"I did a very small amount of research and found this site:
It looks fairly impartial to me, and it does a good job of refuting or at least addressing some of the claims you've made, Entity."
"It's different names for the same being."
The bible was written by many different people over many years. The author known to scholars as Second Isiah, who lived around 600 BCE, wrote the second half of the book of Isiah and edited many parts of the torah and talmud to change the many gods into a single god. The reason he did this was because at the time Judea was being invaded by Babylon and the Babylonians scattered the Israelites to different parts of their empire to prevent rebellion.
At the time and place which god you worshiped was tied deeply to your location. In Psalm 137:3-4 is an example of this way of thinking. Babylon was the land of Marduk, whom I've mentioned before, so in effect both Babylon and Israel shared a religion at the time. The speaker is an Israelite prisoner and exile from Judea right after the invasion of Babylon.
"For there our captors asked us for songs, and our tormentors asked for mirth, saying, "Sing us one of the songs of Zion!" How could we sing Yahweh's song in a foreign land?"
In our current, common understanding of god it is thought that god is present everywhere and is all powerful. Why would this Israelite have difficulty singing songs of praise?
This is why the cult of Yahweh had to evolve into a monotheistic religion, otherwise it would die out. So that's why Second Isiah changed the torah and the talmud. It was to save his religion.
So I have the motivation and the opportunity, but there's more evidence. We can determine approximately when various parts of the bible were written based off of the kind of language used (just like you can place a date on Chaucer vs Shakespeare,) references to contemporary events, political and social goals that can be inferred from the text based on historical knowledge of the time period, and the smooth narrative flow when parts written by other authors are removed.
So we have motivation, opportunity and circumstantial evidence to support my claim in this case.
Moreover, the author of the response admitted that I am at least partially correct, "allow me to note that I do believe that some Israelites believed in many gods, of which Yahweh was one. However, there is also evidence inside and outside the Bible that there were other Israelites who believed in a single deity."
The author also claims that there is no deity named "El Elyon." But there is see:
Of course, Wikipedia isn't a good first source, but it's what I have on hand at the moment.
In fact, the parable of Abraham going up the mountain to kill his first son is a Jewish rejection of the standard practice of sacrificing your first born son to El Elyon, (who is also El Shaddai or "God of the Mountains", which explains why he went up the mountain to do so. El Elyon, not Yahweh was the god of Abraham as I believe I mentioned my previous post.)
And he considered the EnÃ»ma EliÅ¡ and other extra biblical texts of the sort not to be "compelling evidence" of a connection, despite similarities in mythology, names of gods, and geographical and temporal nearness. It is baffling to me why he would disregard this connection.
So at the end of it all, it's simply a matter of disagreement between biblical scholars (not that I am a biblical scholar, but I draw my material from those who are,) and I readily admit that the gentleman in question is more learned than I am on the subject. However, the difference his position from the position I take isn't as large as he is making out (aside from his being incorrect on certain points.)