When Did Jesus Become God? 5 Startling Findings in the Gospels

Matthew, Mark, Luke and John offer differing views of Christ’s divinity. Some say he became divine at his baptism, others that he has always been one with God. Plus: Did the idea of the Virgin Mary come from a misunderstanding?

Jesus was crucified and came to be viewed as divine after his resurrection. But as time went on, the Gospel writers altered this view, offering different takes on when Jesus became one with God.

Icon of the Crucifixion by Andreas Pavias, second half of the 15th century

What did the earliest Christians believe? The first writings about Jesus reveal that his original followers thought that he became divine upon his resurrection. 

But that’s not a belief shared in all of the books of the New Testament. In fact, there was hardly a consensus among early followers. “Different Christians in different churches in different regions had different views of Jesus, almost from the get-go,” writes Bart D. Ehrman in the 2014 book How Jesus Became God: The Exaltation of a Jewish Preacher From Galilee. 

“If Jesus claimed to be equal with God,
wouldn’t the earlier Gospels have mentioned it? ”

---

Here are five surprising findings revealed in a study of the Gospels.

Early Christians believed Jesus became divine upon his resurrection — but in the earliest Gospel, Mark, the timeline had been moved back to his baptism.

Theophany, an icon of the Baptism of the Lord, 20th century

1. The Gospel of Mark doesn’t mention that Mary was a virgin, and declares that Jesus became divine only after being baptized. 

According to Mark, Jesus was fully human up until the point that John the Baptist baptizes him. Once this happens, the Spirit of God descends as a dove and a voice from the heavens declares, “You are my beloved son, in you I am well pleased” (Mark 1:9-11). 

It is only after this has happened that Jesus begins his own ministry, now one with God, and is able to perform miracles (walk on water, raise the dead), cast out demons and forgive sins.  

The author of Luke literally changed the words of God because the earlier view that Jesus became divine after being baptized had become a heresy.

The Baptism of Christ by Domenico Ghirlandaio, 1490

2. A passage in Luke was changed from its original to downplay the statement that Jesus became the Son of God at his baptism.

We don’t have any original documents of the New Testament. What we do have are copies made centuries later — many of which have been altered and differ from each other. One such passage about Jesus’ baptism in Luke tweaks what God says. “But in several of our old witnesses to the text, the voice says something else,” Ehrman writes. “It quotes Psalm 2:7: ‘You are my Son, today I have begotten you.’” 

Why make this change? Ehrman says that “when scribes were copying the texts of Luke in later centuries, the view that Jesus was made the Son [of God] at the baptism was considered not just inadequate, but heretical.” Jesus was always divine, and any other teaching needed to be suppressed — even if that’s what early Christians believed.

What if Mary wasn’t a virgin? The earliest mentions of her don’t say anything of the sort — and the concept only sprung up in Matthew with a bad translation.

The Creation of Man by Natalie Lennard, 2017

3. The Gospel of Matthew mentions the virgin birth — but this is a misinterpretation of an early prophecy.

The book of the Old Testament prophet Isaiah declares, “A virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and his name shall be called Immanuel” (Isaiah 7:14). Never mind that Jesus isn’t actually called Immanuel; the author must have made the connection because the name translates to “God Is With Us.” Turns out the quote isn’t actually about the coming messiah at all. 

To top it off, Matthew mentions the virgin birth because of a bad translation. The author read a Greek translation of Isaiah many centuries later. The original Hebrew word, alma, means “young woman” but it was translated with the Greek parthenos, which carries the connotation of a young woman who has never had sex. It’s this misinterpretation that leads Ehrman and other biblical scholars to believe that this is the origin of Mary becoming the Virgin. 

As time when on, Jesus’ divinity got earlier and earlier, until the last Gospel, John, states that he had always been one with God.

Jesus Christ by Cathy Dobson, 1994

4. It’s not until John, the latest of the Gospels, that Jesus is declared to have always existed as an equal to God.

The author of John doesn’t hold that Jesus was exalted into a divine state; he is the same as God and was his human incarnation on Earth for a few decades. This is the view of Jesus held today by most Christians — but it’s certainly not what his earliest followers, including the 12 Disciples, believed. As previously mentioned, they thought that Jesus became divine only after his resurrection and later ascension into Heaven. 

The Gospel of John declares that Jesus is the Word of God and was essential to Creation. The text deliberately calls to mind the opening lines of Genesis.

The ceiling fresco of Chiesa di Sant’Orsola in Como, Italy, painted by Giovanni Domenico Caresana, 1616

5. An even higher view of Christ is found in the Gospel of John: that Jesus is the Word of God — and, as such, is responsible for creating the world. 

The Gospel of John is the latest of the four, written in Greek 60 or so years after Jesus died, in a different part of the world — Ephesus, in modern-day Turkey. 

“For John,” Ehrman writes, “Jesus was an equal with God and even shared his name and his glory in his preincarnate state.”

Take John 5:17-18, one of many examples: “This was why the Jews sought all the more to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was also calling God his own Father, thereby making himself equal to God.”

Much discussion has taken place around the so-called Prologue of John, the first 18 verses of the book. It presents the most elevated view of Jesus’ divinity imaginable: “even before he appeared, he was the Logos of God himself, a being who was God, the one through whom the entire universe was created,” Ehrman explains. 

But if that was the case, and Jesus made such claims about himself, wouldn’t the earlier Gospels have mentioned it? There’s nothing to be found in Matthew, Mark or Luke, however. 

The four Gospel writers all have their own take on when Jesus became God.

Christ in mandorla with the Evangelists, from the Reichenau Illumination, early 11th century

Christians today tend not to take such a close look at the Gospels, not noticing the discrepancies and not aware of the historical evidence. It’s shocking to think that the form of Christianity practiced today doesn’t align with some of the views of the Four Gospels. John’s view of Jesus as one with (but somehow distinct from) God the Father has won out. But it seems as if it could easily have gone another way. –Wally

What Did the Earliest Christians Believe?

The original views of Christ differ significantly from current beliefs. No virgin birth, no divine status during his lifetime — instead, Jesus was a mortal like the rest of us, until God decided to resurrect him and he became the Son of God.

The first Christians didn’t believe that Jesus had been born of a virgin or was already divine. He was a typical human until God resurrected him.

The Resurrection by James Tissot, circa 1890

How can we know what the earliest Christians believed when the first writings about him are from 20 years after his death? 

Scholars turn to what’s called preliterary sources — that is, snippets of text, whether they’re hymns or creeds of faith, that have been inserted into later books of the Bible. You can tell they’re most likely earlier oral traditions that have been added because they not only use terminology found nowhere else in the works, but they also often present different theological views. 

For instance, in Romans 1:3-4, Paul describes Jesus as he “who was descended from the seed of David according to the flesh, who was appointed Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead.”

The first part expresses a long-held belief by Jesus’ followers: that he was the promised messiah from the line of King David. This is a surprising inclusion for Paul, the earliest Christian author; nowhere else does he emphasize Jesus’ messiahship. 

The second part of the Bible verse holds a key element of early Christian belief: Jesus became the Son of God at his resurrection. A similar snippet from Acts 13:32-33 posits the same view, even though that’s in stark contrast to what the author later writes (and is currently part of the Christian faith) — namely that Jesus was divine from the moment of his conception.

“There is no talk about Jesus being born of a virgin and certainly no talk of him being divine during his lifetime.”

— Bart D. Ehrman, “How Jesus Became God”

Jesus was said to have been resurrected and, some time after, ascended into Heaven to be with God.

The Ascension by Benjamin West, 1801

What’s most striking is that “there is no talk about Jesus being born of a virgin and certainly no talk of him being divine during his lifetime,” writes Bart D. Ehrman in How Jesus Became God: The Exaltation of a Jewish Preacher From Galilee, published in 2014. “He is a human figure, possibly a messiah. But then at a critical point of his existence, he is elevated from his previous lowly existence down here with us, the other mere mortals, to sit at God’s right hand in a position of honor, power and authority.”

Ehrman emphasizes the importance of this act: “the man Jesus is showered with divine favors beyond anyone’s wildest dreams, honored by God to an unbelievable extent, elevated to a divine status on a level with God himself, sitting at his right hand.”

This belief helped give a positive spin to a man whose followers must have been disheartened that their messiah didn’t destroy their oppressors but was instead tortured and executed by them. It certainly wasn’t what any of them was expecting of their hero. 

But Jesus’ “resurrection confirmed for them that even though he had not conquered his political enemies — the way the messiah was supposed to — God had showered his special favor on him by raising him from the dead,” Ehrman writes. 

Early Christians thought that Jesus was indeed their messiah despite having been crucified. God resurrected him and made him his adopted son and heir — with all the power and glory that involved.

The Resurrection of Christ by Rafael, 1502

Adopted Sons

To the people of the time, there wasn’t any stigma attached to being an adopted son — in fact, quite the opposite. In Ancient Rome, the adopted son was the chosen heir. “He was made great because he had demonstrated the potential for greatness, not because of the accident of his birth,” Ehrman explains. 

Take Julius Caesar. He had a son, Caesarion, with Cleopatra — but not too many people have heard of him. Instead, it’s his nephew and adopted son, Octavian, who has a major place in history: He went on to become Augustus, the first emperor of the Roman Empire.

So when the earliest Christians talked about Jesus being God’s adopted son, they were saying this: “He received all of God’s power and privileges. He could defy death. He could forgive sins. He could be the future judge of the earth. He could rule with divine authority,” Ehrman writes. “He was for all intents and purposes God.” –Wally

Who Really Wrote the New Testament?

Many, if not most, of the Scriptures were written by people falsely claiming to be the apostles or other leaders of the early Christian church, says biblical scholar Bart D. Ehrman. That means a lot of books of the Bible are actually forgeries.

The book of Mark, like the rest of the Gospels, was written anonymously. Why, then, do we believe they were products of the men that bear their names?

If your answer to any conundrum is, “It’s one of God’s miracles,” then this article is not for you. I seek the truth in facts — fully admitting that as we gain more and more knowledge, our previous beliefs can shift. 

I don’t subscribe to the school of thought that blind faith can solve any mystery. I think about what is scientifically feasible, what archaeology and history research reveals, and base my judgments from there. Virgins do not give birth; men are not raised from the dead; and illiterate peasants do not write well-argued religious tracts.

“Most of the apostles were illiterate and could not in fact write.

They could not have left an authoritative writing if their souls depended on it.”

— Bart D. Ehrman, “Forged”

All that being said, this post is not about my beliefs. These are the findings of Bart D. Ehrman in his 2011 work, Forged: Writing in the Name of God — Why the Bible’s Authors Are Not Who We Think They Are. 

“Most of the apostles were illiterate and could not in fact write,” Ehrman declares. “They could not have left an authoritative writing if their souls depended on it.” 

Bart D. Ehrman was once an evangelical Christian who took everything in the Bible literally. Now he’s a biblical scholar whose works, like Forged, offer shocking truths about the supposed word of God.

So who wrote the New Testament, then? Most of the texts were composed by people with extensive schooling — that is, undoubtedly, members of the upper class elite.

Why would someone lie about writing these works? “Quite simply, it was to get a hearing for their views,” Ehrman explains. “If you were an unknown person, but had something really important to say and wanted people to hear you — not so they could praise you, but so they could learn the truth — one way to make that happen was to pretend you were someone else, a well-known author, a famous figure, an authority.”

Here are four shocking revelations about who actually wrote the New Testament (or, perhaps I should say who didn’t write it):

Peter and Paul had differing views of Christianity, but both were chosen as the “authors” of forged books in the Bible to lend authority to the writings.

1. Ancient writers forged writings to address infighting among early Christian groups.

Many people think of Christianity as always having been a well-defined, cohesive religion — as if the books of the New Testament were handed down from on high like the tablets of the 10 Commandments Moses received. But the truth is, the fledgling religion was a big old mess for hundreds of years.

“Christians in the early centuries of the church were in constant conflict and felt under attack from all sides,” Ehrman writes. “They were at odds with Jews, who considered their views to be an aberrant and upstart perversion of the ancestral traditions of Israel. They were at odds with pagan peoples and governments, who considered them a secretive and unauthorized religion that posed a danger to the state. And they were virulently at odds with each other, as different Christian teachers and groups argued that they and they alone had a corner on the truth and other Christian teachers and groups flat-out misunderstood the truths that Christ had proclaimed during his time on earth.” 

So, numerous writers turned to forgery to give more weight to their arguments — and nowhere was that more prevalent than among varying factions of early Christians. Those works favored by church leaders centuries after Jesus were chosen to become the New Testament. Those that were deemed heretical (such as, say, the Gnostic Gospel of Judas), were not only left out but hunted down and destroyed in an effort to totally obliterate their teachings.

The book of Jude was written too late to have been authored by Jesus’ brother.

The New Testament book of Jude, for example, claims to be written by Jesus’ brother. But the author is talking about false teachers (which he strangely calls “waterless souls” and “fruitless trees, twice dead, uprooted”) who have infiltrated the religion and need to be rooted out — something that didn't happen until much later than Jude’s lifetime.

James was the head of the first Christian church, but couldn’t have written the book of the New Testament that bears his name.

And the book of James was supposedly penned by another of Jesus’ brothers, this one the head of the first Christian church, in Jerusalem. But not only was this book written after James’ death, the author is fluent in Greek and its rhetoric. Even if the timing worked out, the historical James, Ehrman says, was an Aramaic-speaking peasant who almost certainly never learned to read.

The New Testament itself declares that Peter was illiterate — so how the heck could he have written all those Bible books?

2. Peter was an illiterate fisherman who died years before 1 and 2 Peter were written.

Like the book of James, the book of 1 Peter was written by someone who was very well educated, spoke Greek and practiced rhetoric. 

What do we know of Peter from the Bible? He was a fisherman from the town of Capernaum in Galilee. Archeological and historical records reveal that “Peter’s town was a backwoods Jewish village made up of hand-to-mouth laborers who did not have an education,” Ehrman writes. “Everyone spoke Aramic. Nothing suggests that anyone could speak Greek. Nothing suggests that anyone in town could write. As a lower-class fisherman, Peter would have started work as a young boy and never attended school.”

In fact, in Acts 4:13, Peter and his companion John are described as agrammatoi, a Greek word meaning “unlettered” — that is, illiterate.

There’s also the issue of timing. Tradition holds that Peter was martyred in Rome under Nero in 64 CE. But the author of 1 Peter alludes to Rome as “Babylon” — that is, the destroyer of Jerusalem and the Temple. The Romans didn’t destroy Jerusalem until 70 CE, six years after Peter died. 

Peter, like all of the apostles, believed that Jesus’ Second Coming would take place during his lifetime.

In addition, the author of 2 Peter comes up with a defense as to why Jesus hasn’t returned as the Messiah. To God, “one day is as a thousand years and a thousand years are as one day.” So time is relative and just be patient.

But such an argument wouldn’t have been necessary for a disciple writing so soon after Jesus’ crucifixion. The Second Coming was predicted “within this generation” (Mark 13:30) and before the disciples “tasted death” (Mark 9:1). At the time Peter lived, Jesus could have still been right on schedule.

Paul actually did write some of the books of the New Testament — well, seven of the 13 attributed to him.

3. Good news! More than half of the letters attributed to Paul in the New Testament are authentic.

That means, of course, that six of the 13 are forgeries, though. Almost all biblical scholars agree that these seven letters were indeed written by the apostle Paul: Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians and Philemon. 

In the other books of the Bible attributed to Paul, there are words and phrases and writing styles not found in those that have been verified. And there are points made about Paul’s religious philosophy that just don’t jibe with what we know about his beliefs. For instance, the man was anti-marriage (even though he himself got hitched). In 1 Corinthians 7, Paul preaches that people should remain single. Why worry about procreation when the Rapture is going to happen any day?

But in the Pastorals (as 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus are referred to), “Paul” is insisting that church leaders be married. Side note: Why has this not become an argument to end the tradition of priests being celibate?

Scholars agree that at least a couple of the letters Paul wrote while under house arrest in Rome were actually penned by him.

Which brings us to another problem of timing: When Paul was alive, there weren’t any church leaders. His view was that every Christian was endowed with a supernatural gift (healing, say, or speaking in tongues) and all were equal: “In Christ there is neither slave nor free, neither male nor female,” he declares in Galatians 3:28.

Paul believed Jesus’ Second Coming would happen unexpectedly, “like a thief in the night” (1 Thessalonians 5:2), and he would be around to experience it. It wasn’t until a generation or more later, when people were still waiting, that some found it necessary to think more long term and offer up excuses. 

“The author of 2 Thessalonians, claiming to be Paul, argues that the end is not, in fact, coming right away,” Ehrman explains. “There will be some kind of political or religious uprising and rebellion, and an Antichrist-like figure will appear who will take his seat in the Temple of Jerusalem and declare himself to be God.” 

How could the same Paul declare in 1 Thessalonians that Jesus’ return would happen soon and suddenly, and then in 2 Thessalonians renege on that and state that a whole series of events had to take place first? 

And in Ephesians, there’s also an issue with Paul’s biography. The writer includes himself as someone who, before meeting Jesus, was guilty of “doing the will of the flesh and senses.” But that doesn’t fit with the man who says, in undisputed letters, he had been “blameless” when it came to the “righteousness of the law” (Philippians 3:4-5).

An angel is said to have whispered the words of the Gospel to St. Matthew. But it turns out there’s evidence Matthew didn’t actually write the book of the Bible named for him.

4. One-third of the authors of the books of the New Testament — including the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John — were actually anonymous. 

In fact, those texts remained anonymous for about a century. It wasn’t until around 180-185 CE that the Gospels were definitely named for the first time, by a church father and heresy hunter named Irenaeus. 

And how did those authors get chosen? To lend the Gospels authority (and help assure they made the cut when choosing what would go into the New Testament), the writers were declared to be two disciples and two close associates of disciples. 

Matthew, for instance, was a Jew, and tradition held that he had written a Gospel. So the first was assigned to him since it was deemed the most “Jewish.” 

Church leaders ascribed authors of the Gospels about 100 years after they were written — anonymously, no less. There’s no evidence Mark actually wrote the book that bears his name, for example.

The second Gospel was determined to be by Mark on the scantest of evidence; he seems to have been chosen because of his connection to Peter. 

When you hear the reasons the Gospels were assigned authors, like the book of Luke, you’ll realize how flimsy the evidence really is.

The author of Luke also wrote the book of Acts, where he proclaims to be a companion of Paul’s. “Because Acts stresses that Christianity succeeded principally among Gentiles, the author himself may have been a Gentile,” Ehrman writes. “Since there was thought to be a Gentile named Luke among Paul’s companions, he was assigned the Third Gospel.” So it goes.

John, the son of Zebedee, was assigned the Gospel with his name by process of elimination.

John, meanwhile, was supposed to be written by “the Beloved Disciple” it mentions (John 20: 20-24). In early tradition, the closest apostles to Jesus were Peter, James and John. Peter was named elsewhere in the book, and James had already been martyred. So that left John, the son Zebedee, as the author of the fourth Gospel.

Not the most convincing of evidence — but the Gospels couldn’t remain anonymous if they were going to become part of the Bible.

But wait — there’s more. In addition, Ehrman writes, “The anonymous book of Hebrews was assigned to Paul, even though numbers of early Christian scholars realized that Paul did not write it, as scholars today agree. And three short anonymous writings with some similarities to the Fourth Gospel were assigned to the same author, and so were called 1, 2 and 3 John. None of these books claims to be written by the authors to whom they were ultimately assigned.”

---

For biblical literalists, this evidence must be disturbing. Not only does it show that the New Testament contains lies, it makes us question the very beliefs at the core of what we know as Christianity. 

That’s something to take up with God — or, perhaps, Ehrman. As he writes, “The use of deception to promote the truth may well be considered one of the most unsettling ironies of the early Christian traditions.” –Wally

---

How to Cast a Wicca Ritual Magic Circle

A ritual to perform before casting Wiccan spells or practicing witchcraft, as well as what you need for your Wiccan altar.

Whether you’re a novice or a seasoned practitioner, this is the first thing you should do before casting a spell or conducting a Wiccan ritual. It’s not necessary (that’s the beauty of the religion — you don’t have to do anything), but it can make your magic all the more powerful if you do.

Also, keep in mind that you can modify this based on what you have handy, or the time you have available, or what just feels right to you. I don’t have a lot of space at home, so I often just set up the four candles and skip right to the part where I chant as I light each, invoking the spirits of the Old Ones.

You can also add whatever you want to represent the season or festival. If it’s Samhain, for example, Halloween decorations and some black candles lend an appropriately macabre air to the ritual. And evergreens, mistletoe, holly and Christmas lights add a special touch at Yule. 

Before you start your ritual, you have to set the mood and find the right music. I always play the Twin Peaks soundtrack because I was obsessed with the show when it came out, and the ethereal music by Angelo Badalamenti and Julee Cruise puts me into a trancelike state.

Now you’re ready to work some magic!

Casting the Circle

Cleanse the area with a ritual broom.

Use four candles to mark the cardinal points: green for north, yellow for east, red for south and blue for west.

Begin with the north and work clockwise (unless you’re performing black magic, in which you should move counterclockwise or the enticingly named widdershins). Light each of the candles. 

Now take some salt (or some other sort of markers, such as flowers or pine branches), and form a circle, keeping the cardinal point markers inside it.

Light your incense. Lift your athame (ritual dagger) or wand and touch its point to a bowl of water, saying:

I consecrate and cleanse this water that it may be purified and fit to dwell within the sacred circle. 
In the name of the Mother Goddess and the Father God [or the names of specific deities], I consecrate this water.

Visualize your knife or wand blasting away all negativity from the water.

Then touch the point to a bowl of salt, saying: 

I bless this salt that it may be fit to dwell within the sacred circle.
In the name of the Mother Goddess and the Father God, I bless this salt.

Now stand facing north, at the edge of the circle. Hold the knife or wand out at waist level.

Walk slowly around the circle’s perimeter, clockwise (or widdershins if you’re being naughty), charging it with your words and energy. Stretch the energy out, visualizing it forming a complete sphere, half above the ground, half below. 

Say:

Here is the boundary of the circle.
Naught but love shall enter in.
Naught but love shall emerge from within.
Charge this by your powers, Old Ones!

When you arrive back at the north, place your athame or wand on the altar.

Take up the salt and sprinkle it around the circle, beginning and ending in the north, moving clockwise. 

Next, carry the incense around the circle, moving clockwise. 

Finally, sprinkle water around the circle, moving clockwise. 

Sense each of these substances purifying the circle.

The circle is now sealed.

Hold aloft your wand at the north edge of the circle, saying:

O Spirit of the North,
Ancient One of Earth,
I call you to attend this circle.
Charge this by your powers, Old Ones!

Visualize a green mist rising and writhing out of the candle’s flame, becoming something of nature. When the spirit is present, lower your wand and move to the east, then raise it again. Say:

O Spirit of the East,
Ancient One of Air,
I call you to attend this circle.
Charge this by your powers, Old Ones!

Visualize a yellow mist rising and writhing out of the candle’s flame, becoming a whirlwind. When the spirit is present, lower your wand and move to the south, then raise it again. Say:

O Spirit of the South,
Ancient One of Fire,
I call you to attend this circle.
Charge this by your powers, Old Ones!

Visualize a red mist rising and writhing out of the candle’s flame, becoming flames. When the spirit is present, lower your wand and move to the west, then raise it again. Say:

O Spirit of the West,
Ancient One of Water,
I call you to attend this circle.
Charge this by your powers, Old Ones!

Visualize a blue mist rising and writhing out of the candle’s flame, becoming a wave. 

The circle breathes and lives around you. The spirits of the elements are present. Feel their energies. Stand still for a moment, visualizing the circle glowing and growing in power. 

The circle is now complete. The Goddess and God, or whatever deities you’d like, may be called and magic wrought. –Wally

Ancient Gods of the Old Testament

Who is Baal? What about Asherah, Dagon, Marduk, Moloch and the other pagan gods of the Bible? And was human sacrifice part of their worship?

Some of these ancient gods, including Molech, who had a built-in baby-burning furnace, are accused of inciting human sacrifice.

My parents were never very religious. But that didn’t stop them from sending me to bible camp in the summer. (It was tons of fun — though we all dreaded the inevitable one-on-one with our counselor, when he’d ask if we had let Jesus into heart. Every year we replied that we thought Jesus was in there but we couldn’t be absolutely sure).

I also went to Catholic school for four years. So, even though I was obsessed with the ancient gods of Greece and Rome, I couldn’t help being influenced by the Bible’s condemnation of the Canaanite deities in the Old Testament. If you asked me about Baal when I was a kid, I’d have told you he was an evil god who was second only to Satan himself.

“The god El could very well have been the original conception of the Hebrew God.

It’s right there in the “el” in the name Israel, which is usually translated as “He Who Struggles With God.””

Imagine my surprise years later, when I learned more about the gods that were so maligned in the Bible. They weren’t always the bloodthirsty incarnations of evil they were depicted as. They were simply the deities worshipped by the kingdoms surrounding Israel and Judah. Baal, for instance, was essentially just another Middle Eastern god of fertility. The Old Testament writers disparaged them because they were rivals to their extremely jealous god, Yahweh. (In fact, when God came up with 10 Commandments for his people to follow, he topped the list with, “Thou shalt have no other gods before me.”)

Here are the major ancient deities of the Levant, and how they’re depicted in the Bible.

Adrammelech

Aka: Adramelech, Adar-malik

Meaning of the name: Majestic King

Domain: The sun, a counterpart to Anammelech, the goddess of the moon

Biblical reference: 2 Kings 17:31: The people of the Assyrian city of Sepharvaim were said to burn their children as sacrifices to the god.

Description: This handsome devil has the face of a mule and the plumage of a peacock. He’s also depicted as having a lion’s body with wings and the bearded head of a man.

Strange story: According to Collin de Plancy, author of the Dictionnaire Infernal, Adrammelech is in charge of Satan’s wardrobe.

Asherah

Aka: Athirat, Ashratu

Meaning of the name: Happy or Upright

Domain: There’s a lot of confusion around this deity. She could be the mother of the gods. In some incarnations, she was a goddess of sexuality or of the mountains. She also could be tied to the sea or the sun.

She might not even be a goddess; asherah seems to refer to cult objects — specifically the consecrated poles used in worship at the time.

Numerous statuettes like this one are tied to the goddess Asherah.

Biblical reference: 1 Kings 18:19: The goddess’ 400 prophets eat at Jezebel’s table, along with the prophets of Baal.

2 Kings 23:4-7: Josiah had “all the articles” made for Asherah and Baal burned, and the “idolatrous priests” were done away with. The Asherah pole was also set on fire and its ashes spread over the graves of the common people. And the quarters where women did weaving for the goddess were torn down.

Description: Often depicted as a stylized tree

Strange story: She’s connected with Yahweh as a consort — meaning that before the Jews were monotheistic, their God had a wife!

Ashtoreth 

Aka: Atar-gatis; connected to Ishtar and Astarte

Meaning of the name: Star

Domain: The moon; supreme goddess of Canaan and female counterpart to Baal

Biblical reference: 1 Samuel 12:10: One of many references to people declaring they will no longer worship the Baals and the Ashtoreths. The use of the plural could indicate that these names were used to speak generally about so-called pagan deities.

The goddess in her Atar-gatis guise has legs as well as a long fish tail.

Description: As Atar-gatis, she was a woman with the tail of a fish.

Strange story: As an earlier incarnation, Ishtar, the goddess was worshipped through prostitution. And she eventually morphed into a male demon, Astaroth, a great duke of Hell.

Baal

Aka: Ba’al, Baal of Peor, Baal-Berith, Baal-Zebub

Meaning of the name: Lord

Domain: Fertility, as well as the sun and storms; supreme god of Canaan and Phoenicia

Biblical reference: The Old Testament is lousy with references to Baal. He gave the Golden Calf a run for its money. Some choice selections: 

2 Kings 10:18-28: The Israelite King Jehu tricked all the servants and priests of Baal to come to the temple for a great sacrifice, where he had his soldiers massacre every last one of them. To add insult to injury, Jehu then made the house of Baal a public latrine. 

Jeremiah 19:5: Baal’s worshippers are said to burn their sons alive as a sacrifice to appease the deity. 

1 Kings 18:28: The priests of Baal worked themselves into a frenzy and cut themselves with swords and lances.

You can see how depictions of Baal might have helped influence Christians’ concept of the Devil (aka Beelzebub).

Description: Baal is basically a minotaur — a powerfully built man with the fearsome head of a bull. He’s sometimes shown as a man wearing a toilet-plunger-looking hat  over his luxurious curls and holding a lightning bolt in his upraised hand.

Strange story: Baal’s worship included public ritual prostitution between one of his priests and a local woman.

The demon Beelzebub, whom Jesus links to Satan in the Book of Matthew, is a modification of one of Baal’s names.

Chemosh

Aka: Asthor-Chemosh

Meaning of the name: Uncertain; perhaps Destroyer or Fish God

Domain: War, mountains; primary god of the Moabites

Biblical reference: 1 Kings 11:7: Despite being held up as a paragon of virtue, King Solomon actually built a sanctuary to Chemosh — thought of as a move to please his Moabite wife.

2 Kings 3:27: The king of Moab sacrificed his firstborn son and heir to Chemosh on the city wall — and the strategy worked. The Israelites scurried away in defeat.

Description: An old man with a full beard, wearing a bulbous cap and sometimes brandishing a sword

Strange story: There’s rare archeological evidence that calls out Chemosh by name: the Moabite Stone, or Mesha Stele, discovered in 1868 at Dibon. It bears an inscription commemorating the circa 860 BCE endeavors of King Mesha to overthrow the Israelite dominion of Moab. 

Dagon

Meaning of the name: Grain

Domain: Fertility, agriculture, war, death and the afterlife; chief god of the Philistines

Biblical reference: 1 Samuel 5: The Philistines captured the Ark of the Covenant and put it in the temple of Dagon. In the morning, the statue had fallen over, face-down, in front of the ark. The next morning, the same thing had happened, and the statue’s head and hands had broken off. The worshippers of Dagon were justifiably freaked out, so they moved the ark from town to town — but everywhere it resided, the people developed tumors. Eventually, the Philistines returned the cursed ark to Israel.

The statue of Dagon kept falling down in front of the stolen Ark of the Covenant.

Description: A merman — half man, half fish, or a bearded man wearing a sort of giant fish cloak, with the open mouth pointing skyward

Strange story: The concept of Dagan’s appearance is fishy, though — some sources think it’s a misrepresentation of the deity.

El

Meaning of the name: God

Domain: Father of the gods

Biblical reference: Genesis 14:18–20: Abraham accepts the blessing of El.

Description: An old man, often with wings; sometimes depicted as a bull

Strange story: In the Bible, El is the supreme god of the Canaanites, yet is identified with Yahweh. In fact, he could very well have been the original conception of the Hebrew God. It’s right there in the “el” in the name Israel, which is usually translated as “He Who Struggles With God.”

If El was the prototype of Yahweh, it explains the connection between his wife, Asherah, and the Hebrew God.

Hadad 

Aka: Ramman; often conflated with Baal

Meaning of the name: Thunder

Domain: Storms, fertility

Biblical reference: It’s believed that some of the mentions of lower-case baals (gods) in the Old Testament refer to Hadad — though he also gets jumbled up with numerous other deities of the region. 

One theory, which I imagine to be controversial, states that Psalm 29 was actually about Hadad and not Yahweh, waxing poetic about the voice of God striking with flashes of lightning, shaking the desert, twisting oaks and the like.

Description: Another bearded man wielding a lightning bolt

Strange story: Like the Egyptian deity Osiris, Hadad is murdered by a fellow god, and the world goes barren before he is resurrected.

Marduk

Aka: Bel (which means Lord)

Meaning of the name: Bull Calf

Domain: Justice, compassion, healing, magic; sometimes also a storm and agriculture deity; patron god of Babylon

Biblical reference: Jeremiah 50:2: A rallying cry about the fall of Babylon, where Bel is put to shame, and Marduk is dismayed

Description: A man with a curly beard wearing a robe covered with circular devices. He’s got a pet/servant dragon.

Marduk, god of justice, defeats Tiamat, the goddess of chaos.

Strange story: Marduk killed the goddess of chaos, Tiamat (often shown as a griffin-like creature), with an arrow that split her in two. From her eyes, the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers began to flow, and from her corpse, Marduk formed the heavens and earth. 

Moloch 

Aka: Molech, Molekh, Mo’lech, Moloc

Meaning of the name: King

Domain: Not sure — maybe the underworld; does sacrificing babies count?

Biblical reference: Leviticus 20:2-5: Yahweh demands that the Israelites stone to death any man who “gives his seed” to Moloch, who loved a good child sacrifice.

Description: A calf or an ox; a man with the head of a bull with arms outstretched, its body a furnace to roast infants

Strange story: There’s no real archaeological evidence of a god named Moloch. This most likely wasn’t the name he was known by among his worshipers but rather a Hebrew transliteration. Some scholars think Moloch was actually the same god as Baal.

Nisroch

Aka: Nisrok

Meaning of the name: Possibly relating to a plank of wood, specifically from Noah’s Ark, which Sennacherib, the king of Assyria, worshipped as an idol

Domain: Agriculture

Biblical reference: 2 Kings 19:36-37: Sennacherib was worshipping in the temple to Nisroch, when two of his sons came in and smote the heck outta him with their swords.

King Sennacherib’s sons flee the temple of Nisroch after killing their father.

Description: A muscular man with the head and wings of an eagle (though this is thought by some scholars to originally have been a depiction of a jinni), sometimes shown watering a sacred tree

Strange story: There’s some debate as to whether Nisroch is actually a deity or if it’s a scribal error for the god Nimrod. In later folklore, Nisroch became a demon who’s the chief cook in Hell.

Tammuz

Aka: Dumuzi

Meaning of the name: The Flawless Youth, the Good Young One

Domain: Fertility, shepherds (helping keep newborn animals from being defective)

Biblical reference: Ezekiel 8.14-15: A being of fire (even its loins were aflame) shows the prophet Ezekiel pagan atrocities. At the entrance to the Temple in Jerusalem, Ezekiel sees women weeping for the death of Tammuz, much to his horror. The fire being, though, assures him he’ll see much worse abominations, which is hardly surprising.

Description: A total hottie

Strange story: Tammuz was killed by his lover, Inanna, the goddess of sexuality, because she felt he didn’t mourn her enough when she was lost in the Underworld. Don’t worry: In a foreshadowing of Christ (and in the tradition of Adonis and Osiris), Tammuz was resurrected. –Wally

The Beautiful Bahai Temple in Chicago

What is Baha’i? What’s the history of the Baha’i Temple in Wilmette, Illinois?

The beauty of the Bahai’i Temple makes Wally jump for joy.

Those of us who live in the Chicago area are familiar with the Baha’i Temple — though most know nothing about the religion itself. We’ve seen glimpses of the structure on the North Shore and have been drawn to it, where we discover that it’s a gorgeous building that makes for a pleasant visit to spend a short time wandering its gardens and admiring its intricate stonework. 

Which is exactly what we did one weekend with our friend Kate during the COVID-19 pandemic. We weren’t able to go inside the temple, but to be honest that’s not too big a disappointment. The interior isn’t all that impressive — a large, open space that’s unadorned, in stark contrast to the ornate exterior. OK, the interior of the dome is gorgeous. But that’s the extent of the beauty inside, I promise. 

“The Earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens.”

— Bahá’ulláh, founder of Bahá’í

An illuminated manuscript of Baha’u’llah’s writings that was presented to the British Museum in 1913

What is the Bahá’í religion?

It’s a relatively new faith, having emerged in the Middle East in the 1840s. A Persian teacher known as Bahá’ulláh preached a religion founded on the principles of peace, equality and the unity of humankind. Sounds nice, doesn’t it? 

Bahá’ulláh, the founder of the Baha’i faith, might look stern — but he was really all about peace, love and understanding.

To Baha’is, the soul is eternal and should be illuminated by focusing on kindness, generosity, integrity, truthfulness, humility and selflessness. That’s exactly what this world needs more of, if you ask me.

At a Parliament of the World’s Religions meeting in Chicago in 1893, the United States was introduced to Baha’i. (By the way, it’s pronounced “Buh-high.”) Despite being proclaimed as one of the world’s fastest growing religions, it never caught on big time, and I’d wager that most Americans aren’t familiar with the faith. 

But by 1900, there were about 1,000 Baha’is living in the U.S. and Canada. Worldwide, the faith’s adherents now number around 5 million.

Duke and Wally spent a pleasant day with their friend Kate, circling (and admiring) the Baha’i Temple.

Do they have a prophet or savior like Mohammed or Jesus?

Like Muslims, the Baha’i believe that Mohammed, as well as Jesus (along with Abraham, Moses, Buddha, Krishna and Zoroaster, for that matter) was a prophet — just not God’s final prophet. Divine revelation, to them, is not final but ongoing; there will be other prophets in the future. Maybe the next one will be female.

The Baha’i faith sees all people as equal — a view that doesn’t fit with conservative Islam — and has led to persecution since its inception.

How have Baha’i been treated over the years?

It’s sad that a religion that preaches acceptance has suffered so much oppression and violence. Perhaps it’s telling that no temple exists in Iran, the birthplace of the faith. The Baha’i messages of religious tolerance, gender equality, universal education, and elimination of all prejudice and racism don’t jibe well with many conservative religious entities, and the faith is viewed as a heretical branch of Islam. As such, countries including Yemen, Egypt and Afghanistan have persecuted and imprisoned Baha’is on the sole grounds of their beliefs. And Iran has a history of torturing and killing Baha’is, closing their schools, banning their literature, and denying their rights and marriages.

Worship for Baha’is is very personal and freeform, devoid of rituals and clergy.

What is worship like for Baha’i?

The freeform, personal worship certainly won’t appeal to everyone, especially those who find comfort in religious rituals. My ex became interested in Baha’i, but the lack of any sort of pomp and circumstance never appealed to me. I have always been more drawn to Wicca, which has a similar acceptance of all faiths, seeing them as symbols, but has the flair of magic spells.

In keeping with the Baha’i philosophy of egalitarianism, everyone is welcome at their temples, and there isn’t any clergy. Ceremonies happen on only a few holy days each year. Typical worship consists of sitting there quietly, praying or meditating on your own. 

It’s also encouraged to get involved in social projects in your community. 

The COVID pandemic meant most people had to stay closer to home, so Wally and Duke headed up to give the Baha’i Temple another visit.

What is the Chicago Baha’i Temple’s history?

It began with the purchase of a couple of plots of land along Lake Michigan in 1907, north of Chicago in what is now the town of Wilmette. Because it was funded by individual contributions, the project was delayed, much like Gaudí’s La Sagrada Família cathedral in Barcelona, Spain (which is still being built, by the way). The Chicago Baha’i Temple was further held up by the two World Wars and the Great Depression. The foundation stone was laid in 1920 and construction ended with the temple’s formal dedication in 1953. 

The temple was built from 1920 to 1953 and is composed of a variety of architectural styles.

Who designed the Chicago Baha’i Temple?

Louis Bourgeois, a French Canadian who had been a Baha’i for over a decade at the time, got the commission. He wanted the building’s design to reflect the beliefs of the faith: the oneness of humanity and the unity of all religions. To really run with this symbolism, he designed a conglomerate of various architectural styles: Neoclassical symmetry, Gothic ribbing, a Renaissance dome, Romanesque clerestory and Islamic arabesques on pillars that hint at minarets. And while that sounds like an unpleasing Frankensteinian mishmash, it somehow all comes together gracefully.

The carvings on the nine pillars feature symbols of the world’s biggest religions: the Christian cross, the Jewish Star of David, the Islamic star and crescent moon — even the swastika of Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism. 

That swastika causes a lot of controversy — but that’s just because people don’t understand that Buddhists and Hindus have used that symbol long before the Nazis co-opted it.

Bourgeois’ vision was to create “a gathering place for all humanity.” When describing his design, the architect said, “There are combinations of mathematical lines, symbolizing those of the universe, and in their intricate merging of circle into circle, and circle within circle, we visualize the merging of all religions into one.”

Ornate scrollwork depicting symbols from major world religions covers the building’s façade.

What’s with the repetition of the number nine?

To a Baha’i, nine is the most sacred number. As the highest single digit, it’s a potent symbol of comprehensiveness as well as unity. In addition to the nine columns, there are nine entrances, nine verses above the doors and alcoves and nine fountains. 

Each column is topped by a nine-pointed star, the symbol of Baha’i.

The nine columns around the exterior are each topped with a nine-pointed star, the symbol of the Baha’i faith.

Small pools and fountains surround the Baha’i Temple.

How many Baha’i temples are there?

The original idea was to have one house of worship on each inhabited continent (sorry about your luck, Antarctica), and the one in Wilmette, known as the Mother Temple of the West, remains the only one in North America. It’s also the oldest Baha’i temple in the world. (The first temple was built in Ashkhabad, modern-day Turkmenistan, in 1908 but was commandeered by the Soviets and later badly damaged by an earthquake before being demolished in 1963.)

The temple outside of Chicago is the only one on the continent and is supposed to serve all of North America.

Here’s a list of Baha’i temples around the world:

• Wilmette, USA

• Santiago, Chile

• Panama City, Panama

• Kampala, Uganda

• Langenhain, Germany

• Sydney, Australia

• Apia, Western Samoa

• New Delhi, India

Other national or local Baha’i houses of worship are planned for the Democratic Republic of Congo, Papua New Guinea, Cambodia, India, Kenya, Colombia and Vanuatu.

If you’re in the Chicago area, consider a trip north of the city to visit the Baha’i Temple.

What about the gardens?

The gardens are an essential design element at all the temples. There’s one in front of each of the nine entrances to the temple, featuring rectangular as well as rounded elements, revealing influences both Western and Eastern.

Wandering through the gardens with our friend Kate, we kept circling the temple, admiring its beauty. The circumambulation can be meditative.

Who’d have thought that the delicate beauty of the Baha’i Temple was achieved using concrete?!

What is the Chicago temple made of?

Would you believe that various materials were suggested, including limestone, granite, terracotta and even aluminum, before they decided upon concrete?

This didn’t go over so well, as people feared the material lacked beauty. But a fifth-generation stone carver named John Earley devised a technique inspired by Italian mosaics. He exposed the larger pebbles in the aggregate of the mixture, which gave the concrete an unusual warmth. And when you see the final product nowadays, there’s no denying its lacelike beauty that seems to glow, earning its nickname as the Temple of Light and Unity.

Sadly, neither Bourgeois nor Earley lived to see the temple’s completion. –Wally

Kate wasn’t the biggest fan of this shot. “It looks like you’re in front of some office building,” she said. Wally looked at the pic and replied, “That’s some office building!”

Bahá'í House of Worship
100 Lindon Ave.
Wilmette, IL 60091

 

Othman, the Influential Third Khalifa of Isalm — and His Grisly Demise

Uthman ibn Affan, as he was also known, created the definitive version of the Quran and greatly improved the Islamic Empire’s infrastructure. 

Othman accomplished quite a bit during his time as khalifa — until he was brutally murdered by a mob.

The Prophet Mohammed had been dead for only 12 years, and already the religion he founded, Islam, was on its third leader, or khalifa. 

“Staggering wealth, dazzling beauty, two of the Prophet’s daughters for wives — what did this man lack?”

— Tamim Ansary, “Destiny Disrupted”

This painting depicts the election of Othman as the third khalifa of the budding religion of Islam.

The Third Khalifa: Othman

Othman (aka Uthman ibn Affan or Osman) was distantly related to Mohammad, as his fifth cousin once removed. Taking office at the age of 68, he was khalifa from 24-40 AH (644-661 CE). 

His father had been one of the richest men in Mecca, and Othman multiplied his family’s fortune many times over, earning him the nickname Othman the Wealthy.

He didn’t drink, he didn’t smoke, what did he do? Well, he also didn’t chase women — despite being known as quite the hottie.

Conversion and Repentance

Othman’s conversion to Islam didn’t go over well with his family, which was rabidly anti-Muslim. In fact, his stepfather had once tried to strangle Mohammed to death but was prevented by Abu Bakr. His two wives refused to convert, so he divorced them and married Mohammed’s gorgeous daughter, Ruqayya. After she died, Othman wed another of the Prophet’s daughters, Umm Kulthum. 

“Staggering wealth, dazzling beauty, two of the Prophet’s daughters for wives — what did this man lack?” asks Tamim Ansary in Destiny Disrupted: A History of the World Through Islamic Eyes. “And yet Othman seemed haunted by the fear that he was not good enough. He spent much of his time fasting, praying and reading the Qur’an. Perhaps his extravagant donations to the public good were attempts to deserve the extraordinary good fortune he already enjoyed.”

For instance, to make up for abandoning a battlefield after a rumor spread that Mohammed had been killed, Othman would buy slaves and free one every Friday.

For some reason, Othman decided to organize the verses of the Qur’an according to length — and that’s how the holy book remains to this day.

Shaping the Qur’an, Launching Massive Building Projects

The first big project Othman undertook was to create a definitive edition of the Qur’an. Scholars eliminated redundancies, resolved discrepancies and evaluated dubious passages. The final product was a book in which the verses were pretty much arranged according to length, rather than thematically or chronologically. That doesn’t seem like the best way to organize a holy book, but there you go.

Othman’s policies greatly benefitted his own clan, the Umayyads, forming a powerful dynasty, seen here at the siege of Constantinople.

Another contentious decision Othman made was to lift Omar’s restrictions on Muslims buying land in conquered territories. In fact, wealthy Muslims could borrow from the public treasury to finance these purchases. Soon a class of elites, many from his own clan, the Umayyads, had acquired immense estates throughout the new empire.

Othman’s construction projects must have gone over better with the public. He built more than 5,000 mosques, prettied up Medina, dug canals, constructed highways, improved irrigation systems, upgraded ports, and installed wells and water systems.

Of course, he also constructed himself a lavish palace — though within it,  he “lived on bread, water and prayer,” Ansary says.

The tomb of Othman in Jannat al-Baqī’, the first Islamic cemetery, found in Medina

The End of Othman

Othman had set up his foster brother as governor of Egypt, but the man tried to squeeze too much money out of the people. A delegation petitioned Othman to remove the man as governor, which he agreed to. 

On their way back to Egypt, members of the delegation spotted a suspicious-looking slave of the khalifa and searched him. They discovered a letter telling the governor to arrest and execute them upon their return.

LEARN ABOUT Abu Bakr and Umar, the first two khalifas of Islam

The delegation turned around and marched into the palace. When they showed Othman the letter, he expressed shock and said he had never seen it before. This might indeed have been the case, but the once-peaceful petitioners had devolved into an angry mob. 

“[T]he rioters worked themselves into a frenzy, broke down palace doors and burst in with a roar. They found the khalifa in his study, and there in the flickering twilight of the old man’s lamp, in year 34 of the Muslim era, they beat their own leader to death,” Ansary writes. 

It was an ignominious end to the life of one of the most influential early leaders of Islam. –Wally

The Birth of Islam and the First Two Khalifas: Abu Bakr and Umar

Who were the first khalifas after the death of the Prophet Mohammed? And how did they shape the new religion of Islam?

The selection of Abu Bakr as the first successor to the Prophet Mohammed caused the Sunni-Shiite schism in Islam that remains to this day.

The time immediately after a spiritual leader’s death can make or break a budding religion — and determine in what direction it goes. 

So it was for Islam after the death of Mohammed. Muslims needed another leader, but how could anyone compare to the irreplaceable Prophet — especially since he had declared that there weren’t going to be any more God-guided messengers like himself?

Abu Bakr is chosen as the Prophet Mohammed’s successor.

A group of decision-makers unanimously decided upon Abu Bakr, a close companion of Mohammed, giving him the title khalifa (or, caliph, to the Western world). The designation was quite modest: It means “deputy.”

Not everyone was happy with the decision. Ali, whose father had adopted Mohammed, was essentially a brother to the Prophet. He was also the first male Muslim, and time and time again, he showed his valor in defending Mohammed and Islam. 

But Ali had his youth working against him. He was just over 30, while Abu Bakr was almost 60. At the time, choosing a younger man over an older one was unthinkable. In fact, the word for a tribal leader, sheikh, literally translates to “old man.”

The first khalifa Abu Bakr, founder of the Sunni branch of Islam

Abu Bakr, the First Khalifa: The Start of Sunni vs. Shi’i 

The disagreement between the two men’s factions eventually led to the major sects of Islam: Those who favored Ali developed into Shi’i, which means “Partisans.” Abu Bakr led the Sunnis. 

Tribes soon began to secede from the alliance that Mohammed had forged, refusing to pay the charity tax to the treasury at Medina. 

“Had Abu Bakr allowed these departures, Islam would surely have gone in a very different direction,” writes Tamim Ansary in Destiny Disrupted: A History of the World Through Islamic Eyes. “It might have evolved into a set of practices and beliefs that people embraced individually. But Abu Bakr responded to the crisis by declaring secession to be treason.”

Abu Bakr held the role of khalifa for a short time (11-13 AH, or 632-634 CE) but set a hardline, all-or-nothing orthodoxy — in contrast to his genial persona as a kindly old man known to pass out candy to children on the street. (Note: The Islamic calendar follows a dating system designated AH, from the Latin anno hegirae, "in the year of the Hijra,” when Mohammed and his followers migrated from Mecca to Medina and established the first Muslim community, or Umma.)

Abu Bakr died from a chill after a bath — but not before he named Omar as his successor.

The Second Khalifa: Omar the Powerful, Omar the Forgotten

A hot bath, a cold breeze — and, a mere two years into his role as khalifa, Abu Bakr was on his deathbed. Not wanting any arguments, he named Omar (aka Umar) as his successor, with young Ali passed over once again.

Omar was about as opposite as you could get from the gentle Abu Bakr. He was a large rough-and-tumble kind of dude, with a legendary temper. In fact, he had been on his way to kill Mohammed, when he passed his sister, reading under a tree. When she told him she had become a Muslim, he snatched the Qur’an from her hand. It was open to a verse that seemed to speak directly to Omar, and that was it. He was converted. 

Omar shaped the religion in numerous lasting ways — an impressive legacy despite not being well known. During his time as khalifa, from 13-24 AH (634-644 CE), “he set the course of Islamic theology, he shaped Islam as a political ideology, he gave Islamic civilization its characteristic stamp, and he built an empire that ended up being bigger than Rome,” Ansary writes. “Any one of these achievements could have earned him a place in the who’s who of history’s most influential figures; the sum of them make him something like a combination of Saint Paul, Karl Marx, Lorenzo di Medici and Napoleon. Yet most people outside Islam know him only as a name and perhaps a one- or two-sentence descriptor: he’s the second khalifa, a successor of Mohammed — that’s about it.”

Omar who? The second khalifa of Islam, should be known to all as the man who shaped the Muslim world and ruled over an empire larger than Rome’s.

Omar set out to make Islam a just and egalitarian community — while launching a military campaign that succeeded despite overwhelming odds. 

His choice to use the term jihad to describe a war of conquest kicked off the controversy that lasts to this day. Jihad translates to “struggling,” and is supposed to only apply to fighting in self-defense. In an ironic bit of moral gymnastics, Islam is believed to be a realm of peace, therefore violence against non-Muslims can be justified because that bloodshed is ultimately helping expand the realm of peace. That strikes me as a bogus argument. Then again, Jesus preached peace, yet Christians have used religion to validate countless atrocities, from the Crusades to modern-day homophobia. 

Omar marches into Jerusalem. The khalifa was tolerant when it came to religious worship, which made him popular with those he conquered.

When Omar defeated a city, he allowed the Christians and Jews to worship as they pleased; they just had to pay a tax that was less than they were paying their Byzantine overlords. This seemed like a good deal to them. 

“By the time Omar died, Islamic rule covered more than 2 million square miles. How is this possible?” Ansary asks. “Religious Muslims offer the simple explanation that Muslims had the irresistible supernatural aid of Allah. Academic historians explain the Byzantine and Sassanid empires had just fought a ruinous war with each other, and despite their seeming might, they were both rotten to the core and ready to fall.” 

In 634 CE, a Persian slave named Lu’lu stabbed Omar multiple times in the back. No one’s sure if it was personal or in revenge for a military defeat. Either way, the influential reign of the man some consider as the true founder of the Arab empire, came to an abrupt end. –Wally

King Josiah and the Formation of Jewish Law

Revised stories of the patriarchs proved powerful propaganda, and Deuteronomy presented the moral code of early Judaism — with a surprising amount of human rights. 

The penultimate king of Judah, Josiah is held up as the best of the best. We have him to thank for the Judaism practiced today.

King Josiah receives more superlatives of awesomeness than any other figure in the Old Testament. And with heavy hitters like Moses, David and Joshua, that’s saying something. 

“Before him there was no king like him, who turned to the Lord with all his heart and with all his soul and with all his might, according to all the law of Moses; nor did any like him arise after him,” gushes 2 Kings 23:25.

Not too bad for a kid who was crowned in 639 BCE at the tender age of 8, after his father, Amon, was assassinated in a coup, having reigned only a year.

King Josiah oversees a ritual sacrifice in this illustration from an Egyptian manuscript.

Of course, it turns that the early books of the Old Testament were written in the 7th century BCE, when Josiah ruled the kingdom of Judah. The writings were planned specifically to bolster his vision of a unified Israel, where everyone abandoned all other deities to worship only YHWH (aka Yahweh, or God), according to Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman in The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology’s New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts. 

The book of Law that King Josiah discovered in the Temple was, most likely, the original book of Deuteronomy. We’re not sure why this prompted him to tear his robe, though.

Finding the Book of Law

In the 18th year of Josiah’s reign, 622 BCE, the king commanded his high priest to renovate the Temple. During the work, a new book of Law turned up. 

“That book, identified by most scholars as an original form of the book of Deuteronomy, sparked a revolution in ritual and a complete reformation of Israelite identity,” Finkelstein and Silberman explain. “This was the formative moment in the crystallization of the biblical tradition as we now know it.”

King Josiah has the idols of Baal destroyed (and the priests killed) in this illustration by Gustave Doré.

According to Josiah and other hardcore monotheists, there was a lot of work to be done (and undone). 

The new book of Law “suddenly and shockingly revealed that the traditional practice of the cult of YHWH in Judah had been wrong,” the authors continue. 

Pagan practices were taking place even within the confines of the Temple itself. Josiah had all the iconography of Baal removed, along with anything used to worship the sun, moon and stars, and had it all burned. He also broke down the houses of the male cult prostitutes (!!!). 

That was just the beginning. Josiah marched northward, smashing stone altars to other gods and killing their priests. 

The frontispiece to the book of Deuteronomy in the Nuremberg Bible

A Revolution in Human Rights

The new Law wasn’t all just destruction and death, though.

Josiah made Passover an official holy day, which linked him with Moses, who was involved in the holiday’s gruesome origin. 

More than this, “Deuteronomy calls for the protection of the individual, for the defense of what we would call today human rights and human dignity,” write Finkelstein and Silberman. “Its laws offer an unprecedented concern for the weak and helpless.” 

For example, Deuteronomy 15:7-8 states, “If there is among you a poor man … you shall open your hand to him, and lend him sufficient for his need, whatever it may be.” Imagine if that were still in practice today.

Joseph’s awful brothers sold him into slavery. He was born too soon — thanks to the book of Deuteronomy, his servitude would only have lasted six years.

In addition, Josiah’s law gave inheritance rights to wives, instructed farmers to give tithes to the poor every third year, protected resident aliens from discrimination and freed slaves after six years of servitude. 

The Death of King Josiah by Francesco Conti, who lived 1681-1760

Josiah’s Lasting Legacy

Was Josiah successful in his campaign of religious centralization? Perhaps not on as broad a scale as he would have liked. Evidence suggests that he “failed to stop the veneration of graven images, since figurines of a standing woman supporting her breast with her hands (generally identified with the goddess Asherah) have been found in abundance within private dwelling compounds at all major late-seventh century sites in Judah,” explain Finkelstein and Silberman. 

One god just wasn’t enough for the ancient Judahites — many a household had figurines of the goddess Asherah like this one.

In 610 BCE, the new pharaoh, Necho II, launched a military expedition, allying with Egypt’s old foes the Assyrians to battle an even greater threat: the Babylonian Empire.

No one is quite sure why Josiah joined the fray against Egypt. Whatever the reason, it was a decision that led to his death. 2 Kings 23:29 glosses over the loss of the greatest king of Judah as if the writer were embarrassed: “In his days Pharaoh Necho king of Egypt went up to the king of Assyria to the river Euphrates. King Josiah went to meet him; and Pharaoh Necho slew him at Megiddo, when he saw him.”

Pharaoh Necho II, who killed King Josiah. The Old Testament glosses over this event, as if the writers were embarrassed and wanted to downplay it.

“In his days Pharaoh Necho king of Egypt went up to the king of Assyria to the river Euphrates. King Josiah went to meet him; and Pharaoh Necho slew him at Megiddo, when he saw him.” (2 Kings 23:29)

“One thing is clear. The Deuteronomistic historian, who saw Josiah as a divinely anointed messiah destined to redeem Judah and lead it to glory was clearly at a loss to explain how such a historical catastrophe could occur and left only a curt, enigmatic reference to Josiah’s death,” write Finkelstein and Silberman. “Decades of spiritual revival and visionary hopes seemingly collapsed overnight. Josiah was dead and the people of Israel were again enslaved by Egypt.”

By 597 BCE, all the cities of Judah had been crushed under the Babylonian assault, culminating with the defeat of Jerusalem, which was burned to the ground. The Babylonian ruler, Nebuchadnezzar, looted the Temple and deported all but the poorest inhabitants of Judah. 

The Babylonians, led by King Nebuchadnezzar, defeated Judah, enslaved its people and burned Jerusalem to the ground.

Judah’s last king, Zedekiah, was captured. He had to watch the Babylonians slaughter his sons before he was blinded.

Zedekiah, the last king of Judah, didn’t fare so well. Tragedy of Zedekiah by Charles Monnet, 1750

Nebuchadnezzar had Zedekiah blinded — only after the king of Judah had watched his sons get slaughtered.

Nevertheless, there was a power in Josiah’s movement. His revisionist history and rallying cry have become parts of the most popular book on the planet. And the laws of Deuteronomy found within “served as the foundation for a universal social code and system of community values that endure — even today,” write Finkelstein and Silberman. –Wally 

The True Story of the Assyrian Conquest of Judah

The Old Testament says that good King Hezekiah fended off the Assyrian army at Jerusalem, but his triumph was undone by bad King Manasseh. Archaeology proves otherwise.

Instead of scurrying home in defeat, did the Assyrians actually successfully conquer Jerusalem?

It just doesn’t seem fair that the fate of an entire kingdom would be dependent upon its king’s behavior — namely whether or not he worshiped other gods besides YHWH (Yahweh). 

But that’s exactly what happens throughout the Old Testament. In general, the kingdom of Judah fared much better than its northern neighbor, Israel, which was ultimately laid to waste by Assyria.

“A contemporary record explains how Sennacherib laid siege to city after city throughout Judah, conquering them with ramps and battering rams.

He captured King Hezekiah and kept him “like a bird in a cage.” ”

The Bible tells us that King Hezekiah defeated the Assyrians with divine intervention. But archaeological evidence from the time suggests otherwise.

Hezekiah and the Miraculous Defeat of Assyria

With King Sargon II of Assyria dead since 705 BCE, Hezekiah (who reigned from 727-698 BCE) decided it was time to rebel, entering a coalition backed by Egypt. Of course, that prompted the new ruler of Assyria, Sennacherib, to gather his formidable army and march upon Judah. 

The book of 2 Kings in the Bible tells the story of a miraculous defeat: The Angel of the Lord went forth, slaying 185,000 soldiers in the Assyrian camp. Needless to say, that frightened King Sennacherib enough that he scurried home — only to be murdered by two of his sons. 

After his supposed defeat, the Assyrian ruler Sennacherib was killed by two of his own sons.

For some reason, Hezekiah’s son and successor, Manasseh (698-642 BCE), isn’t impressed enough with the power of Yahweh to insist upon sole worship of the deity. He makes a theological about-face, and even goes so far as to burn his son as an offering to one of the local gods, practice soothsaying and augury, and deal with mediums and wizards. (Sounds like fun to me — except for the human sacrifice bit.)

The evil King Manasseh had to repent for his sins in the Old Testament — but historical evidence doesn’t jibe with the Bible’s version of events.

Archaeology Tells a Different Story

Were the Assyrians defeated during their invasion of Judah? If the story in the Old Testament seems almost too fantastical to believe, that’s because it probably is. Archaeological evidence — granted, some from the Assyrian point of view — tells another version.

A contemporary record explains how Sennacherib laid siege to city after city throughout Judah, conquering them with ramps and battering rams. He captured King Hezekiah and kept him prisoner in his palace, “like a bird in a cage,” while the Assyrian army plundered his land. 

So who’s telling the truth? The authors of the Bible or the Assyrian historians?

Bad news for biblical literalists: “The devastation of the Judahite cities can be seen in almost every mound excavated in the Judean hinterland,” write Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman in The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology’s New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts.

Sennacherib, the ruler of Assyria at the time of Hezekiah and Manasseh

Manasseh and Assyria

Perhaps Manasseh is remembered so poorly because he actually became one of Assyria’s most loyal vassal states — despite the prosperity it brought. 

“[A] seventh century text reporting tribute given by south Levantine states to the Assyrian king indicates that Judah’s tribute was considerably smaller than that paid by the neighboring, poorer Assyrian vassals Ammon and Moab,” write Finkelstein and Silverman.

Manasseh was said to be captured and marched to Assyria in chains — including one through his nose. But a contemporary record says it was Hezekiah who was captured and kept “like a bird in a cage.”

In another document, Manasseh is reported as giving gifts to the Assyrian king and helping him conquer Egypt. And while this certainly would have displeased anyone who wanted a free, unified kingdom of Israel, Manasseh’s long reign of 55 years was a peaceful time for Judah. 

The Defeat of Sennacherib by Peter Paul Rubens, 17th century

“For all the Bible’s talk of Hezekiah’s piety and YHWH’s saving intervention, Assyria was the only victor,” Finkelstein and Silverman write.  “Sennacherib fully achieved his goals: he broke the resistance of Judah and subjugated it. Hezekiah had inherited a prosperous state, and Sennacherib destroyed it.”

The author of the books of Kings seems to have hoped that by the time he wrote his version of the account, people would have forgotten what actually had happened. For centuries, this is what people have believed — until archeological evidence has come along to prove them wrong. –Wally