What is the context?
The settlers continue making their own gods and placing them in the shrines left in the towns. The account names different deities associated with the different peoples and includes the horror of burning children in sacrifice.
They also appoint priests for the high places and worship the Lord while continuing to serve their own gods. The report of acknowledgment is therefore qualified by divided allegiance.
The narrative is not presenting the many forms of worship as interchangeable. Its concern is that the Lord is being added to a religious arrangement that leaves the earlier gods and practices in place.
How is this passage commonly understood?
Wesley distinguishes outward worship of the Lord from the continuing service of other gods. The USCCB note cautions that several of the listed divine names are uncertain. Keeping the BSB’s names does not require inventing a verified identity, symbol, or set of rituals for each one.
What is our position?
We don't have a position on this passage yet. When our study reaches a conclusion the text supports, it will appear here.
Where can I study this further?
No deeper study linked yet.