Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament: Introducing the Conceptual World of the Hebrew Bible

by John H. Walton

When we compare the ancient Near Eastern ideas of ontology and theogony to the biblical portrayal of Yahweh, we see some significant similarities and differences. The most obvious difference is seen in the absence of any theogony in Israel. The biblical text offers no indication that Israel considered Yahweh as having an origin, and there are no other gods to bring into existence either by procreation or separation. Since the cosmos is not viewed as a manifestation of divine attributes, Israel’s cosmogony develops without any need of theogony. The issue of theogony is likewise foreign to contemporary Christian and Jewish theology, where God is considered eternally existing. In the area of ontology, however, there is more continuity. The name of Yahweh itself invites ontological assessments. Whether it represents a simple statement of existence or expresses a causative aspect in its verbal form, the giving of the name is surrounded by statements of identity linked with role. Though we may not go so far as to revert to G. E. Wright’s “God who acts,” we nevertheless cannot miss the common role-oriented descriptors when attributes are defined. More than that, the biblical depiction of Yahweh insists that he is the only God, which, given the ontology laid out above, indicates that there is no jurisdiction or role allotted to any other deity. This will be discussed at greater length in “Comparative Exploration 6.3” on the Decalogue. A specific text that is informed and illuminat...