xxBo0kn3rdxx
Pseudo-Onkelos
xxBo0kn3rdxx
Pseudo-Onkelos
ANJell-GoMinam
Ai nako, either way, same God.
They seem mighty different, not just in character, either.
To be fair, H-shem is depicted differently throughout the Tanakh. Sometimes he's depicted with masculine qualities, sometimes with feminine; sometimes with corporal appearance (able to be touched), sometimes likened to a whirlwind. So it's quite open to interpretation even within one faith.
Oh my god I have a final about this in eight hours why am I on the internet.
Feminine qualities like found in Deuteronomy 32:18, which says, "You were unmindful of the Rock that bore you, and you forgot the God who gave you birth." (Deuteronomy 32 is getting a lot of attention.) Watch out, Not Enough Ummah!
xp Anyway, this speech isn't literal. With reference to God's corporeality, see Genesis 3:8 where God walks.
Yesss, that was the verse I was thinking of! Deuteronomy 32:18. Nice job there, sir! ^^ And the beginning of Genesis is interesting in it of itself. Some say that the book of Genesis was actually redacted from a variety of sources. The God we see walking in the garden of Eden is a different depiction (if you will) than the one we see earlier where he rigidly says "Let there be ____" and He saw that it was good. And such and such. Shows himself to Elijah in a whisper, et cetera. God seems to manifest himself in many ways. It's interesting; I rather like it. I...don't particularly know why, but I do.
Yes, the Documentary Hypothesis, which I am not certain if I should agree with it. It still seems prevalent. Not that I have a problem with it. I prefer it over the Mosaic authorship. Deuteronomy 32 (that chapter again) is supposedly older than Deuteronomy 4. Anyway, I am currently trying to figure out how I should believe in HaShem, and I'm really wondering if He is corporeal or not.
Moses Maimonides and Philo before him didn't think He was corporeal. I feel this is from Greek thinking, however. Maimonides used Aristotelian philosophy, and Philo used Middle Platonism. When I read through the Tanakh, I don't see an incorporeal god. I think theologies changed over time, so God of Israel was corporeal, but was then believed to be incorporeal. That's my take on it.