This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
El (deity) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
El (deity) is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive. | ||||||||||
|
This
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The vast majority of this article is unsourced, and appears to be original research. I don't want to just wholesale delete obviously, but isn't original research against Wiki Policy? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.250.10.14 ( talk) 16:26, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
The goal of the rules on Wikipedia is to have well-written articles, not to make it difficult to write or improve them. And accuracy in an article is more important than technicalities of editing. Direct references to source materials are allowed. The goal is to improve an article if it is clearly in need of it. Knowledge of a topic is not POV, and referring to either references or to direct sources is allowed unless there is some debate as to accuracy. Note the previous addition to this Talk page, the person said the whole article looked at that time like Original Research. It still contains some, and corrections with direct references to Source Material are better than inaccuracies. If an editor feels a change is mistaken or debatable, then maybe adding "Citation needed" would be preferable to simply undoing major corrective work by another editor. Misty MH ( talk) 23:35, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
I teach this subject, in a state university. I can't presume to judge the sections connecting El with Greek myth. That's outside my area of expertise. Otherwise, the article is a really admirable summary of contemporary scholarship, as developed in the last twenty years, in standard texts like Mark S. Smith, The Early History of God: Yahweh and the other Deities in Israel, 2nd ed. (Eerdmans: Grand Rapids and Cambridge, UK, 2002) or any of William G. Dever's books. I will recommend it to my students. It's not "original research" but it sure could use some sources. This was a lot of work to write, and perhaps the principal writer prayed this article would fly as it is, without him or her going through the tedious labor of typing in quotes, page numbers and sources. It certainly shouldn't be deleted, but it does need help. Profhum ( talk) 03:10, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
This was added by [1] and never sourced, just changed - as it was today. I spent some time trying to source it, but gave up when I found the Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible which says on p. 1254 [2] "Cuneiform texts from Ebla provide clues to its pantheon of ca. 40 principal deities including Kura (principal god of the city), Hadad (storm-god). Pagan (lord of the region), Rashap (god of the underworld), Adamma (underworld goddess and spouse of Rashap), Ishara (principal goddess of the city), Ishtar (goddess of love and war), and Idabal (god associated with the Orontes Valley)." It doesn't say El wasn't mention, but it certainly doesn't suggest El was a major god or at the top of any list. Dougweller ( talk) 13:34, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
From the attributes of this deity it can be deducted that 'Poseidon' is identical to: 'Neptune', and also to the Semitic: 'Leviatan', as a being living or staying in the depth of the sea darkness, this may have been one of the reasons for Hebrews withdrawing from sailoring. (Deity would come from the proto-european: 'Dyaus', meaning originally: 'the brightness' ('Diamond= the bright gem'), 'the force', 'the power', that in the end may have transformed into the Greek: 'Theos', the Latin: 'Deus', and cognates: 'Zeus', 'Jupiter = dyaus pitar', and its derivatives; in the real world, 'Zeus' was identical to 'Apollion', that had an original identification as a solar cult; 'Deity' may have no other linked attributes, but 'Divinity', as in the cognate Sanskrit word: 'Deva', would be a word restricted for good doers or beings favourable or friendly to mankind). This is a working sketch, additions and precise references welcome.-- Jgrosay ( talk) 13:22, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Jgrosay, you display direct bias in that statement. You would be correct, if however the hebrew bible, the old testament, and various hebrew individuals and location names refer to "God" as "El" or "Elohim". The comparison is not in that they are cognates at all, but in that they were related culturally, or identical culturally. That is a far more relevant comparison than claiming that for example "Perun" is the same deity as "Thor", because that would be purely based on theological opinion, and not on cultural and linguistic reality in the case of "El" and "Yahweh". That being said, it's pointless to try and sweep this up, or attempt to present it in a different light, because that said deity has an origin in culture and history is the only thing that keeps it relevant in terms of an encyclopedia or dictionary. People who are impartial to the religion in question are not concerned with the adherents beliefs and opinions surrounding the culture of it other than the classification of sects and movements, in other words it could be relevant to note that jews or christians may disagree with that analysis or overview. 107.11.136.170 ( talk) 20:40, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
Added link to Enlil at See Also, since Enlil's "See Also" directs to here. The Enlil page has the description about the Canaanite spelling of Elil, thus El.-- Craxd ( talk) 16:48, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
The lead stated the following: "Specific deities known as El or Il include the supreme god of the Canaanite religion,[4] the supreme god of the Mesopotamian Semites in the pre-Sargonic period,[5] and the God of the Hebrew Bible."
My issue w/ that phrasing is that according to the Wikipedia article on God (and its sources), there are "many different conceptions of God" not limited to the Hebrew God, but that phrasing implies the opposite.
I have reworded the lead so it reads: "Specific deities known as El or Il include the supreme god of the Canaanite religion,[4] the supreme god of the Mesopotamian Semites in the pre-Sargonic period,[5] and the god of the Hebrew Bible, all referring to different concepts of God.", which is correct. The former phrasing implied that God may only refer to the Hebrew God and not the other Gods which is incorrect. Israell ( talk) 11:07, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
Doug Weller, does the El (deity) article give any source for this: "and the God of the Hebrew Bible."? No. Why is that phrasing more correct than the one I'm suggesting? I have simply reworded the lead so God applies to all three mentioned gods. Israell ( talk) 11:19, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
No, it's not an opinion. It is a very well-documented fact that there are many concepts of God in different belief systems. Israell ( talk) 12:08, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
I am not disputing that El is one of the names of the "God of the Hebrew Bible". Jytdog, Doug Weller, are you implying that God can only refer to the Hebrew God? Israell ( talk) 15:20, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
I have found this article on God, and it mentions the Canaanite deity El: http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/God . This second article mentions the Mesopotamian concepts of God: http://urantia-book.org/newbook/ub/ppr096_7.html .
As I explained, God does not only refer to the Hebrew God. God is a very broad concept. Any deity that one sees as the "Supreme God" or "Supreme Being" fits that concept. Some Pagans do believe in "the Goddess and the God" — that's God! Sikhs believe in one God (as Sikhism is a monotheistic religion) — that's God! Theistic Buddhists also have a concept of God — that's God! Hindus (of different sects) believe in many Gods and acknowledge Ishwara as the Supreme (Cosmic) Being — that's God! Voodooists believe in a Supreme God — that's God! I had no idea such a simple, sensical change would require so many explanations.
Yes, that's the problem. The lead implies that God can only refer to the Hebrew deity. Making it a small g would at least give it some semblance of unbiasedness. Israell ( talk) 16:16, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
Jytdog, are you still watching this article? Undid revision by 2601:8c:4401:678f:558c:6536:b81:44b7. Consensus was reached for "the god of the Hebrew Bible" (small 'g'). Israell ( talk) 18:28, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
What I read in the text was that he is the creator of the gods and humans, but some sources also say creator of the earth and the universe. Is there a authentic reference for that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.244.80.45 ( talk) 12:41, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
At Talk:Wahab El Yahiz an editor argues that El is a Sabaean god, and Almaqah seems to be saying the same thing. Is this correct? Doug Weller talk 05:22, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
@ User:Doug Weller; you can read this, it is an English source. [1] Ecoboy90 ( talk) 09:15, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Well, the writer is Yoel Natan. He seems to already be used in Wikipedia, as a source for the articles on the Expedition of Kurz bin Jabir Al-Fihri, on Islam by country, on Umm Nidal, on Takbir, on Mangalorean Catholics, and on Navel in popular culture. Dimadick ( talk) 21:11, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
References
“In some places, especially in Psalm 29, Yahweh is clearly envisioned as a storm god, something not true of Ēl so far as we know (although true of his son, Ba'al Hadad). It is Yahweh who is prophesied to one day battle Leviathan the serpent, and slay the dragon in the sea in Isaiah 27:1. The slaying of the serpent in myth is a deed attributed to both Ba’al Hadad and ‘Anat in the Ugaritic texts, but not to Ēl.”
It claims Yahweh was a storm god in theses psalms. But there is no sources cited about what scholars interpret theses psalms. It only cites the psalms but doesn’t mention scholars interpretation of them. CycoMa ( talk) 03:54, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
I've done some research into the canaanite gods, and while I've found reason to believe that Yahweh was a son of El, but while I've found evidence of the connection between Michael and Mannu-ki-ili, I haven't found any evidence that he was a son of El. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nayerb ( talk • contribs) 18:15, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
Unless there is an objection, I'm going to overhaul the list of the Sons of El. In addition to increasing the list from 14 to 25, i will be removing the Ugaritic designation and the question marks. These gods appear as Sons of El in multiple pantheons (Canaanite, Ugaritic, and Babylonian), so they are confirmable and not exclusive. My sources are Marvin Pope, James Pritchard, Philo of Byblos, Sanchunations, and Jerome Eubius. Sadena ( talk) 15:34, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
Ashart Ashtar Arsu Athtart Azizos Baal Berith Dagon Eshum Fo Hadad HLL/Hillel/Helel Hey-el-el Kothar Mannu Mot Salem Shahar Shalim Shapash Sidedon Yahweh Yam Yarikh Sadena ( talk) 15:42, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
I checked two texts online of the Amarna Letters and could not find a mention of Raphael in EA333, just "Rabi" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:6010:53F0:96A0:8943:296F:E494:232 ( talk) 12:38, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
@ Veritaes Unam: See [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] tgeorgescu ( talk) 11:04, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
References
Hint: the word El appeared before the Hebrew language appeared. So, the Strong Lexicon is not WP:RS about it. tgeorgescu ( talk) 12:50, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
El (deity) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
El (deity) is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive. | ||||||||||
|
This
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The vast majority of this article is unsourced, and appears to be original research. I don't want to just wholesale delete obviously, but isn't original research against Wiki Policy? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.250.10.14 ( talk) 16:26, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
The goal of the rules on Wikipedia is to have well-written articles, not to make it difficult to write or improve them. And accuracy in an article is more important than technicalities of editing. Direct references to source materials are allowed. The goal is to improve an article if it is clearly in need of it. Knowledge of a topic is not POV, and referring to either references or to direct sources is allowed unless there is some debate as to accuracy. Note the previous addition to this Talk page, the person said the whole article looked at that time like Original Research. It still contains some, and corrections with direct references to Source Material are better than inaccuracies. If an editor feels a change is mistaken or debatable, then maybe adding "Citation needed" would be preferable to simply undoing major corrective work by another editor. Misty MH ( talk) 23:35, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
I teach this subject, in a state university. I can't presume to judge the sections connecting El with Greek myth. That's outside my area of expertise. Otherwise, the article is a really admirable summary of contemporary scholarship, as developed in the last twenty years, in standard texts like Mark S. Smith, The Early History of God: Yahweh and the other Deities in Israel, 2nd ed. (Eerdmans: Grand Rapids and Cambridge, UK, 2002) or any of William G. Dever's books. I will recommend it to my students. It's not "original research" but it sure could use some sources. This was a lot of work to write, and perhaps the principal writer prayed this article would fly as it is, without him or her going through the tedious labor of typing in quotes, page numbers and sources. It certainly shouldn't be deleted, but it does need help. Profhum ( talk) 03:10, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
This was added by [1] and never sourced, just changed - as it was today. I spent some time trying to source it, but gave up when I found the Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible which says on p. 1254 [2] "Cuneiform texts from Ebla provide clues to its pantheon of ca. 40 principal deities including Kura (principal god of the city), Hadad (storm-god). Pagan (lord of the region), Rashap (god of the underworld), Adamma (underworld goddess and spouse of Rashap), Ishara (principal goddess of the city), Ishtar (goddess of love and war), and Idabal (god associated with the Orontes Valley)." It doesn't say El wasn't mention, but it certainly doesn't suggest El was a major god or at the top of any list. Dougweller ( talk) 13:34, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
From the attributes of this deity it can be deducted that 'Poseidon' is identical to: 'Neptune', and also to the Semitic: 'Leviatan', as a being living or staying in the depth of the sea darkness, this may have been one of the reasons for Hebrews withdrawing from sailoring. (Deity would come from the proto-european: 'Dyaus', meaning originally: 'the brightness' ('Diamond= the bright gem'), 'the force', 'the power', that in the end may have transformed into the Greek: 'Theos', the Latin: 'Deus', and cognates: 'Zeus', 'Jupiter = dyaus pitar', and its derivatives; in the real world, 'Zeus' was identical to 'Apollion', that had an original identification as a solar cult; 'Deity' may have no other linked attributes, but 'Divinity', as in the cognate Sanskrit word: 'Deva', would be a word restricted for good doers or beings favourable or friendly to mankind). This is a working sketch, additions and precise references welcome.-- Jgrosay ( talk) 13:22, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Jgrosay, you display direct bias in that statement. You would be correct, if however the hebrew bible, the old testament, and various hebrew individuals and location names refer to "God" as "El" or "Elohim". The comparison is not in that they are cognates at all, but in that they were related culturally, or identical culturally. That is a far more relevant comparison than claiming that for example "Perun" is the same deity as "Thor", because that would be purely based on theological opinion, and not on cultural and linguistic reality in the case of "El" and "Yahweh". That being said, it's pointless to try and sweep this up, or attempt to present it in a different light, because that said deity has an origin in culture and history is the only thing that keeps it relevant in terms of an encyclopedia or dictionary. People who are impartial to the religion in question are not concerned with the adherents beliefs and opinions surrounding the culture of it other than the classification of sects and movements, in other words it could be relevant to note that jews or christians may disagree with that analysis or overview. 107.11.136.170 ( talk) 20:40, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
Added link to Enlil at See Also, since Enlil's "See Also" directs to here. The Enlil page has the description about the Canaanite spelling of Elil, thus El.-- Craxd ( talk) 16:48, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
The lead stated the following: "Specific deities known as El or Il include the supreme god of the Canaanite religion,[4] the supreme god of the Mesopotamian Semites in the pre-Sargonic period,[5] and the God of the Hebrew Bible."
My issue w/ that phrasing is that according to the Wikipedia article on God (and its sources), there are "many different conceptions of God" not limited to the Hebrew God, but that phrasing implies the opposite.
I have reworded the lead so it reads: "Specific deities known as El or Il include the supreme god of the Canaanite religion,[4] the supreme god of the Mesopotamian Semites in the pre-Sargonic period,[5] and the god of the Hebrew Bible, all referring to different concepts of God.", which is correct. The former phrasing implied that God may only refer to the Hebrew God and not the other Gods which is incorrect. Israell ( talk) 11:07, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
Doug Weller, does the El (deity) article give any source for this: "and the God of the Hebrew Bible."? No. Why is that phrasing more correct than the one I'm suggesting? I have simply reworded the lead so God applies to all three mentioned gods. Israell ( talk) 11:19, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
No, it's not an opinion. It is a very well-documented fact that there are many concepts of God in different belief systems. Israell ( talk) 12:08, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
I am not disputing that El is one of the names of the "God of the Hebrew Bible". Jytdog, Doug Weller, are you implying that God can only refer to the Hebrew God? Israell ( talk) 15:20, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
I have found this article on God, and it mentions the Canaanite deity El: http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/God . This second article mentions the Mesopotamian concepts of God: http://urantia-book.org/newbook/ub/ppr096_7.html .
As I explained, God does not only refer to the Hebrew God. God is a very broad concept. Any deity that one sees as the "Supreme God" or "Supreme Being" fits that concept. Some Pagans do believe in "the Goddess and the God" — that's God! Sikhs believe in one God (as Sikhism is a monotheistic religion) — that's God! Theistic Buddhists also have a concept of God — that's God! Hindus (of different sects) believe in many Gods and acknowledge Ishwara as the Supreme (Cosmic) Being — that's God! Voodooists believe in a Supreme God — that's God! I had no idea such a simple, sensical change would require so many explanations.
Yes, that's the problem. The lead implies that God can only refer to the Hebrew deity. Making it a small g would at least give it some semblance of unbiasedness. Israell ( talk) 16:16, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
Jytdog, are you still watching this article? Undid revision by 2601:8c:4401:678f:558c:6536:b81:44b7. Consensus was reached for "the god of the Hebrew Bible" (small 'g'). Israell ( talk) 18:28, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
What I read in the text was that he is the creator of the gods and humans, but some sources also say creator of the earth and the universe. Is there a authentic reference for that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.244.80.45 ( talk) 12:41, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
At Talk:Wahab El Yahiz an editor argues that El is a Sabaean god, and Almaqah seems to be saying the same thing. Is this correct? Doug Weller talk 05:22, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
@ User:Doug Weller; you can read this, it is an English source. [1] Ecoboy90 ( talk) 09:15, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Well, the writer is Yoel Natan. He seems to already be used in Wikipedia, as a source for the articles on the Expedition of Kurz bin Jabir Al-Fihri, on Islam by country, on Umm Nidal, on Takbir, on Mangalorean Catholics, and on Navel in popular culture. Dimadick ( talk) 21:11, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
References
“In some places, especially in Psalm 29, Yahweh is clearly envisioned as a storm god, something not true of Ēl so far as we know (although true of his son, Ba'al Hadad). It is Yahweh who is prophesied to one day battle Leviathan the serpent, and slay the dragon in the sea in Isaiah 27:1. The slaying of the serpent in myth is a deed attributed to both Ba’al Hadad and ‘Anat in the Ugaritic texts, but not to Ēl.”
It claims Yahweh was a storm god in theses psalms. But there is no sources cited about what scholars interpret theses psalms. It only cites the psalms but doesn’t mention scholars interpretation of them. CycoMa ( talk) 03:54, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
I've done some research into the canaanite gods, and while I've found reason to believe that Yahweh was a son of El, but while I've found evidence of the connection between Michael and Mannu-ki-ili, I haven't found any evidence that he was a son of El. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nayerb ( talk • contribs) 18:15, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
Unless there is an objection, I'm going to overhaul the list of the Sons of El. In addition to increasing the list from 14 to 25, i will be removing the Ugaritic designation and the question marks. These gods appear as Sons of El in multiple pantheons (Canaanite, Ugaritic, and Babylonian), so they are confirmable and not exclusive. My sources are Marvin Pope, James Pritchard, Philo of Byblos, Sanchunations, and Jerome Eubius. Sadena ( talk) 15:34, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
Ashart Ashtar Arsu Athtart Azizos Baal Berith Dagon Eshum Fo Hadad HLL/Hillel/Helel Hey-el-el Kothar Mannu Mot Salem Shahar Shalim Shapash Sidedon Yahweh Yam Yarikh Sadena ( talk) 15:42, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
I checked two texts online of the Amarna Letters and could not find a mention of Raphael in EA333, just "Rabi" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:6010:53F0:96A0:8943:296F:E494:232 ( talk) 12:38, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
@ Veritaes Unam: See [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] tgeorgescu ( talk) 11:04, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
References
Hint: the word El appeared before the Hebrew language appeared. So, the Strong Lexicon is not WP:RS about it. tgeorgescu ( talk) 12:50, 11 November 2023 (UTC)