Malevolent Inheritance: Biola Professor on The Fall

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Where are your citations for the following?

Šaḥar in various Hebrew contexts, preserves some of its old mythological meaning as a feminine dawn goddess, and the original of this feminine dawn may well have been the Indo-European goddess Usas, the Hēos of Homer and Hesiod, perhaps blended now with Semitic Ishtar. Her son, Helel, may possibly be the sun itself, and indeed Šaḥar may mean the rising sun, according to an older school of thought, or Hêlēl may be an allusion to the planet Venus, as most modern commentators on the passage believe.

Whether or not the composer of the Isaiah passage made this explicit identification, the Greek translators of the Septuagint certainly did, since their translation of Hêlēl ben Šaḥar as Heōsphoros ho prōi anatellōn clearly combines the astronomical identification with Hesiod's, Heōsphoros son of Heōs, the dawn-bringer, Venus. The Greek was in turn rendered by the Latin vulgate as Lucifer, qui mane oriebaris, and the name has stuck to the rebel ever since.[Ibid]

Your first assumption seems to be that the claims in the article do not need to be checked for accuracy.

Do you not know what Ibid means?

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Meanwhile, back in the real world I have already shown precisely where those unsupported contentions are on multiple occasions. In the most recent instance they were bolded as well as underlined so they would be all but impossible to miss -- and yet...

Do please direct me to the posts you have made on the Hebrew word Šaḥar; your references to the Indo-European goddess Usas as well as the Semitic goddess Ishtar and her son Helel; and your comments on the Hēos of Homer and Hesiod.

I'll wager you had never come across the words Šaḥar, Usas, Helel, or Hēos until you read that quote.

[tabibito]

Do you not know what Ibid means?

It means that the same source provided for the immediately preceding citation is used for the citation under consideration - without a page number, it means "on the same page as."

I don't find a previous citation in the relevant post (i.e. in the post to which I responded). The idea with citations is to provide enough information to allow the audience to verify that your information has in fact accurately repeated the (cited) author's comments.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

It means that the same source provided for the immediately preceding citation is used for the citation under consideration - without a page number, it means "on the same page as."

I don't find a previous citation in the relevant post (i.e. in the post to which I responded). The idea with citations is to provide enough information to allow the audience to verify that your information has in fact accurately repeated the (cited) author's comments.

And it was the same text as I used in my own thread.

However, you are welcome to source and read any or all of the following:

Nagy, Gregory, "Phaethon, Sappho's Phaon, and the White Rock of Leucas". Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 77, 1973.
Dorson, Richard, M, "The Eclipse of Solar Mythology" In Myth: A Symposium. Ed T A Sebeok, Indiana University Press, 1965.
McKay, J.W. "Helel and the Dawn-Goddess", Vetus Testamentum 20, 1970.

[tabibito]

And it was the same text as I used in my own thread.

However, you are welcome to source and read any or all of the following:

Nagy, Gregory, "Phaethon, Sappho's Phaon, and the White Rock of Leucas". Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 77, 1973.
Dorson, Richard, M, "The Eclipse of Solar Mythology" In Myth: A Symposium. Ed T A Sebeok, Indiana University Press, 1965.
McKay, J.W. "Helel and the Dawn-Goddess", Vetus Testamentum 20, 1970.

Nothing in the three sources you mentioned relates well enough to the paragraphs under review to rate them as quotations from those sources.

However, McKay (Helel and the Dawn Goddess, 464) does mention the possibility that there might never have been any active cult associated with Shahar in Hebrew culture. On page 455, McKay does consider that the Isaiah passage may have a casual (not causal) link with Semitic mythical precursors. That would make the Isaiah passage a convenient reference, without reflecting any belief on the part of the author, to an outside source. Throughout most of history, authors frequently have alluded to outside literary works without indicating any endorsement of the works themselves.

per McKay, 464.

(e) Finally, the goddess Shahar became so firmly embedded in Hebrew mythology that long after the word 'ntf came to be used as a masculine noun signifying little more than the natural phenomenon, the dawn, the myth of her son was remembered in Israel and Shahar continued to retain many to the features of her Greek counterpart, Eos. It is difficult to understand why nnr should have become a masculine noun in Hebrew. Shr was masculine in Ugaritic, but the Moabite Stone uses a feminine form. Perhaps both forms were originally known in Israel, but for some reason only the masculine form has survived in Biblical Hebrew, possibly for the simple reason that it was the one more widely used, but perhaps also because the notion of a dawn-goddess was never more than a poetic symbol representing no active cult or faith.

So then: the Hebrew word doesn't even preserve the gender of the noun as it applies to the goddess. The name of the goddess is the feminine form of the masculine noun, the latter being the same in Hebrew as in Ugaritic.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Nothing in the three sources you mentioned relates well enough to the paragraphs under review to rate them as quotations from those sources.

However, McKay (Helel and the Dawn Goddess, 464) does mention the possibility that there might never have been any active cult associated with Shahar in Hebrew culture. On page 455, McKay does consider that the Isaiah passage may have a casual (not causal) link with Semitic mythical precursors. That would make the Isaiah passage a convenient reference, without reflecting any belief on the part of the author, to an outside source. Throughout most of history, authors frequently have alluded to outside literary works without indicating any endorsement of the works themselves.

per McKay, 464.

(e) Finally, the goddess Shahar became so firmly embedded in Hebrew mythology that long after the word 'ntf came to be used as a masculine noun signifying little more than the natural phenomenon, the dawn, the myth of her son was remembered in Israel and Shahar continued to retain many to the features of her Greek counterpart, Eos. It is difficult to understand why nnr should have become a masculine noun in Hebrew. Shr was masculine in Ugaritic, but the Moabite Stone uses a feminine form. Perhaps both forms were originally known in Israel, but for some reason only the masculine form has survived in Biblical Hebrew, possibly for the simple reason that it was the one more widely used, but perhaps also because the notion of a dawn-goddess was never more than a poetic symbol representing no active cult or faith.

I suspected you would not be able to resist.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

On page 455, McKay does consider that the Isaiah passage may have a casual (not causal) link with Semitic mythical precursors.

McKay does not. He is citing Gunkel and Grelot.

[tabibito]

McKay does not. He is citing Gunkel and Grelot.

Correct.
However,

In these instances שחר is generally prefixed by the definite article (Gen. Josh. vi 15; Judg. xix 25; 1 Sam. ix 26; Neh. iv 15; proving beyond all doubt that the natural phenomenon is in mind and not a deity, but it seems likely that the stereotyped dawn which "rises" may depend on an earlier conception dawn as a divine being 3). Elsewhere in the Old Testament שחר is generally a personalised being, according to the MT, but the Versions almost universally attempt to remove the anthropomorphisms. (a) In Ps. Ivii 9 Shahar is depicted as asleep and to the Psalmist who cries שחר שעירה, "I shall awaken Shahar." The Versions all treat שהר as temporal and make the verb "I shall awake in the morning" 4). Exactly the same text translations recur in Ps. cviii 3

McKay acknowledges that the Bible uses shakhar as an anthropomorphic personification rather than advancing it as a "conscious entity" with most versions of the MT evidencing attempts to remove the anthropomorphisms.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Correct.
However,

In these instances שחר is generally prefixed by the definite article (Gen. Josh. vi 15; Judg. xix 25; 1 Sam. ix 26; Neh. iv 15; proving beyond all doubt that the natural phenomenon is in mind and not a deity, but it seems likely that the stereotyped dawn which "rises" may depend on an earlier conception dawn as a divine being 3). Elsewhere in the Old Testament שחר is generally a personalised being, according to the MT, but the Versions almost universally attempt to remove the anthropomorphisms. (a) In Ps. Ivii 9 Shahar is depicted as asleep and to the Psalmist who cries שחר שעירה, "I shall awaken Shahar." The Versions all treat שהר as temporal and make the verb "I shall awake in the morning" 4). Exactly the same text translations recur in Ps. cviii 3

McKay acknowledges that the Bible uses shakhar as an anthropomorphic personification rather than advancing it as a "conscious entity" with most versions of the MT evidencing attempts to remove the anthropomorphisms.

I am not entirely sure what point you wished to make by citing another paper by McKay dealing with those specific verses in Isaiah chapter fourteen, given that Forsyth acknowledges that the intentions of the composer of that section are unclear, merely noting that the translators of the LXX did make a connection between Hêlēl ben Šaḥar and Heōsphoros son of the bringer of dawn.

[tabibito]

I am not entirely sure what point you wished to make by citing another paper by McKay dealing with those specific verses in Isaiah chapter fourteen, given that Forsyth acknowledges that the intentions of the composer of that section are unclear, merely noting that the translators of the LXX did make a connection between Hêlēl ben Šaḥar and Heōsphoros son of the bringer of dawn.

I cited a work that you yourself provided as a reference.
None of the three works you provided contain the paragraphs that you cited.

Isaiah 14:4 you will taunt the king of Babylon with these words

Is some deity or demon to be addressed by the words that follow?

It is quite likely that a reference to a well known pagan story was made - but even so, such a citation says nothing about the beliefs of the Hebrews of the time.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

I cited a work that you yourself provided as a reference.

And that work is cited by Forsyth. Your quote is somewhat disingenuous as McKay demonstrates in the pages prior to and after that short comment you provided.

None of the three works you provided contain the paragraphs that you cited.

And? References to other texts are not always exact quotations from those texts.

[tabibito]

And that work is cited by Forsyth. Your quote is somewhat disingenuous as McKay demonstrates in the pages prior to and after that short comment you provided.

Just how does McKay modify the section that I cited?

And? References to other texts are not always exact quotations from those texts.

You did not provide precise details that would have enabled a comparison between what you posted and the author's claims. Is there a reason for not providing those details?

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Just how does McKay modify the section that I cited?



You did not provide precise details that would have enabled a comparison between what you posted and the author's claims. Is there a reason for not providing those details?

McKay notes at the beginning of section II that there is much evidence from South of Palestine to suggest that שחד was known as a feminine deity, and while שחד is always a masculine noun the deity of Dawn, šḥr, in the Ugaritic likewise male. He also comments that שחד is invariably accompanied by active verbs which imply personality, further noting that the image of dawn which rises may also depend on an earlier conception of the dawn as a divinity. He also remarks on language used by the Psalmist and in Songs that again may reflect a personalised feminine Dawn and comments that elsewhere in the OT שחד is generally a personalised being but the Versions altered the texts to remove any anthropomorphism.


As to the papers I provided, they are the ones used in the section from Forsyth that I cited.

[tabibito]

McKay notes at the beginning of section II that there is much evidence from South of Palestine to suggest that שחד was known as a feminine deity, and while שחד is always a masculine noun the deity of Dawn, šḥr, in the Ugaritic likewise male. He also comments that שחד is invariably accompanied by active verbs which imply personality, further noting that the image of dawn which rises may also depend on an earlier conception of the dawn as a divinity. He also remarks on language used by the Psalmist and in Songs that again may reflect a personalised feminine Dawn and comments that elsewhere in the OT שחד is generally a personalised being but the Versions altered the texts to remove any anthropomorphism.
As to the papers I provided, they are the ones used in the section from Forsyth that I cited.

That there was a god by the name used in the Isaiah passage is all but certain. There is no known link with actual Hebrew religious practices.
Forsyth states that there is a clear link with pagan traditions, but that Isaiah turned the well known tale to a parody directed against a human man. (pp 136-137), as also page 135:

Forsyth.jpg

Small wonder you were so coy about providing citation details.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

That there was a god by the name used in the Isaiah passage is all but certain. There is no known link with actual Hebrew religious practices.
Forsyth states that there is a clear link with pagan traditions, but that Isaiah turned the well known tale to a parody directed against a human man. (pp 136-137), as also page 135:

Forsyth.jpg

Small wonder you were so coy about providing citation details.

That the Hebrew religion gradually developed is something you seem reluctant to recognise. Judaism did not arrive fully formed like Athene. And these Hebrew texts show the changes being undertaken to remove and/or diminish references to other deities.

As Forsyth further notes, there appears to have been a school that continued after the original Isaiah was long dead:

Second Isaiah's grand vision, appear to come from the hands of later members of the school who kept the Isaiah tradition alive, even on into the postexilic period. Probably our poem comes from some sixth-century hand who would have had an immediate interest in the downfall of Babylon, but was then reworked and incorporated into the general section in which it now stands, the oracles against the nations. Whoever composed the poem was alert to the dominant themes of the genuine Isaiah's ministry: the coming of the dark and destructive "Day of Yahweh" on which "the pride of men shall be humbled,"

He also comments on the Israelite preoccupation with the Assyrians. Noting:

In particular, the poem echoes the genuine Isaiah's preoccupation with the Assyrian emperors as the "rod of Yahweh's anger" sent to punish a godless nation, as the instrument of God's judgement, but finally, once the purpose is accomplished, as the symbol of monarchy's weakness: "When Yahweh has finished all his work on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem, he will punish the arrogant boasting of the king of Assyria and his haughty pride. For Isaiah, the Assyrian enemy who comes from afar, from "the end of the world" with chariots like the storm wind, was also "the enemy from the north. This expression recurs in other Old Testament passages […] In all these cases the enemy in question has the characteristics of a human agent, of specific political foes. But it is likely that the "enemy from the north" tradition originated in the figure of Baal-Zaphon in Canaanite mythology and was radically historicized within the Old Testament until only a trace of the myth remained. The reference in our poem to Zaphon itself, the mountain of the far north, is thus both a continuation of this tradition, and also one of the first signs of the revival of explicitly mythological language and imagery in the time of the exile.

Further noting:

Identification of the king of Babylon, the power responsible for the fall of Jerusalem and the exile of the Jews from their homeland, with the figure of the cosmic rebel was to have considerable effect on the thinking of subsequent writers.

In that chapter of Isaiah the human tyrant who dares to challenge Yahweh suffers further ignominies when his body is exhumed and abandoned "like loathsome carrion" and "like a corpse trampled underfoot".