No, I take it literally. Baal meant lord and it was a demonic deity. There is no “pattern of human behavior” without entities around which it forms. Ephesians 6.
>>No, I take it literally
And you voted for Carter and other Useful Idiots how many times?
>>There is no “pattern of human behaviorâ€
LOL. The Israelites who were repeatedly given over to their enemies for their participation in the worship of that state-established pattern contradict your opinion.
” Thus we read of the “ba’al” of a house, of land, of goods, of a woman (that is, as a husband). It is also generalized so far as to be a mere noun of relation. Thus a “ba’al of dreams”is a dreamer; a “ba’al of anger” is an angry man; a “ba’al of wings” is a bird; a “ba’al of edges” is two-edged; “ba’alim of a covenant” are allies; “ba’als of an oath” are conspirators. Further, a “ba’al” may be the owner of animals (Isa. i. 3; Ex. xxi. 28 et seq.), but not of men as slaves or subjects, for the phrase in Isa. xvi. 8, the “ba’alim” of the nations, implies dominion over regions rather than over people. “Ba’al” in Hebrew is therefore essentially different from “adon,” which implies personal sway and control. When any divinity is called “ba’al” or “a ba’al,” the designation must be understood to imply not a ruler of men, but a possessor or controller of certain things. On the other hand, the Assyrian (Babylonian) “bÄ“l,” originally the same word, implies especially lordship over men, though it is also, as in all north-Semitic languages, used as a mere noun of relation. In Arabic “ba’al,” as applied to persons, is confined to the meaning of “husband.””
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/2236-ba-al-and-ba-al-worship