and be tenured at Harvard or Princeton divinity schools isn't necessarily a sign of intellect these days.  That said I do love some guys who taught there.

I think i would generally agree with you.  Early Judaism - perhaps better referred to as the religion(s) of ancient Israel - is complicated with very incomplete evidence.

Romer does tend to connect dots as you note.  But does present a variety of Biblical and archeological evidence which is interesting regardless if you agree with his conclusions.

 

 

Which scholars/books do you like?  Thoughts on David Carr?

Mark Smith studies the impact of mesopotamian religions on ancient Israeli religion.  I believe he is one of the leading scholars on Ugaritic and the Baal cycle.  Are you critical of his work?  

I also think a number of the scholars are not religious -or at least do not have a strong religious bias in their work.  Finkelstein, Dever, Helperin, Friedman.

kugel would likely be troubled by this discussion but seems intellectually hones enough to admit his bias