Sure, that's why I referred to "peasant doing their mixing and matching". And the vocal opposition in 1/2 Kings against the worship of foreign gods itself leads one to think that this was a present and persistent "problem". Otherwise, why harp on it so much? But I agree - my initial wording was a bit too sweeping.
---
However, since the Wiki-page refers to Finkelstein/Silberman 2002 - (This is going to be more of a digression than anything else) it's interesting to note that they rely on two sources for their inferences: One is figurines and other archaeological evidence suggestive of a more non-supervised form of local/private cult (libation vessels, incense altars etc.).
Quote:
"Indeed, for Judah, with its relatively underdeveloped state bureaucracy and national institutions, religious rituals were carried out in two distinct arenas—sometimes working in concert, sometimes in open conflict. The first was the Temple in Jerusalem, about which there is abundant biblical description from various periods but (since its site was obliterated in later building operations) virtually no archaeological evidence. The second focus of religious practice was among the clans scattered throughout the countryside. There, complex networks of kinship relations dominated all phases of life, including religion. Rituals for the fertility of the land and the blessings of the ancestors gave people hope for the well-being of their families and sanctified their possession of their village fields and grazing lands."
Since the high places were presumably open areas or natural hilltops, no definite archaeological traces of them have as yet been identified. So the clearest archaeological evidence of the popularity of this type of worship throughout the kingdom is the discovery of hundreds of figurines of naked fertility goddesses at every late monarchic site in Judah. More suggestive are the inscriptions found in the early eighth century site of Kuntillet Ajrud in northeastern Sinai—a site that shows cultural links with the northern kingdom. They apparently refer to the goddess Asherah as being the consort of YHWH.
The other form of evidence is biblical literature itself. This presents the danger of circularity: interpreting the biblical account in light of the material culture, and view the relevance of the material culture in light of the biblical account. For example, a bit further on they write:
Quote:
There is ample biblical and archaeological information that the syncretistic cult of YHWH flourished in Jerusalem even in late monarchic times. The con¬demnations of various Judahite prophets make it abundantly clear that YHWH was worshiped in Jerusalem together with other deities, such as Baal, Asherah, the hosts of heaven, and even the national deities of the neighboring lands. From the biblical critique of Solomon (probably re¬flecting late monarchic realities), we learn of worship in Judah of Milcom of Ammon, Chemosh of Moab, and Ashtoreth of Sidon (i Kings 11:5; 2 Kings 23:13). Jeremiah tells us that the number of deities worshiped in Judah equaled the number of its cities and that the number of altars to Baal in Jerusalem equaled the number of bazaar stalls in the capital (Jeremiah 11:13). Moreover, cult objects dedicated to Baal, Asherah, and the host of heaven were installed in the Temple of YHWH in Jerusalem. Ezekiel 8 de¬scribes in detail all the abominations practiced in the Temple in Jerusalem, including the worship of the Mesopotamian god Tammuz.
For one, the biblical account is basically taken at face value. That the prophets had an obvious agenda and therefore good reasons to exaggerate, for example, is an issue that doesn't get addressed. The effects of that can be seen in light of a passage just two paragraphs prior:
Quote:
The first was the Temple in Jerusalem, about which there is abundant biblical description from various periods but (since its site was obliterated in later building operations) virtually no archaeological evidence.
So there is virtually no archaeological evidence of the Temple and what happened in it, yet "cult objects dedicated to Baal, Asherah, and the host of heaven were installed in the Temple of YHWH in Jerusalem" - because Ez 8 says so. And we believe Ez 8 because ... we find figurines, high places of worship, libation vessels etc.
Finkelstein/Silberman 2002 have been criticized for exactly that rather one-dimensional use of biblical evidence. The reason for their approach is that both Finkelstein and Silberman are archaeologists - and very good ones. Questions of the hermeneutics of interpretation etc., however, more or less pass them by.
---
Again, this is not to say that I disagree with you. And I actually think "The Bible Unearthed" is a book that pretty much any christian should read (despite thinking that it's a book that shouldn't be used referencing wiki-pages). For all its faults, it's a lot more right than wrong.
Anyway - not sure where I'm going with this. I guess my point is that if you queried all american christians in depth about their faith, you'd probably discover that a significant portion of them are tritheists, some of them are strict monotheists, some of them are just sort of spiritual etc. etc. I'd say that doesn't mean that American Christianity is not trinitaric - it just means that people don't understand/don't really think about theology. So if we find figurines of Baal in basically every iron-age village of the levant, I wouldn't immediately jump to the conclusion that Israel/Judah as a state, with a state cult, was polytheist.
