2) God


 

The bible doesn’t describe God. It is revealed by a very vague definition which is: YE-HO-VE-H (or Jehovah) which is the acronym of the phrase” Yech Hou Veyiyeh Hou “, “The one who always is and always will be”, (The eternal one).

Our anthropomorphic tendency wants us to imagine a kind of “God the father” who imposes his will like a man, like a father, like a king, like a tyrant. The French word for God, “Dieu” is the French pronunciations of the Greek word for the god Zeus, archetype of God the Father. In English, the word God is derived from the Indo-European root “gheu” = to invoke, and “gheu-tu” = the invoked. So French and English don’t mean the same when they talk about god. God in English could mean “mother” as often seen on battlefields where the last invoked person in mortal agony is “mother”. Opposed to that, “Dieu” means “father”, the one who rules and has to be obeyed.

But what has always existed, and will always exist are the biological and physical codes.

The second message of the bible is that it is wrong to be anthropomorphic and understand God as a man or a woman figure, but understand deity as what has always ruled things and will always rule things.

 

The unique feature of what has always been and always will be, associated to the forbidden representation of an anthropomorphic God, is the essence of the biblical heritage, which is found back in Islam but not in Christianity. Since God in Christianity has a son, a mother and a father, it isn’t anymore God, but the result of an anthropomorphism introduced by conquering Christianity in order to recuperate the adoration of pagan gods. And if the father, the mother and the son are not enough, all the saints are added to the Christian mythology in order to recuperate all the pagan gods like in the South-American Santeria.

And so state authority was reinforced, in casu the Holy Roman Empire in which the emperor, image of God on earth has been replaced by the pope, his court by the clergy and the so important vestal virgins by the nuns.

Nowhere in the bible God speaks like a man. He is always addressing himself to one person in particular, often within a dream. Or his message can be delivered by a messenger (angel), or by an object (a burning but not consuming bush (If you like science fiction: that’s how an alien in the bushes could call a television screen or a flashy loudspeaker?!…), or by extraordinary phenomena (miracles)

So there is never a witness attesting the presence of an anthropomorphic God. One exception was the reception of the 10 commandments so frightening for the people that they asked Moses to receive it for them.

Divine biblical messages are usually transmitted by one medium. In the bible 4 of the 5 books refer to Moses. So it is very probable that Moses reveals the laws of the Pentateuch.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It is interesting to notice that the name of Moses can’t be found back in any Egyptian text. It is astonishing that this Egyptian prince who has such a tremendous weight on the Jewish destiny does not appear on any Egyptian hieroglyph.

Nevertheless the radical “Mosis” can be retrieved in Egyptian names for example in Tut-mosis. “Mosis” means “son of…” in ancient Egyptian, or “taken out of the water” But the father in law of Joseph, Putiphar, is mentioned in a tomb in the Nile delta: “Pa-di-pa-re” which means: the one the God Re has given.

Other arguments for biblical evidence in ancient Egypt is the presence of foreign princes also called Hyksos +/- 1650 b.c., period mentioned by the bible as the beginning of Jewish presence in Egypt. According to the bible Jews remained about 400 years in Egypt, the Exodus happening in 1250 BC.

A possible explanation for this absence of Moses in Egyptian literature is the different way Hebrews and Egyptians used names. An example of this difference is cited in the bible: The Hebrew name of Joseph son of Isaac is well known. But in Egypt he was called Zaphenath-Paneah (41-45), which means “God speaks, he lives”. Such was common practice towards Asians or Hyksos at the service of Egyptians. The real Egyptian name of Moses is thus unknown because Moses is actually a nickname meaning “saved from the waters” or the more common Egyptian suffix “son of…”. He could have been the son of Tout , like Tout-mosis, or just an orphan Mosis of nobody. A nice name would have been: Ra-mosis meaning… son of the Nile: Ramses!

 

Akhnaton was the most likely Egyptian prince resembling Moses as suggested by Freud. Akhnaton was bad shaped. Moses had also some elocution problems according to the midrash (the oral tradition). Another possibility is that Aaron, the brother of Moses was Akhnaton? The suffix –on relates to the veneration of the sun. “On” is the biblical name of Heliopolis (the city of the sun).

What is making all this speculations vain is the fact that Akhnaton lived 100 years before the exodus…

According to Roger Sabbah, Moses (or Ramses) killed Akhnaton, the vain pharaoh who thought he was the only god, and not the first to believe in one god. He then fled to his stepfather Jethro (Jeth-ro = father of the Nile) that is father Ay or Adon Ay.

 

One could see the exodus during the reign of Ramses III. Indeed the mortuary temple of Ramses III in Luxor shows a battle between the pharaoh and Jews. The well carved typical details of the pictured Jews are so genuine that one could have taken them for a photography of Hassidic Jews in the Pelican street in Antwerp. Even the typical dread locks in front of both ears are present.

But this doesn’t fit with the knowledge that dreadlocks in front of the ears where prescribed in the Sinai after the exodus. Or are these prescriptions only a recuperation of common capillary traditions? Other Jewish traditions where of pagan origin: for example the candle lighting of Hanukkah in commemoration of the Temple. The lighting of candles during 8 days, one more every day, was of common practice in Rome during their festival of Saturnus. It is logical that one tries to make light during the darkest winter days.

 

As one can see, there is no concrete reminiscence in Egyptian literature of the exodus. But the context as described by the Egyptians is very real: Hyksos period with foreign kings, monotheist period during the Akhnaton reign, and destruction of all remnant of his predecessors by Ramses II destroying all remains of monotheism.

The brothers Sabbah in their book ” Les secrets de l’exode ” go far more beyond in their relation Moses, Akhnaton, Egypt and the Jewish people. They demonstrate a much closer relation between Hebrew scripture and pronunciation of hieroglyphs than between Hebrew scripture and other languages. Unfortunately their demonstration has several weaknesses, which will not be discussed here.

In a second book “Les secrets de la bible” Roger Sabbah shows that the bible is filled with Egyptian culture. The Decalogue is based allowing to him on the 42 commands of Osiris, including the interdiction of robbery, killing, etc…He stresses that the original Egyptian bible text was camouflaged in order to resist the exile in Mesopotamia. The Egyptian Pharaoh had to be a bad guy, although worshiped and mourned as Adon-Ay (the pharaoh Ay) when reading the bible.

 

 

 

To close this parenthesis on Moses in this chapter related to try to define what the bible means by God, I think it is very important that nothing remains of Moses.

As idolatry is the worse thing in the biblical message, the absence of worshiping of Moses is a fundamental aspect of Judaism. I think this is the biggest difference between Islam, Christianity and Judaism.

In Judaism no man has the right to be worshiped. In Christianity and in Islam two men, Jesus and Mohamed, are worshiped more than their actual message is (which is still the biblical message).

So let’s talk about God. There is no single word to say God in the bible, there are three: The first word for God as red in Genesis is “Elohim”. In this word one recognize the radical El or Eloh (Allah), and the suffix of plural “- im”. This could be translated as “All the Gods” such as in the Greek “Pantheon”.

To confirm the use of the plural, one finds in the episode of the tree of knowledge the following sentence: “If man was to taste the fruit of the tree of knowledge he would be like us (in plural!) i.e. Elohim (= the gods).

And only when the episode of creation in 6 days ends, the second word for God is used i.e. the tetragram YHVH (Ye-Ho-Va-H) or “The one who is and always will be” (The eternal one).

So the God of creation and the God of men and of Moses in particular is not the same. And this is obvious, because “the one who is, and always will be” can only follow the normal evolution of the world, as we know it. Elohim is probably the résumé of all the ancient beliefs about all the gods and all the forces of nature. A nice illustration of this interpretation is the episode of Jacob leaving his stepfather Laban in an eastern country (Haran) to go back to Canaan. His wife Rachel takes her “Elohim”, her gods (plural) with her. They are called Teraphim,

The third word used for God in Genesis is the one used for Jacob: “El Chadai”. The singular form El (one god) cha- (who) -dai (enough). One god who set the limits or one God who rules. For Moses as quoted literally in the second book of the Pentateuch, Exodus (6,2) “El Chadai” is not the real divinity, but the name of a great and mighty god revealed to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. For Moses the only God is “YHVH”, “the one who is and the one who always will be”. Actually in the 10 commands god is not the one who created earth. No, god is first the one who pulled the Jews out of their slavery in Egypt. This means that there exists a very tight relation between the Jewish people and this “eternal one”. It was the eternal Jewish spirit that forced Jews out of slavery and that proved stronger than idols and material satisfaction. It is only later in the law of Shabbat that god relates to the creation in 6 days under the YHVH form, not the Elohim form..

In Jewish symbolism one finds the strength of “the god who sets the rules” in the phylacteries which are worn on the head and on the left arm. The nods of those phylacteries compose the word Cha-Da-I. “Cha” on the left arm, “Da” on the left arm at the level of the heart, and “I” on the head. Meaning that the divine strength can be found in the association of the head, the heart and the arm.

Phylacteries (tefilines) are leather boxes attached to the head and to the left arm by leather ropes. They contain bible excerpts about the Jewish credo “Chema Israel IHVH Elohenou, IVHV e’had”. In this bible excerpt one insists on loving in three ways: with the heart, with the body and with the soul. (Head, Heart, Arm).

 

Phylacteries are worn every morning and tied around the left arm and the head. This practice which goes back to the pharaohs as shown by the brothers Sabbah on the mummy of Toutankhamon in their book “Les secrets de l’exode” has maybe a medical purpose. By tying the leather ropes for about a half hour at the level of the arteria brachialis and the arteria jugularis, one increases the workload on the arteries going to the brain and the left arm. One could ask him if this daily exercise could not strengthen the heart muscle and open the arteries leading to the brain? I don’t know medical research about this exercise, but it would be worth trying. An Israeli study comparing religious and non-religious kibbutzim where able to show that religious kibbutzim had a higher life expectancy and a lower morbidity rate. This could of course be caused by psychological factors, but the practice of phylacteries should deserve medical attention.

 

 

 

When you analyse the different forms of god representations in the world one realises that the common denominator of all those gods is “fear”. Idols where shaped to cause fear or to sublimate natural fears.

And this gives power to the one who is able to manipulate this fear.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Usually gods have the appearance of snakes, lions, wild animals feared and respected by men.

Now phobias about snakes appear systematically around puberty. Like many phobias these are not acquired, but congenitally present since birth in order to preserve people against danger. A sexual connotation around puberty causing dreams about phallic symbols with the snake representing the phallic object of course is well known since the work of Freud. Other classical phobic images are teeth, horns, insects, skeletons, etc…All those phobic images are found back in idols.

Even the mental representation of the snake divinity is present in Genesis. But he loses all his powers in face of the god of creation.

The devil as represented in Christianity does not exist in the Pentateuch. Satan is actually an Egyptian divinity: late prophets adapted Seth by adding the suffix “-on” which means “like”. Satan means “like Seth”, which means very naughty. Proof for this is the use of Satan to characterise two very awful and sanguinary tyrants in the bible, which really existed: The first one was Hadad, master of Cairo, and the other one was Reza master of Damascus. Only late apocrypha like Zachary and Job show anthropomorphic angels like Satan sitting next to god, which remembers a certain kind of mythology.

After the destruction of the second temple the rabbis, who introduced prayer to replace the sacrifices, introduced images of animals, seraphim’s that we know from Mesopotamian mythology and other mythological inhabitants of the angelical pantheon, in the blessings of men as a mirror of the blessings of heaven. Maybe this is very poetic, but in complete contradiction with the first message of the bible.

 

A big inconvenience of idols is that they can be destroyed. Once they are destroyed they lose all their power. Hence the ingenuity of an omnipresent unique and invisible god. How strong you are, you can’t destroy that invisible god. The only way to destroy the power of the invisible god, as the Romans learned to their expense, is to adopt him.

 

Fear of the invisible is a very strong kind of fright as was so well exploited by Alfred Hitchcock, the master of suspense in his movies. If the invisible god of the Jews exists, he must be incarnated in the irrational fear anti-Semites have for Jews.

Albert Cohen in his roman Solal demonstrates very well this idea with his typical sense of humour. His hero says at a certain moment: “I was hired by my boss because he was sufficiently anti-Semite to believe in my qualities”.

God is also incarnated in the existential fear of Jews. An innate fear, witness of intelligence, like any fear of death. And so fearful believers realise the transmission of the biblical message from generation to generation by following biblical prescriptions at the edge of neurosis.

 

The first man to override this fear of the gods is Abraham on mount Moriah at the instant he was ready to sacrifice his son Isaac. The bible says textually that Elohim (the ancient gods, those responsible for the sum of all fears, representing all the forces of universe) asked him to sacrifice his son. And we know that it was a custom to all the inhabitants of the Middle East to sacrifice the first son to “Moloch” one of the pagan gods. At the moment he was to put the knife in the flesh of his son, a “Malach”, a messenger, not from “Elohim”, the old gods, but from “I.H.V.H”, the eternal one (the eternal Jewish spirit), calls: “Abraham, Abraham”. Actually anybody could have been the “Malach”, the messenger. It could even have been Ishmael, imploring for the life of his brother. Evidence is that at this precise moment Abraham realised the gravity of his act and realised “I.H.V.H.”, the eternal one, i.e. “reason”, and decided: enough is enough! no more children sacrifice! And he sacrificed a goat instead. Even today one can find thousands of urns containing remains of sacrificed Punic children in the neighbourhood of Trapani in Sicily. Punic culture comes from the region of nowadays Lebanon with a language very similar to Hebrew and whose main city of Cartage near Tunis is well known.

 

Ironically commentators of the bible preach that Abraham was an example of blind faith to god. But in my eyes Abraham is an iconoclast fleeing his elderly house in Ur (near Baghdad) after he destroyed the idols his father Terah made as was told by the Midrash, the oral transmission of the bible.

 

 

 

Abraham refuses idols, Abraham refuses sacrifice of children and Abraham refuses also the destruction of a city by the will of god. He says that if the city contains only 10 righteous men, this destruction is unfair. And Sodom and Gomorrah are destroyed. And every city destroyed by a natural catastrophe contains probably more than 10 righteous men, and thus is unfair. Abraham is bargaining with god. If a catastrophe kills righteous and innocent men, something is unfair with that kind of reliance in that kind of god.

 

 

So the correct attitude to follow is to foresee possible risks and to build an arch in a region that could know floods, and to flee a region that knows a lot of earthquakes like Sodom and Gomorrah, or to garner 7 years of grain for the next 7 years of famine in Egypt.

Don’t forget if Jacob was called Israel, this was because he was fighting god. Israel means fighting against the god El, or fighting against all odds!… This episode is described in Genesis at the moment that Jacob had to fight his older brother Esau. Although stronger and bigger, Esau was twice hooked by his younger and smarter brother Jacob. First when Jacob bought his right of first born for a plate of lentils. And the second time when he received the blessing of his father to be his heir instead of Esau. Coming back from the East with his wives and children he was afraid from Esau. So he sent his family in separate groups as several scouts and stayed behind alone. Someone then attacked him, wrestling all night with him and catching his loin (I would say this is very suggestive literature). And then he said he saw the face of god (pniel) (This had to be very pleasant indeed). Afterwards he realised this was not a messenger from Esau, but a messenger (angel) of god. And at that moment Jacob was named: the fighter against the god El, or Israel, and his children became the children of Israel. The Jewish credo “Chema Israel IHVH Elohenou, IHVH e’had” could be translated as: ” Listen Fighters against the El (Israel), the one who is and always will be (the eternal) is our El, the eternal is one”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interesting philosophy: what was and what will be is one. Everything is an eternal resetting because the past and the future are one. This philosophy is shared by king Salomon in his book Kohelet (Ecclesiast) in which Kohelet the hero of his book says: Nothing is new, every generation discovers the same things, and every new day sees the same sun rise. Every effort to discover new things is vanity. And later Lavoisier says: “Rien ne se gagne et rien ne se perd”, “Nothing is gained and nothing is lost”.

The passed and the future are one. It is as if life was like a cycle in a software program. Every cycle giving a variation of the program. But the program remains eternal.

 

 

 

 

 

This way we can understand why the god of Israel is not the creator of the world, but the god of the exodus as it is written in the Decalogue. The god of Israel is the eternal Israel revealed at the exodus. A Jew’s life is short, but Israel’s life is eternal. Or as an Arab proverb says: The water drops go by, but the stream remains. And the eternal program is what was revealed to the Jewish people by the bible and later to the world by the monotheist religions.

 

 

 

 

Advertisements
Published in: on 24/10/2006 at 09:45  Comments (4)  

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://drjewish.wordpress.com/2006/10/24/2-god/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

4 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. I love this place. Thanks. Good articles. But, if I may, here is what I thing is missing:

    I read her:
    Don’t forget if Jacob was called Israel, this was because he was fighting god. Israel means fighting against the god El, or fighting against all odds!…

    BUT… this is NOT the MAIN reason Jakob was called ISRAEL!

    I read:
    This episode is described in Genesis at the moment that Jacob had to fight his older brother Esau. Although stronger and bigger, Esau was twice hooked by his younger and smarter brother Jacob.

    BUT… Esau was i short time older than Jakob, the 2 were twillings, the key i color RED, Esaus sign.

    I read;
    First when Jacob bought his right of first born for a plate of lentils.

    HERE tke KEY to full understanding is a plate of lentils

    I read:
    And the second time when he received the blessing of his father to be his heir instead of Esau.

    YES, because of the points I’ve made here. The KEY is tje history, even in their time – the WORDS explains the actions that had happend in i live of linquistic living.

    This is what I’ve discovered while I was reading & searching for comprehension og this times arameic in speaking realities.

    Thanks

    Kola

  2. I NEED SOME CONTACT ADDRESSES OF STRONG PROPHETS AND PHYSICIAN IN JUDAISM

  3. in ISRAEL

  4. thank you so very much 🙂


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: