I recently checked the 2013 edition of the scriptures for an entry in the Bible Dictionary that should have been corrected.
This is what I gave them as feedback on the site form that asks for it:
“Baal. Possessor, lord. The Sun-god and the male or generative principle in nature. He was worshipped with different ideas and rites (compare the plural Baalim) in different places”
Ok, that was current when British Egyptologists dominated religious studies — in the 1800s. Since then we know that Baal had two hammers, thunder and lightning. He rode in the clouds. He was banished by the summer drought, the god of irrigation was a pretender to his throne and he returned in majesty with the winter storms.
He was clearly an Indoeuropean Storm god such as Jupiter, Zeus or Thor. Thus when the heavens are sealed against rain, it is a reproof to the worship of Baal, not an affirmation of his power. When the challenge is to bring fire out of heaven on the mountain tops (which is where lightning strikes most often in Israel) it was a challenge directly to him.
I’d like to suggest that this entry be cleaned up.
A better example of a current entry on Baal can be found here.
After 1929 it was pretty clear just who Baal was. To quote from the Britannica:
In Ugaritic and Old Testament Hebrew, Baal’s epithet as the storm god was He Who Rides on the Clouds. In Phoenician he was called Baal Shamen, Lord of the Heavens.
Knowledge of Baal’s personality and functions derives chiefly from a number of tablets uncovered from 1929 onward at Ugarit (modern Ras Shamra) …
—- bless their hearts.
- What errors have you found in the manuals or scripture helps?
- Have you given feedback about a mistaken or outdated entry?
Discuss.
Wheat & Tares 
A while back, I’ve purchased a Catholic study bible, and a combo Bible (NIV, KJV, NASB, and AMP). It is amazing the extra tools for understanding the bible these other bibles have (especially the catholic study bible.)
It would be nice if the church updated their version of the Bible Dictionary, and added some of these nice study features of other study bibles (as well as the BoM). I guess that leaves the door open for someone else like Grant Hardy’s Understanding the Book of Mormon, but of course if the church put out something like Grant has done, more members would be open to it, and Sunday School scholarship would improve immensely.
I found the OT Sunday School lesson manual generally dated. One particular example is lesson 23 where it speaks about the idea of Deborah being a “true friend” to Barak which cannot be demonstrated by the scriptures. In fact the opposite seems to be true. There are other examples.
I have never provided feedback because in my experience it makes little difference.
(1) The Guide implies that “Zion” means “pure in heart” when this is just a subtitle given in one verse of scripture. The actual etymology is debatable, and IMHOP “pure in heart” is too vague a definition to lead off with.
(2) The old Bible Dictionary says Eve means “Mother of all living.” Looks like it was corrected to “Life” in the new Guide. I was always like, “Do people really think all those concepts could fit into three letters?!”
(3) Not in any manuals I’m aware of, but perpetuated in every class where the phrase “great and terrible” comes up: Someone remarks that it will be great for the righteous and terrible for the wicked. “Great” in Hebrew refers to scope and has little to do with the “Grrr-eat” of Tony the Tiger.
I complained about a website feature that bugged me. At one point they had an online ‘add note’ type feature incorporated into the online lesson manuals. Given I didn’t present my lessons from the online manual, but instead pasted the text into a WP document, and edited there. The add note at that point got included in the copy and paste, which given it was at least every paragraph was a total pain. A little while later, I noticed it was gone, and no longer a problem. That’s a tech thing rather than a content issue though, and it maybe I wasn’t the only one providing and complaining.
*providing feedback and complaining.
Laurel, my daughter was complaining of your #3 a couple of days ago, with reference to seminary, and my son was complaining about the general interpretation at church of another scriptural phrase, if I can only remember what it was… An eye single to the glory of God – should mean sincere, without deceit, he said. A now obsolete meaning of the word.
Sung: “I know the scriptures are true.” Especially those handy indexes.
my uncle’s favorite joke. We still worship idols today. Even Baal.
Foot-Baal, Basket-Baal, etc.
ha ha
Thanks for the comments.
Stephen: “He was clearly an Indoeuropean Storm god such as Jupiter, Zeus or Thor.”
No, he’s Semitic, not Indo-European. The page you linked to (Encyclopedia Britannica) makes this clear:
“As a Semitic common noun baal (Hebrew baʿal) meant “owner” or “lord,””
Also, per Britannica, he’s primarily a fertility god:
“As such, Baal designated the universal god of fertility”
And, since Baal is described as male, this would make him “the male or generative principle”.
I guess the Bible Dictionary does transpose “sun god” for “sky god”. Doesn’t seem like a crucial distinction to me, at least for the average Bible reader.
Bottom line, your criticism of the Bible Dictionary’s entry on “Baal” is much less accurate that the entry itself.
I would like to see the Bible Dictionary updated, however.