ANCIENT INQUIRY
AT-1656

Baal and Yahweh as storm gods: A comparative study of Ugaritic and biblical traditions

DOI · Academic research

verifiedRetraction / correction review1 usage record

Source record

This is one canonical bibliographic record with topic-scoped research-use entries. It does not reproduce the paper, book, text, dataset, image, or manuscript and does not imply that full text was reviewed.
Canonical source ID
AT-1656
Accepted usage IDs
AT-1656
Types
DOI
Roles
Academic research
Verification
verified
Archive state
unavailable-through-registered-public-or-tdm-routes
Access
unavailable-through-registered-public-or-tdm-routes
Rights
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0; not cleared
Public reproduction
Permitted only under the exact recorded Creative Commons terms and required attribution; verify the asset-specific license before reuse.
Correction / retraction
no retraction flag in checked Crossref/OpenAlex metadata

Recorded research uses

AT-1656

Ugarit

Why Ancient Inquiry uses this citation here

comparative study of Baal and Yahweh as storm gods in Ugaritic and biblical traditions; comparison does not imply identity

What this usage does not establish

Acquisition does not imply full methodological review.
Open topic

Topics citing it and claims using it

Supporting citation for public claim

Ugaritic evidence places Israelite and biblical traditions within a wider West Semitic cultural and religious environment without proving direct dependence for every passage.

The source base is strong, but the interpretation must remain precise. Ugarit strongly supports cultural and linguistic context. It does not automatically settle every question of biblical dependence.
Open claim topic
Supporting citation for public claim

Ugaritic and biblical materials provide strong evidence of shared West Semitic religious and literary background without making the traditions identical.

Answer / theory: It strongly shows shared West Semitic religious and literary background. Direct copying has to be argued passage by passage. What supports it: Parallels in divine council imagery, storm-god language, sea-combat motifs, and poetic vocabulary. What is weak or disputed: Broad “copied from Ugarit” claims are usually too blunt. Evidence level: Strong Evidence for shared context, mixed evidence for direct borrowing claims.
Open claim topic
Supporting citation for public claim

Direct borrowing from Ugaritic into a specific biblical passage must be argued passage by passage; similarity alone is insufficient.

Answer / theory: It strongly shows shared West Semitic religious and literary background. Direct copying has to be argued passage by passage. What supports it: Parallels in divine council imagery, storm-god language, sea-combat motifs, and poetic vocabulary. What is weak or disputed: Broad “copied from Ugarit” claims are usually too blunt. Evidence level: Strong Evidence for shared context, mixed evidence for direct borrowing claims.
Open claim topic

Access and actions

Baal and Yahweh as storm gods: A comparative study of Ugaritic and biblical traditions

Open original

Search Ancient Inquiry

Open complete search

Visual theme

Theme intensity changes decoration only. Evidence and relationship semantics never change.

Prepare an issue report

This static site cannot transmit a correction by itself. It prepares a complete report with page and build provenance for the published corrections channel.

Open corrections instructions