Judgment Summary:
“Yahwism”-type revisionists seek to show that Abrahamic monotheism grew out of Polytheism. They cite as evidence the existence of tribalised variants of Yahweh and / or images of Yahweh having wives &c.
This is already covered by the Monotheist’s own account of what happened after Prophets brought monotheism, how it degenerated into tribalism and polytheism via idol-intercessors, all as an exponent of creeping materialism which required a deity that we could physically touch.
The revisionists @Bob and @felix_dakat ignore this simple counterargument and its commentary, and prefer to keep restating their case. This is the fallacy of Invincible Ignorance (no offence).
As all can see here on this challenge thread, they are too pusillanimous to debate it formally, in a succinct controlled situation where their fallacy of Invincible Ignorance would be set in stone and laid bare - this new-fangled revisionism needs monsterthreads, where objections are hastily buried via mindless repetition of a Revisionist thread’s OP.
All rise for judgement.
There’s nothing new to be said on the matter. However fantastic the claim of Monotheism may be, about One God really existing, the Revisionist attack which purports to find new evidence on a millennia-old problem, is merely derivative and so the time-honoured ownership claim of Monotheism on this property (the property = Historicity) is upheld.
As a derivative of the Monotheist narrative, the Revisionist claim is at best fanciful, and at worst: it fully upholds the claim of Monotheism because it purports to have found degenerate forms of Monotheism already within the narrative of Monotheism.
@Bob @felix_dakat You have brought a frivolous claim of ownership of the house of Historicity. You have not responded to the summons for this trial. You have extended the matter beyond comprehension.
DIRECTIONS:
I order in absentia that you pay God compensation and l issue a 12 month Civil Restraint Order entailing no Sealioning of anybody that believes God is One and has revealed Scripture to humankind. It may even be on your threads but Historicity is a house and that house is Monotheism’s so you are sealioning.
As a final direction: One interesting aspect is that the Revisionists ignore what “Yahweh” means and it’s evidently not even on Google. The meaning cripples their narrative and I order that the meaning of the noun “Yahweh” shall be withheld @Bob and @felix_dakat as a special direction requested by the Defence so as to keep the giggles coming.
Gavel bangs.