Inadequacy of Modern Terminology

The issue of applying modern terminology to ancient conceptions of deity requires attention at the outset. Terms such as “monotheism,” “polytheism,” “henotheism,” and “monolatry” are regularly used when discussing ancient notions of deity. The definitions of each term at first appear straightforward. According to Dunne, monotheism means “belief in only one God” (note the capitalization). Polytheism in turn refers to “the worship and belief in many gods” (lower case). Henotheism is “worship centered on one God while recognizing the existence of others,” while monolatry describes “worship of one God without necessarily excluding the belief that others may exist.”

(For further details, see this article: Monotheism.)

The problem is that all these terms describe points of theology of the writers of the Hebrew Bible. As discussed briefly below, the Hebrew Bible affirms the existence of many אֱלֹהִים (elohim) (e.g., Psa 82:1, 6; Deut 32:17), while affirming the uniqueness of Yahweh among those elohim (Deut 4:35 [compare the definite article in Hebrew]; Neh 9:6). Among the elohim, only Yahweh deserves worship—even by the other elohim (Exod 20:3; Psa 29:1–2; 1 Sam 7:3). Biblical writers clearly saw Yahweh (the capitalized “God”) as “species unique” among the elohim, since they assign certain qualities to Yahweh that are reserved only for Him:

“Yahweh is all-powerful (Jer 32:17, 27; Pss 72:18; 115:3), the sovereign king over the other elohim (Psa 95:3; Dan 4:35; 1 Kgs 22:19), the creator of the other members of his host-council (Psa 148:1–5; Neh 9:6; compare Job 38:7; Deut 4:19–20; 17:3; 29:25–26; 32:17; Jas 1:17) and the lone elohim who deserves worship from the other elohim (Psa 29:1). In fact, Nehemiah 9:6 explicitly declares that Yahweh is unique—there is only one Yahweh (‘You alone are Yahweh’)” (Heiser, Unseen, 31).

Monotheism, so long considered unproblematic for describing biblical theology, does not address the uniqueness of Yahweh in the context of the divine plurality affirmed in the Hebrew Bible. Part of the problem is that monotheism was a term first coined in the 17th century, not as an antonym to polytheism, but to atheism (MacDonald, Deuteronomy, 1–21). Some scholars doubt the validity of henotheism with respect to biblical religion (MacIntosh, “Monolatry,” 811) since henotheism was a technical term coined “to designate a peculiar form of polytheism … [where] each god is, “at the time a real divinity, supreme and absolute” not limited by the powers of any other gods” (Yusa, “Henotheism,” 266). This does not align with Yahweh’s status in the Hebrew Bible.

A different approach to the “One and the Many” is needed, especially if the theology of the biblical writers is to be given a voice:

“A more coherent approach is to describe what Israelites believed about their God rather than trying to encapsulate that belief in a single word … Scholars should stop trying to define Israel’s religion with singular, imprecise modern terms and instead stick to describing what Israel believed” (Heiser, “Monotheism,” 28).

Polytheism likewise needs description. In an essay on monotheism and polytheism, Egyptologist and ancient religion scholar Jan Assmann delineates the crucial elements necessary for polytheism:

1. a cooperative cosmology (more than one deity creates and maintains the world);

2. a diversified, politicized cultus (important deities are worshiped in multiple locations, especially urban centers);

3. mythic, interactive biography (gods are known in relation to other gods) (Assmann, “Monotheism,” 17–20).

It is clear that despite the divine plurality language of the Hebrew Bible (Heiser, “Monotheism,” 1–18), the theology of the biblical writers does not endorse the sort of belief system Assmann outlines. Since the religious expressions of Israelites varied from adherence to the faith articulated by the biblical writers to the adoption of other gods, when this essay refers to the biblical conception of God, it does so with a focus on the uniqueness of Yahweh articulated in the ways noted above by the biblical writers. Other expressions of Israelite religion will be therefore referenced as heterodox. Lastly, polytheism cannot be considered as a conception of deity deriving from terms for deity, but requires the more comprehensive contexts noted by Assmann.