The rhetoric against the idols in the Bible is not an example of the Jews’ vision of a transcendent god wholly independent of the pagan culture around them. These rhetorics establish a “theopolitical” discourse in the context of Mesopotamian icon/idol politics:

In fact, this idol polemic literature that emerged during the exile period is trying to do with rhetoric what other nations did with war. Just as the Assyrian kings destroyed the temples of the Elamites and said that their gods were now “ghosts/nothingness”. Israelis also do this with literature.

This rhetoric is also used in Isaiah 40-55. But even if the rhetoric here seems very “monotheistic” to us compared to the context of polytheist Mesopotamia, it is not too different from other idol rhetoric of the period. The difference is not a categorical one, but a rhetorical one.

Akhenaten must be viewed alongside other cult centralization initiatives. Sennacherib, Nebuchadnezzar, Akhenaten and Josiah all fall under this category of southwest asian cult centralization initiatives.

1. But cult centralization is costly and requires political force, it usually emerges through political action. Though the specific motive for each individual is simply unknown. But probably a mosaic of political social economic and personal reasons is the answer.
2. “Rather than imagining their national god (Yahweh) being defeated by more powerful gods such as Ashur and Marduk, Judean theologians redesigned Mesopotamian cosmology by rendering all other gods powerless.”