CHAPTER XV THE GROUPING OF THE GODS The coalescence of Israelites and Amorites brought the cults of Yahweh and the Baals into close connection.-When the two races united in the Hebrew nation, the gods of both peoples continued to stand. There is nowhere any hint that David commanded the Amorites to put away their ancient cults as a condition of entering the kingdom. To do this would have stirred up race-prejudice once more, since religion and politics were identified in ancient society. The entire policy of David shows that he wanted to conciliate the Amorites; and there is no sign of any struggle against the local Baalworship for many generations after the establishment of the Davidic monarchy. We do not know whether David and Solomon themselves worshiped the native Amorite gods;' but we know that the incorporation of the Amorites would have been impossible if they had not become worshipers of the national deity; and we find cases in which they actually practiced the cult of Yahweh (II Sam. 21:1-9; cf. I Kings 3:4, 5). But on the other hand, the Baals were local, or provincial, gods; and the founding of the nation did not bring up the subject of the local worship. As a consequence, the provincial gods dropped into the background until they were finally thrust into notice by the fierce denunciations of the later prophets. The Hebrew kingdom brought with it a strong impulse to regard Yahweh as a god of civilization.-The establishment of the monarchy at the point of coalescence between Israelites and Amorites brought with it a powerful tendency to forget * Professor Ira M. Price, of the University of Chicago, suggests that David may have simply ignored the local Baals. or ignore the connection between Yahweh and the older usages of the desert and the hills. There was now an impulse to connect the national god with the standpoint of civilization as opposed to that of the wilderness, and to claim the patronage of Yahweh on behalf of legal usages that were strange to the more primitive classes in Hebrew society. In other words, the kingdom had a propensity to draw Yahweh aside from his earlier character as a god of the primitive, brotherhood mishpat, and to regard him as a divinity having the same nature as the local Baals. This impulse is clearly chargeable to that part of the Hebrew nation where Amorite blood was thickest. The tendency to "baalize" the national god came out conspicuously into relief among the ruling classes who stood connected with the old Amorite centers of population. But Yahweh's early character, as a god of brotherhood "mishpat," clung to him persistently. The tendency to convert the national god into a local Baal was not suffered to go unchecked. For the old idea of Yahweh survived in vigor among certain classes of the people. The nation, indeed, became an arena wherein a mighty conflict was waged around this issue: Is Yahweh a god who approves the standpoint of oriental civilization, with its practical disregard of the common man? Or, is he to be worshiped as a god who sanctions the older and higher morality of the nomadic social group, with its greater esteem for human rights? In the end, the tendency to "baalize" Yahweh was defeated.— The struggle around this issue occupies the foreground of our sociological investigation of the Bible. The great conflict began, as many struggles do, in a vague and confused way. Men could not immediately think themselves into absolute clearness about it. They had to go through stages in their discernment of the logic underlying the main issue. It is not the design of this chapter to put on exhibition the different periods that marked the controversy. But it is well to emphasize at this point in our study that the tendency to baalize the Hebrew religion was defeated in the long run. However strong the forces were which tended to convert Yahweh into a god of "civilization," the religious development of Israel proves that these forces were largely counteracted. The distinction between Yahweh and the local Baals was explicitly asserted by the prophet Hosea, in the eighth century B.C.; by the prophet Jeremiah, in the seventh century; and by the Deuteronomic writers, who were in part contemporary with Jeremiah. The great monument of the Deuteronomic school is, of course, the Book of Deuteronomy, in which the "other gods" chiefly in view are the gods of the former inhabitants of Canaan. But the Deuteronomists also accomplished work of large importance in compiling and editing the books of Judges, Samuel, and Kings, which emphasize the distinction between Yahweh and the local Baals. There were several ways in which the distinction between Yahweh and the Baals was preserved. A number of circumstances operated to maintain the qualitative difference between the cults inherited by the nation from its double ancestry, Israelite and Amorite. 1. The social diversity of the Hebrews. It is a fact of large and vital importance that the nation was not ironed out into absolute social and religious uniformity. The mixture of Israel with the Amorites was mostly in Ephraim, the north.1 It was here that most of the old Amorite cities lay (cf. chap. xi, Table II). Accordingly, it was in Northern Israel, that Baalworship flourished more than elsewhere." But on the contrary, the people with whom the Israelites mixed in the highlands of Judah were mostly Arabian clans, whose habits and point of view agreed more closely with the G. A. Smith, Historical Geography of the Holy Land (London, 1904), p. 316. * McCurdy, art. “Baal," Jewish Encyc. early mishpat of Yahweh. "The shepherd's occupation," writes Professor Addis, "was . . . . especially prominent in Judah, where there is much less arable land than in the central districts of Palestine." The influence of Judah in the direction of the more primitive life and thought was reinforced by that of Gilead, on the east of the Jordan. Gilead was a hillcountry, "a place for cattle" (Num. 32:1). Here the goats lay along the mountain side; here people and flock fed in the ancient days (Song of Sol. 4:1; Mic. 7:14). Gilead was ever one of the backward, outlying sections of Israel, touched but little by Amorite civilization. The Israelites of the frontier, in Judah and beyond the Jordan in Gilead, evidently retained not a little of the ancient nomad habits, and in part were closely allied with other tribes of the wilderness. Thus we find from time to time expressions of that characteristic distaste for the ease and luxuries of settled life which belongs to the genuine Bedouin. The Nazirite vow against drinking wine and the laws of the Rechabites are cases in point. And the Rechabites, like the Nazirites, were on the side of the old Jehovah [Yahweh] worship, and against the Canaanite Baal.2 As soon as we fix firmly in mind the primitive disposition of Judah and Gilead, as contrasted with the more "civilized" character of Ephraim, we shall be prepared to grasp the significance of two of the earliest and most effective Israelite prophets. Elijah, of Gilead, left his home, and passed over into the more Amorite Ephraim in order to protest against the evils of his time (I Kings 17:1 ff.). In the same way, Amos left his home in the wilderness of southern Judah, and went up into Ephraim to preach on behalf of the ancient mishpat of Yahweh (Amos 7:10-15). These flaming prophets were semi-nomads themselves; and they were the spokesmen of whole classes of shepherds and cattle-raisers that lived in the 'Addis, Hebrew Religion (London, 1906), p. 82. Cf. G. A. Smith, op. cit. 2 W. Robertson Smith, The Prophets of Israel (London, 1897), pp. 381, 382. Cf. Renan, History of Israel (Boston), Vol. II, p. 227. EPHRAIM MIXED POPULATION BAAL-WORSHIP AND GODS BAAL-ZEBUB OF EKRON GILEAD JUDAH YAHWEH-WORSHIP BAAL-PEOR SCHEME OF HEBREW EVOLUTION This diagram should be frequently consulted. The Israelite clans located themselves in the hills of Judah, Ephraim, and Gilead. The fusion with the Amorites was mostly in Ephraim. The "mishpat struggle" began with blind revolts against the government; proceeded thence to expulsion of the "border-Baals"; and at length took its characteristic, biblical form by raising the question of the local, or native, Baals inherited from the Amorite side of the nation's ancestry. |