Re: Religion

Glen wrote of Baal

> No. Baal has characteristics associating him with all four

qualities:

> FLING/MARRIAGE WITH VENUS,

Venus, Glen - the Roman Goddess? Or the planet Venus? Certainly not
the former. And also not the latter. Baal's sister-wife was Anat.
Astarte was the Ugaritic planet Venus.

ASSOCIATED WITH WAR,

Apart from his battle with Mot and Yam, what war? Zeus also did
battle with the titans and with Typhon? What does this make him. By
your logic God of the Underworld.

SPENDS MOST OF HIS
TIME IN

> UNDERWORLD DOING STUFF

Baal, in none of the myths spend most of his time in the Underworld.
Glen read the prayers to Baal, they prayed to hium as weather god, to
bring rain for crops, not for the dead.

and ASSOCIATED WITH FIRE.

Yes, he roasted the grain. Zeus too was associated with fire. Who
did Prometheus steal the fire from - it was Olympian Zeus.

Glen again

>These characteristics
> aren't as readily seen in Zeus.

So you see these characteristics are seen readily in Zeus

Glen wrote

>How does he relate amorously with VENUS, for
> instance.

Hera was his sister. Anat was Baals sister. No Venus in either one.

I wrote

> >Baal was not asserting his control of the underword in his

struggles >with

> >Yam and Mot - instead he was asserting his primacy as head of the
> >Pantheon, in the same way that Zeus asserted himself as Chief God

of

> >the Olympians (also ruling from a mountain).

Glen conceeded

> It can be validly seen both ways although Baal's qualities lean the
> interpretation in my favour.

Glen, your interpretation of Baals qualities may have vailidity for
your system of interpretation. But you have to return to what the
ancients wrote. Look at what they believed. The Bible's Yahweh
struggled with Baal, not as a god of the underword, but as King of
the
Gods. And Baal FAILED to light fires, not bad for a divinity you see
as a fire God.

> >These "ancient" connections go back to the post Mycenaean age, when
> >late bronze age Ugarit and Iron-Age Phoenician conceptions of a
> >tripartite world (the heavens = weather God Baal, the oceans =

water

> >God Yam, and the underworld = God of the Dead, Mot), came to
> >influence Hesiodic theogony of Zeus, Poseidon and Hades.
>
> Then... how does El fit into this picture if Baal is the only sky

god?

Who said Baal Was the ONLY sky God. Baal was weather God, El was the
creator of all.

> >Good site Glen. One that clearly derives Apollo from Ugaritic

(i.e.

> >late Bronze Age) "Reseph". It is interesting that Appollo is not
> >found in Mycenaean names,
>
> I'm not particularly interested in Apollo. The IE's have the Sun

Maiden as

> far as I'm concerned so Apollo obviously isn't exactly relatable.

Thanx for

> proving my point. However, I hope you don't believe that there was

simply no

> sun deity in Mycenaean times, that would be absurd.

No but he was not Apollo.

> 3. Cosmology originates with the Sumerians.
>
> >Glen try reading Samuel Noah Kramer's "History Begins in Sumer", or
> >his work on "The Sumerians" before you start shooting of "expletive
> >deleated's" all over the list.
>
> What you present is nothing serious on this topic. You seem

confused
between

> Sumerians and ProtoEuphrateans so I'll let you figure it out with

yourself

> first before discussing this further.
>
> >Glen, how many times do I have to keep saying, in Canaanite belief
> >Baal was God of All Domains, just like Zeus was. But this does not
> >make him the Underworld God, or even a Underworld God (Just as Zeus
> >was not God of the Underworld).
>
> The problem is that there were TWO sky gods, El and Baal. It's easy

to say

> that Baal was god of all domains but while there were cults of El

and cults

> of Baal, there were also mythologies where El and Baal coexisted

together

> like in SumeroAkkadian myth (Anu and Enlil).

Exactly Enlil god of air, of wind; Anu God of the Vault of Heaven.
Baal God of the weather; El the Creator God of the Heavens.

In each case (Enlil and Baal) are seen as successor Gods to the older
Generation (Anu and El). Not much underworld here Glen.

Glen wrote

> I asked John after asserting that the Goddess religion must have

been

> henotheistic instead of monotheistic as if this made a severe

difference:

> >What should we be looking for as a characteristic of "monotheism"
> >then?
>
> John:
> >Mono = One
> >Theos = God
> >
> >Hope this helps.
>
> Exactly. One god. This is my whole point. The European Goddess is

ONE deity

> who happens to have _many_ aspects - hence, it _is_ a MONOtheism.

How can

> you not understand this?

Monotheism is usually associated with a single, transcendent
divinity,
outside of creation who was omniscient and omnipotenent. What you
are
referring to is what is normally referred to as pantheism, in which
the divine is seen as mutable and immanent in all phenomena.
Different thing Glen.

Glen wrote

> Zaehner is irrelevant. Your initial assertion is completely

unverifyable

> whether with or without Zaehner's input and therefore doesn't

constitute a

> proof of anything whatsoever. You're illogical and furthermore, the
> distinction here is trivial and fruitlessly argumentative.

Hello kettle. Try calling the pot black ;-)

Zaehner IS relevant to discussing the origins of Monotheism in Iran.

Regards

John