It's a living

[dreamer_easy]

I assume Yahweh is referred to as "the living god" to contrast Him with lifeless idols. Now, my understanding is that the Hebrews were henotheists: their neighbours' gods existed, but were not to be worshipped, and in any case were subordinate to Yahweh. However, quick search turns up the first use of "the living god" in Deuteronomy. So now I'm wondering - did "living god" have a different meaning, for example, a deity without idols or images?

Comments

[thegameiam.livejournal.com]

Ezra was the one who lead the major influx of Jews back to Judea under Cyrus - others dribbled back and forth, and certainly Persia remained hugely important (basically until the Sassanid empire fell to the Caliphate) in Jewish thought and religion - the main stream of Jewish law follows the Babylonian Talmud (and not the Jerusalem Talmud) after all...

Cambyses and Darius were guided more by their own megalomania than by religious fervor - they would tend to set up Zoroastrianism as a state religion of the newly conquered vassals, but they weren't exactly trying to stomp out the other religions.

The city-state model for religions tends to be more accurate as a descriptor for those worldviews which posit a pantheon. The Pre-Zoroastrian Mesopotamians, non-Abrahamic Canaanites and the Greeks are more alike in this than they are different (although there are some substantial differences in societal organization).

As for simultaneous development, it certainly is possible that multiple people experience the same singular transformative event, and then go on to process it in different ways - consider that the monotheistic Amon-worship in Egypt roughly dates to about the same time period as the Exodus... Was there a cross-fertilization? Sounds likely to me, although we'll never know for certain.

Now, I do challenge the differentiation between E and J worship - that's based on the Documentary Hypothesis, which is not a particularly effective one (see the scholarly challenges to it here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Documentary_hypothesis#Debates_on_the_hypothesis) for instance) - there's no external evidence for these hypothesized groups, and given that there IS a tremendous record of the various splinter groups (like essenes etc), the lack of external evidence should be viewed as determinative.

[adrian-middle.livejournal.com]

I must be way off then. My Biblical Timeline (Thos. Robinson) puts Ezra's mission to Jerusalem in 458 BC, but says the date is disputed, with alternatives of 428 or even 398 BC.

Cyrus conquered Babylon in 539 BC, and his edicts granting the Temple vessels confiscated by Nebuchadnezzar and allwing Shesh-Bezzar to return to Jerusalem were made the following year.

That's a gap of at least 80 years, and possibly as much as 141 years. I can't see how Ezra could possibly have led an influx under Cyrus.