The Urantia Book

Settings

Reading
Theme
Text size
Line spacing

Typeface

Width
Alignment
Show
Listening

Kept in this browser only.

Read through

Jews (ancient Hebrews)

34 paragraphs · about 15 minutes

Every paragraph the index cites under Jews (ancient Hebrews), once, in the order of the book. Beside each stand the entries that cite it.

45:4.1412. Moses, the eman­ci­pa­tor of a rem­nant of the sub­merged vi­o­let race and the in­sti­ga­tor of the re­vival of the wor­ship of the Uni­ver­sal Fa­ther un­der the name of “The God of Is­rael.”

69:2.5La­bor, the ef­forts of de­sign, dis­tin­guishes man from the beast, whose ex­er­tions are largely in­stinc­tive. The ne­ces­sity for la­bor is man’s paramount bless­ing. The Prince’s staff all worked; they did much to en­no­ble phys­i­cal la­bor on Uran­tia. Adam was a gar­dener; the God of the He­brews la­bored—he was the cre­ator and up­holder of all things. The He­brews were the first tribe to put a su­preme pre­mium on in­dus­try; they were the first peo­ple to de­cree that “he who does not work shall not eat.” But many of the re­li­gions of the world re­verted to the early ideal of idle­ness. Jupiter was a rev­eler, and Bud­dha be­came a re­flec­tive devo­tee of leisure.

69:4.3A fe­tish was used to stand guard over the de­posits of goods for silent barter. Such mar­ket places were se­cure against theft; noth­ing would be re­moved ex­cept by barter or pur­chase; with a fe­tish on guard the goods were al­ways safe. The early traders were scrupu­lously hon­est within their own tribes but re­garded it as all right to cheat dis­tant strangers. Even the early He­brews rec­og­nized a sep­a­rate code of ethics in their deal­ings with the gen­tiles.

69:8.3En­slave­ment was a for­ward step in the mer­ci­ful treat­ment of war cap­tives. The am­bush of Ai, with the whole­sale slaugh­ter of men, women, and chil­dren, only the king be­ing saved to grat­ify the con­queror’s van­ity, is a faith­ful pic­ture of the bar­baric slaugh­ter prac­ticed by even sup­pos­edly civ­i­lized peo­ples. The raid upon Og, the king of Bashan, was equally bru­tal and ef­fec­tive. The He­brews “ut­terly de­stroyed” their en­e­mies, tak­ing all their prop­erty as spoils. They put all cities un­der trib­ute on pain of the “de­struc­tion of all males.” But many of the con­tem­po­rary tribes, those hav­ing less tribal ego­tism, had long since be­gun to prac­tice the adop­tion of su­pe­rior cap­tives.

69:8.4The hunter, like the Amer­i­can red man, did not en­slave. He ei­ther adopted or killed his cap­tives. Slav­ery was not preva­lent among the pas­toral peo­ples, for they needed few la­bor­ers. In war the herders made a prac­tice of killing all men cap­tives and tak­ing as slaves only the women and chil­dren. The Mo­saic code con­tained spe­cific di­rec­tions for mak­ing wives of these women cap­tives. If not sat­is­fac­tory, they could be sent away, but the He­brews were not al­lowed to sell such re­jected con­sorts as slaves—that was at least one ad­vance in civ­i­liza­tion. Though the so­cial stan­dards of the He­brews were crude, they were far above those of the sur­round­ing tribes.

70:1.15Al­ways these olden tribes made war at the bid­ding of their gods, at the be­hest of their chiefs or med­i­cine men. The He­brews be­lieved in such a “God of bat­tles”; and the nar­ra­tive of their raid on the Mid­i­an­ites is a typ­i­cal recital of the atro­cious cru­elty of the an­cient tribal wars; this as­sault, with its slaugh­ter of all the males and the later killing of all male chil­dren and all women who were not vir­gins, would have done honor to the mores of a tribal chief­tain of two hun­dred thou­sand years ago. And all this was ex­e­cuted in the “name of the Lord God of Is­rael.”

70:3.8In later times, blood di­luted with red wine was used, and even­tu­ally wine alone was drunk to seal the adop­tion cer­e­mony, which was sig­ni­fied in the touch­ing of the wine cups and con­sum­mated by the swal­low­ing of the bev­er­age. The He­brews em­ployed a mod­i­fied form of this adop­tion cer­e­mony. Their Arab an­ces­tors made use of the oath taken while the hand of the can­di­date rested upon the gen­er­a­tive or­gan of the tribal na­tive. The He­brews treated adopted aliens kindly and fra­ter­nally. “The stranger that dwells with you shall be as one born among you, and you shall love him as your­self.”

70:11.2Law is al­ways at first neg­a­tive and pro­hibitive; in ad­vanc­ing civ­i­liza­tions it be­comes in­creas­ingly pos­i­tive and di­rec­tive. Early so­ci­ety op­er­ated neg­a­tively, grant­ing the in­di­vid­ual the right to live by im­pos­ing upon all oth­ers the com­mand, “you shall not kill.” Ev­ery grant of rights or lib­erty to the in­di­vid­ual in­volves cur­tail­ment of the lib­er­ties of all oth­ers, and this is ef­fected by the taboo, prim­i­tive law. The whole idea of the taboo is in­her­ently neg­a­tive, for prim­i­tive so­ci­ety was wholly neg­a­tive in its or­ga­ni­za­tion, and the early ad­min­is­tra­tion of jus­tice con­sisted in the en­force­ment of the taboos. But orig­i­nally these laws ap­plied only to fel­low tribes­men, as is il­lus­trated by the later-day He­brews, who had a dif­fer­ent code of ethics for deal­ing with the gen­tiles.

80:8.2These de­scen­dants of An­don were dis­persed through most of the moun­tain­ous re­gions of cen­tral and south­east­ern Eu­rope. They were of­ten re­in­forced by ar­rivals from Asia Mi­nor, which re­gion they oc­cu­pied in con­sid­er­able strength. The an­cient Hit­tites stemmed di­rectly from the An­don­ite stock; their pale skins and broad heads were typ­i­cal of that race. This strain was car­ried in Abra­ham’s an­ces­try and con­tributed much to the char­ac­ter­is­tic fa­cial ap­pear­ance of his later Jew­ish de­scen­dants who, while hav­ing a cul­ture and re­li­gion de­rived from the And­ites, spoke a very dif­fer­ent lan­guage. Their tongue was dis­tinctly An­don­ite.

84:5.6The early Chi­nese and the Greeks treated women bet­ter than did most sur­round­ing peo­ples. But the He­brews were ex­ceed­ingly dis­trust­ful of them. In the Oc­ci­dent woman has had a dif­fi­cult climb un­der the Pauline doc­trines which be­came at­tached to Chris­tian­ity, al­though Chris­tian­ity did ad­vance the mores by im­pos­ing more strin­gent sex obli­ga­tions upon man. Woman’s es­tate is lit­tle short of hope­less un­der the pe­cu­liar degra­da­tion which at­taches to her in Mo­hammedanism, and she fares even worse un­der the teach­ings of sev­eral other Ori­en­tal re­li­gions.

85:3.3The He­brews wor­shiped ser­pents down to the days of King Hezekiah, and the Hin­dus still main­tain friendly re­la­tions with their house snakes. The Chi­nese wor­ship of the dragon is a sur­vival of the snake cults. The wis­dom of the ser­pent was a sym­bol of Greek med­i­cine and is still em­ployed as an em­blem by mod­ern physi­cians. The art of snake charm­ing has been handed down from the days of the fe­male shamans of the snake love cult, who, as the re­sult of daily snake bites, be­came im­mune, in fact, be­came gen­uine venom ad­dicts and could not get along with­out this poi­son.

85:4.2Many things and nu­mer­ous events have func­tioned as re­li­gious stim­uli to dif­fer­ent peo­ples in dif­fer­ent ages. A rain­bow is yet wor­shiped by many of the hill tribes of In­dia. In both In­dia and Africa the rain­bow is thought to be a gi­gan­tic ce­les­tial snake; He­brews and Chris­tians re­gard it as “the bow of prom­ise.” Like­wise, in­flu­ences re­garded as benef­i­cent in one part of the world may be looked upon as ma­lig­nant in other re­gions. The east wind is a god in South Amer­ica, for it brings rain; in In­dia it is a devil be­cause it brings dust and causes drought. The an­cient Bed­ou­ins be­lieved that a na­ture spirit pro­duced the sand whirls, and even in the times of Moses be­lief in na­ture spir­its was strong enough to in­sure their per­pet­u­a­tion in He­brew the­ol­ogy as an­gels of fire, wa­ter, and air.

86:4.8Al­most ev­ery group had a dif­fer­ent idea re­gard­ing the des­tiny of the ghost soul. The Greeks be­lieved that weak men must have weak souls; so they in­vented Hades as a fit place for the re­cep­tion of such ane­mic souls; these un­ro­bust spec­i­mens were also sup­posed to have shorter shad­ows. The early And­ites thought their ghosts re­turned to the an­ces­tral home­lands. The Chi­nese and Egyp­tians once be­lieved that soul and body re­mained to­gether. Among the Egyp­tians this led to care­ful tomb con­struc­tion and ef­forts at body preser­va­tion. Even mod­ern peo­ples seek to ar­rest the de­cay of the dead. The He­brews con­ceived that a phan­tom replica of the in­di­vid­ual went down to Sheol; it could not re­turn to the land of the liv­ing. They did make that im­por­tant ad­vance in the doc­trine of the evo­lu­tion of the soul.

86:5.11All down through the ages men have stood in awe of the ap­pari­tions of the night sea­son, and the He­brews were no ex­cep­tion. They truly be­lieved that God spoke to them in dreams, de­spite the in­junc­tions of Moses against this idea. And Moses was right, for or­di­nary dreams are not the meth­ods em­ployed by the per­son­al­i­ties of the spir­i­tual world when they seek to com­mu­ni­cate with ma­te­rial be­ings.

87:5.5The Ko­ran con­tains a whole chap­ter de­voted to the evil eye and magic spells, and the Jews fully be­lieved in them. The whole phal­lic cult grew up as a de­fense against the evil eye. The or­gans of re­pro­duc­tion were thought to be the only fe­tish which could ren­der it pow­er­less. The evil eye gave ori­gin to the first su­per­sti­tions re­spect­ing pre­na­tal mark­ing of chil­dren, ma­ter­nal im­pres­sions, and the cult was at one time well-nigh uni­ver­sal.

88:1.5When an­i­mals be­came fe­tishes, there en­sued the taboos on eat­ing the flesh of the fe­tish an­i­mal. Apes and mon­keys, be­cause of re­sem­blance to man, early be­came fe­tish an­i­mals; later, snakes, birds, and swine were also sim­i­larly re­garded. At one time the cow was a fe­tish, the milk be­ing taboo while the exc­reta were highly es­teemed. The ser­pent was revered in Pales­tine, es­pe­cially by the Phoeni­cians, who, along with the Jews, con­sid­ered it to be the mouth­piece of evil spir­its. Even many mod­erns be­lieve in the charm pow­ers of rep­tiles. From Ara­bia on through In­dia to the snake dance of the Mo­qui tribe of red men the ser­pent has been revered.

88:2.3The hearth—fire­place—be­came more or less of a fe­tish, a sa­cred spot. The shrines and tem­ples were at first fe­tish places be­cause the dead were buried there. The fe­tish hut of the He­brews was el­e­vated by Moses to that place where it har­bored a super­fe­tish, the then ex­is­tent con­cept of the law of God. But the Is­raelites never gave up the pe­cu­liar Ca­naan­ite be­lief in the stone al­tar: “And this stone which I have set up as a pil­lar shall be God’s house.” They truly be­lieved that the spirit of their God dwelt in such stone al­tars, which were in re­al­ity fe­tishes.

89:1.5The early food taboos orig­i­nated in fet­ish­ism and to­tem­ism. The swine was sa­cred to the Phoeni­cians, the cow to the Hin­dus. The Egyp­tian taboo on pork has been per­pet­u­ated by the He­braic and Is­lamic faiths. A vari­ant of the food taboo was the be­lief that a preg­nant woman could think so much about a cer­tain food that the child, when born, would be the echo of that food. Such viands would be taboo to the child.

89:3.4These olden ideas of self-dis­ci­pline em­braced flog­ging and all sorts of phys­i­cal tor­ture. The priests of the mother cult were es­pe­cially ac­tive in teach­ing the virtue of phys­i­cal suf­fer­ing, set­ting the ex­am­ple by sub­mit­ting them­selves to cas­tra­tion. The He­brews, Hin­dus, and Bud­dhists were earnest devo­tees of this doc­trine of phys­i­cal hu­mil­i­a­tion.

92:5.6Many races have con­ceived of their lead­ers as be­ing born of vir­gins; their ca­reers are lib­er­ally sprin­kled with mirac­u­lous episodes, and their re­turn is al­ways ex­pected by their re­spec­tive groups. In cen­tral Asia the tribes­men still look for the re­turn of Genghis Khan; in Ti­bet, China, and In­dia it is Bud­dha; in Is­lam it is Mo­hammed; among the Amerinds it was Hes­unanin Ona­mo­na­lon­ton; with the He­brews it was, in gen­eral, Adam’s re­turn as a ma­te­rial ruler. In Baby­lon the god Mar­duk was a per­pet­u­a­tion of the Adam leg­end, the son-of-God idea, the con­nect­ing link be­tween man and God. Fol­low­ing the ap­pear­ance of Adam on earth, so-called sons of God were com­mon among the world races.

92:5.7–10 · four paragraphs not cited here ·

92:5.7But re­gard­less of the su­per­sti­tious awe in which they were of­ten held, it re­mains a fact that these teach­ers were the tem­po­ral per­son­al­ity ful­crums on which the levers of re­vealed truth de­pended for the ad­vance­ment of the moral­ity, phi­los­o­phy, and re­li­gion of man­kind.

92:5.8There have been hun­dreds upon hun­dreds of re­li­gious lead­ers in the mil­lion-year hu­man his­tory of Uran­tia from On­a­gar to Guru Nanak. Dur­ing this time there have been many ebbs and flows of the tide of re­li­gious truth and spir­i­tual faith, and each re­nais­sance of Uran­tian re­li­gion has, in the past, been iden­ti­fied with the life and teach­ings of some re­li­gious leader. In con­sid­er­ing the teach­ers of re­cent times, it may prove help­ful to group them into the seven ma­jor re­li­gious epochs of post-Adamic Uran­tia:

92:5.91. The Sethite pe­riod. The Sethite priests, as re­gen­er­ated un­der the lead­er­ship of Amo­sad, be­came the great post-Adamic teach­ers. They func­tioned through­out the lands of the And­ites, and their in­flu­ence per­sisted longest among the Greeks, Sume­ri­ans, and Hin­dus. Among the lat­ter they have con­tin­ued to the pres­ent time as the Brah­mans of the Hindu faith. The Sethites and their fol­low­ers never en­tirely lost the Trin­ity con­cept re­vealed by Adam.

92:5.102. Era of the Mel­chiz­e­dek mis­sion­ar­ies. Uran­tia re­li­gion was in no small mea­sure re­gen­er­ated by the ef­forts of those teach­ers who were com­mis­sioned by Ma­chi­venta Mel­chiz­e­dek when he lived and taught at Salem al­most two thou­sand years be­fore Christ. These mis­sion­ar­ies pro­claimed faith as the price of fa­vor with God, and their teach­ings, though un­pro­duc­tive of any im­me­di­ately ap­pear­ing re­li­gions, nev­er­the­less formed the foun­da­tions on which later teach­ers of truth were to build the re­li­gions of Uran­tia.

92:5.113. The post-Mel­chiz­e­dek era. Though Amen­emope and Ikh­na­ton both taught in this pe­riod, the out­stand­ing re­li­gious ge­nius of the post-Mel­chiz­e­dek era was the leader of a group of Lev­an­tine Bed­ou­ins and the founder of the He­brew re­li­gion—Moses. Moses taught mono­the­ism. Said he: “Hear, O Is­rael, the Lord our God is one God.” “The Lord he is God. There is none be­side him.” He per­sis­tently sought to up­root the rem­nants of the ghost cult among his peo­ple, even pre­scrib­ing the death penalty for its prac­ti­tion­ers. The mono­the­ism of Moses was adul­ter­ated by his suc­ces­sors, but in later times they did re­turn to many of his teach­ings. The great­ness of Moses lies in his wis­dom and sagac­ity. Other men have had greater con­cepts of God, but no one man was ever so suc­cess­ful in in­duc­ing large num­bers of peo­ple to adopt such ad­vanced be­liefs.

93:9.9The na­tional ego of the Jews was tremen­dously de­pressed by the Baby­lo­nian cap­tiv­ity. In their re­ac­tion against na­tional in­fe­ri­or­ity they swung to the other ex­treme of na­tional and racial ego­tism, in which they dis­torted and per­verted their tra­di­tions with the view of ex­alt­ing them­selves above all races as the cho­sen peo­ple of God; and hence they care­fully edited all their rec­ords for the pur­pose of rais­ing Abra­ham and their other na­tional lead­ers high up above all other per­sons, not ex­cept­ing Mel­chiz­e­dek him­self. The He­brew scribes there­fore de­stroyed ev­ery rec­ord of these mo­men­tous times which they could find, pre­serv­ing only the nar­ra­tive of the meet­ing of Abra­ham and Mel­chiz­e­dek af­ter the bat­tle of Sid­dim, which they deemed re­flected great honor upon Abra­ham.

95:1.2But the cus­tom of the early Adamite peo­ples in hon­or­ing the sev­enth day of the week never com­pletely dis­ap­peared in Mes­o­po­ta­mia. Only, dur­ing the Mel­chiz­e­dek era, the sev­enth day was re­garded as the worst of bad luck. It was taboo-rid­den; it was un­law­ful to go on a jour­ney, cook food, or make a fire on the evil sev­enth day. The Jews car­ried back to Pales­tine many of the Mes­o­po­ta­mian taboos which they had found rest­ing on the Baby­lo­nian ob­ser­vance of the sev­enth day, the Sha­bat­tum.

95:2.1The orig­i­nal Mel­chiz­e­dek teach­ings re­ally took their deep­est root in Egypt, from where they sub­se­quently spread to Eu­rope. The evo­lu­tion­ary re­li­gion of the Nile val­ley was pe­ri­od­i­cally aug­mented by the ar­rival of su­pe­rior strains of Nod­ite, Adamite, and later And­ite peo­ples of the Eu­phrates val­ley. From time to time, many of the Egyp­tian civil ad­min­is­tra­tors were Sume­ri­ans. As In­dia in these days har­bored the high­est mix­ture of the world races, so Egypt fos­tered the most thor­oughly blended type of re­li­gious phi­los­o­phy to be found on Uran­tia, and from the Nile val­ley it spread to many parts of the world. The Jews re­ceived much of their idea of the cre­ation of the world from the Baby­lo­ni­ans, but they de­rived the con­cept of di­vine Prov­i­dence from the Egyp­tians.

95:2.2–9 · eight paragraphs not cited here ·

95:2.2It was po­lit­i­cal and moral, rather than philo­sophic or re­li­gious, ten­den­cies that ren­dered Egypt more fa­vor­able to the Salem teach­ing than Mes­o­po­ta­mia. Each tribal leader in Egypt, af­ter fight­ing his way to the throne, sought to per­pet­u­ate his dy­nasty by pro­claim­ing his tribal god the orig­i­nal de­ity and cre­ator of all other gods. In this way the Egyp­tians grad­u­ally got used to the idea of a super­god, a step­ping­stone to the later doc­trine of a uni­ver­sal cre­ator De­ity. The idea of mono­the­ism wa­vered back and forth in Egypt for many cen­turies, the be­lief in one God al­ways gain­ing ground but never quite dom­i­nat­ing the evolv­ing con­cepts of poly­the­ism.

95:2.3For ages the Egyp­tian peo­ples had been given to the wor­ship of na­ture gods; more par­tic­u­larly did each of the two-score sep­a­rate tribes have a spe­cial group god, one wor­ship­ing the bull, an­other the lion, a third the ram, and so on. Still ear­lier they had been totem tribes, very much like the Amerinds.

95:2.4In time the Egyp­tians ob­served that dead bod­ies placed in brick­less graves were pre­served—em­balmed—by the ac­tion of the soda-im­preg­nated sand, while those buried in brick vaults de­cayed. These ob­ser­va­tions led to those ex­per­i­ments which re­sulted in the later prac­tice of em­balm­ing the dead. The Egyp­tians be­lieved that preser­va­tion of the body fa­cil­i­tated one’s pas­sage through the fu­ture life. That the in­di­vid­ual might prop­erly be iden­ti­fied in the dis­tant fu­ture af­ter the de­cay of the body, they placed a burial statue in the tomb along with the corpse, carv­ing a like­ness on the cof­fin. The mak­ing of these burial stat­ues led to great im­prove­ment in Egyp­tian art.

95:2.5For cen­turies the Egyp­tians placed their faith in tombs as the safe­guard of the body and of con­se­quent plea­sur­able sur­vival af­ter death. The later evo­lu­tion of mag­i­cal prac­tices, while bur­den­some to life from the cra­dle to the grave, most ef­fec­tu­ally de­liv­ered them from the re­li­gion of the tombs. The priests would in­scribe the coffins with charm texts which were be­lieved to be pro­tec­tion against a “man’s hav­ing his heart taken away from him in the nether world.” Pres­ently a di­verse as­sort­ment of these mag­i­cal texts was col­lected and pre­served as The Book of the Dead. But in the Nile val­ley mag­i­cal rit­ual early be­came in­volved with the realms of con­science and char­ac­ter to a de­gree not of­ten at­tained by the rit­u­als of those days. And sub­se­quently these eth­i­cal and moral ide­als, rather than elab­o­rate tombs, were de­pended upon for sal­va­tion.

95:2.6The su­per­sti­tions of these times are well il­lus­trated by the gen­eral be­lief in the ef­fi­cacy of spit­tle as a heal­ing agent, an idea which had its ori­gin in Egypt and spread there­from to Ara­bia and Mes­o­po­ta­mia. In the leg­endary bat­tle of Ho­rus with Set the young god lost his eye, but af­ter Set was van­quished, this eye was re­stored by the wise god Thoth, who spat upon the wound and healed it.

95:2.7The Egyp­tians long be­lieved that the stars twin­kling in the night sky rep­re­sented the sur­vival of the souls of the wor­thy dead; other sur­vivors they thought were ab­sorbed into the sun. Dur­ing a cer­tain pe­riod, so­lar ven­er­a­tion be­came a species of an­ces­tor wor­ship. The slop­ing en­trance pas­sage of the great pyra­mid pointed di­rectly to­ward the Pole Star so that the soul of the king, when emerg­ing from the tomb, could go straight to the sta­tion­ary and es­tab­lished con­stel­la­tions of the fixed stars, the sup­posed abode of the kings.

95:2.8When the oblique rays of the sun were ob­served pen­e­trat­ing earth­ward through an aper­ture in the clouds, it was be­lieved that they be­to­kened the let­ting down of a ce­les­tial stair­way whereon the king and other righ­teous souls might as­cend. “King Pepi has put down his ra­di­ance as a stair­way un­der his feet whereon to as­cend to his mother.”

95:2.9When Mel­chiz­e­dek ap­peared in the flesh, the Egyp­tians had a re­li­gion far above that of the sur­round­ing peo­ples. They be­lieved that a dis­em­bod­ied soul, if prop­erly armed with magic for­mu­las, could evade the in­ter­ven­ing evil spir­its and make its way to the judg­ment hall of Osiris, where, if in­no­cent of “mur­der, rob­bery, false­hood, adul­tery, theft, and self­ish­ness,” it would be ad­mit­ted to the realms of bliss. If this soul were weighed in the bal­ances and found want­ing, it would be con­signed to hell, to the De­vouress. And this was, rel­a­tively, an ad­vanced con­cept of a fu­ture life in com­par­i­son with the be­liefs of many sur­round­ing peo­ples.

95:2.10The con­cept of judg­ment in the here­after for the sins of one’s life in the flesh on earth was car­ried over into He­brew the­ol­ogy from Egypt. The word judg­ment ap­pears only once in the en­tire Book of He­brew Psalms, and that par­tic­u­lar psalm was writ­ten by an Egyp­tian.

95:3.1Al­though the cul­ture and re­li­gion of Egypt were chiefly de­rived from And­ite Mes­o­po­ta­mia and largely trans­mit­ted to sub­se­quent civ­i­liza­tions through the He­brews and Greeks, much, very much, of the so­cial and eth­i­cal ide­al­ism of the Egyp­tians arose in the val­ley of the Nile as a purely evo­lu­tion­ary de­vel­op­ment. Not­with­stand­ing the im­por­ta­tion of much truth and cul­ture of And­ite ori­gin, there evolved in Egypt more of moral cul­ture as a purely hu­man de­vel­op­ment than ap­peared by sim­i­lar nat­u­ral tech­niques in any other cir­cum­scribed area prior to the be­stowal of Mi­chael.

96:1.1The early Semites re­garded ev­ery­thing as be­ing in­dwelt by a spirit. There were spir­its of the an­i­mal and veg­etable worlds; an­nual spir­its, the lord of progeny; spir­its of fire, wa­ter, and air; a ver­i­ta­ble pan­theon of spir­its to be feared and wor­shiped. And the teach­ing of Mel­chiz­e­dek re­gard­ing a Uni­ver­sal Cre­ator never fully de­stroyed the be­lief in these sub­or­di­nate spir­its or na­ture gods.

96:2.3It was only af­ter the days of Ma­chi­venta Mel­chiz­e­dek and Abra­ham that cer­tain tribes of Semites, be­cause of their pe­cu­liar re­li­gious be­liefs, were called the chil­dren of Is­rael and later on He­brews, Jews, and the “cho­sen peo­ple.” Abra­ham was not the racial fa­ther of all the He­brews; he was not even the pro­gen­i­tor of all the Bed­ouin Semites who were held cap­tive in Egypt. True, his off­spring, com­ing up out of Egypt, did form the nu­cleus of the later Jew­ish peo­ple, but the vast ma­jor­ity of the men and women who be­came in­cor­po­rated into the clans of Is­rael had never so­journed in Egypt. They were merely fel­low no­mads who chose to fol­low the lead­er­ship of Moses as the chil­dren of Abra­ham and their Semite as­so­ciates from Egypt jour­neyed through north­ern Ara­bia.

Paper 97, Evolution of the God Concept Among the Hebrews, is cited whole. Read it in the reader ›

97:0.1The spir­i­tual lead­ers of the He­brews did what no oth­ers be­fore them had ever suc­ceeded in do­ing—they dean­thro­po­mor­phized their God con­cept with­out con­vert­ing it into an ab­strac­tion of De­ity com­pre­hen­si­ble only to philoso­phers. Even com­mon peo­ple were able to re­gard the ma­tured con­cept of Yah­weh as a Fa­ther, if not of the in­di­vid­ual, at least of the race.

97:2.1In the tenth cen­tury be­fore Christ the He­brew na­tion be­came di­vided into two king­doms. In both of these po­lit­i­cal di­vi­sions many truth teach­ers en­deav­ored to stem the re­ac­tionary tide of spir­i­tual deca­dence that had set in, and which con­tin­ued dis­as­trously af­ter the war of sep­a­ra­tion. But these ef­forts to ad­vance the He­braic re­li­gion did not pros­per un­til that de­ter­mined and fear­less war­rior for righ­teous­ness, Eli­jah, be­gan his teach­ing. Eli­jah re­stored to the north­ern king­dom a con­cept of God com­pa­ra­ble with that held in the days of Samuel. Eli­jah had lit­tle op­por­tu­nity to pre­sent an ad­vanced con­cept of God; he was kept busy, as Samuel had been be­fore him, over­throw­ing the al­tars of Baal and de­mol­ish­ing the idols of false gods. And he car­ried for­ward his re­forms in the face of the op­po­si­tion of an idol­a­trous monarch; his task was even more gi­gan­tic and dif­fi­cult than that which Samuel had faced.

97:9.1There never were twelve tribes of the Is­raelites—only three or four tribes set­tled in Pales­tine. The He­brew na­tion came into be­ing as the re­sult of the union of the so-called Is­raelites and the Ca­naan­ites. “And the chil­dren of Is­rael dwelt among the Ca­naan­ites. And they took their daugh­ters to be their wives and gave their daugh­ters to the sons of the Ca­naan­ites.” The He­brews never drove the Ca­naan­ites out of Pales­tine, not­with­stand­ing that the priests’ rec­ord of these things un­hesi­tat­ingly de­clared that they did.

98:3.2In the great mono­the­is­tic re­nais­sance of Mel­chiz­e­dek’s gospel dur­ing the sixth cen­tury be­fore Christ, too few of the Salem mis­sion­ar­ies pen­e­trated Italy, and those who did were un­able to over­come the in­flu­ence of the rapidly spread­ing Etr­uscan priest­hood with its new galaxy of gods and tem­ples, all of which be­came or­ga­nized into the Ro­man state re­li­gion. This re­li­gion of the Latin tribes was not triv­ial and ve­nal like that of the Greeks, nei­ther was it aus­tere and tyran­ni­cal like that of the He­brews; it con­sisted for the most part in the ob­ser­vance of mere forms, vows, and taboos.

121:1.1Je­sus did not come to this world dur­ing an age of spir­i­tual deca­dence; at the time of his birth Uran­tia was ex­pe­ri­enc­ing such a re­vival of spir­i­tual think­ing and re­li­gious liv­ing as it had not known in all its pre­vi­ous post-Adamic his­tory nor has ex­pe­ri­enced in any era since. When Mi­chael in­car­nated on Uran­tia, the world pre­sented the most fa­vor­able con­di­tion for the Cre­ator Son’s be­stowal that had ever pre­vi­ously pre­vailed or has since ob­tained. In the cen­turies just prior to these times Greek cul­ture and the Greek lan­guage had spread over Oc­ci­dent and near Ori­ent, and the Jews, be­ing a Lev­an­tine race, in na­ture part Oc­ci­den­tal and part Ori­en­tal, were em­i­nently fit­ted to uti­lize such cul­tural and lin­guis­tic set­tings for the ef­fec­tive spread of a new re­li­gion to both East and West. These most fa­vor­able cir­cum­stances were fur­ther en­hanced by the tol­er­ant po­lit­i­cal rule of the Med­i­ter­ra­nean world by the Ro­mans.

121:2.1The Jews were a part of the older Semitic race, which also in­cluded the Baby­lo­ni­ans, the Phoeni­cians, and the more re­cent en­e­mies of Rome, the Carthagini­ans. Dur­ing the fore part of the first cen­tury af­ter Christ, the Jews were the most in­flu­en­tial group of the Semitic peo­ples, and they hap­pened to oc­cupy a pe­cu­liarly strate­gic ge­o­graphic po­si­tion in the world as it was at that time ruled and or­ga­nized for trade.

Onward

See Old Testament

See also Babylonian captivity; Jews

Cited alongside: religion, Moses, Phoenicians, Chinese, Egypt, Greece, Hinduism, Islam