God's Wife Asherah

Create a topic and discuss! No subject is off limits, but moderators have the right to remove asshat posts. What's an asshat post? Selling stuff, trolling, harassing--the usual stuff you don't want to see either. Happy posting!
searchengineguy
Posts: 474
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2019 9:26 pm

Re: God's Wife Asherah

Post by searchengineguy »

What is an Asherah pole, and why did Yahweh hate it? It was his ex wife!
See:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asherah_pole
An Asherah pole is a sacred tree or pole that stood near Canaanite religious locations to honor the Ugaritic mother-goddess Asherah, consort of El.[1] The relation of the literary references to an asherah and archaeological finds of Judaean pillar-figurines has engendered a literature of debate.[2]

The asherim were also cult objects related to the worship of the fertility goddess Asherah, the consort of either Ba'al or, as inscriptions from Kuntillet ‘Ajrud and Khirbet el-Qom attest, Yahweh,[3] and thus objects of contention among competing cults. In translations of the Hebrew Bible that render the Hebrew asherim into English as "Asherah poles," the insertion of "pole" begs the question by setting up unwarranted expectations for such a wooden object: "we are never told exactly what it was", observes John Day.[4] The traditional interpretation of the Biblical text is that the Israelites imported pagan elements such as the Asherah poles from the surrounding Canaanites. In light of archeological finds, however, modern scholars now theorize that the Israelite folk religion was Canaanite in its inception and always polytheistic, and it was the prophets and priests who denounced the Asherah poles who were the innovators;[5] such theories inspire ongoing debate.[6]

References from the Hebrew Bible Edit
Asherim are mentioned in the Hebrew Bible in the books of Exodus, Deuteronomy, Judges, the Books of Kings, the second Book of Chronicles, and the books of Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Micah. The term often appears as merely אשרה, (Asherah) referred to as "groves" in the King James Version, which follows the Septuagint rendering as ἄλσος, pl. ἄλση, and the Vulgate lucus,[7] and "poles" in the New Revised Standard Version; no word that may be translated as "poles" appears in the text. Scholars have indicated, however, that the plural use of the term (English "Asherahs", translating Hebrew Asherim or Asherot) provides ample evidence that reference is being made to objects of worship rather than a transcendent figure.[8]

The Hebrew Bible suggests that the poles were made of wood. In the sixth chapter of the Book of Judges, God is recorded as instructing the Israelite judge Gideon to cut down an Asherah pole that was next to an altar to Baal. The wood was to be used for a burnt offering.

Deuteronomy 16:21 states that YHWH (rendered as "the Lord") hated Asherim whether rendered as poles: "Do not set up any [wooden] Asherah [pole][9] beside the altar you build to the Lord your God" or as living trees: "You shall not plant any tree as an Asherah beside the altar of the Lord your God which you shall make".[10] That Asherahs were not always living trees is shown in 1 Kings 14:23: "their asherim, beside every luxuriant tree".[11] However, the record indicates that the Jewish people often departed from this ideal. For example, King Manasseh placed an Asherah pole in the Holy Temple (2 Kings 21:7). King Josiah's reforms in the late 7th century BC included the destruction of many Asherah poles (2 Kings 23:14).

Exodus 34:13 states: "Break down their altars, smash their sacred stones and cut down their Asherim [Asherah poles]."

Asherah poles in biblical archaeology Edit
Some biblical archaeologists have suggested that until the 6th century BC the Israelite peoples had household shrines, or at least figurines, of Asherah, which are strikingly common in the archaeological remains.[12]

Raphael Patai identified the pillar figurines with Asherah[13] in The Hebrew Goddess.
See also:https://www.seeker.com/gods-wife-edited ... 83399.html
“One would go mad if one took the Bible seriously; but to take it seriously one must be already mad.”
Aleister Crowley

JTH
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Nov 01, 2019 5:21 pm

Re: God's Wife Asherah

Post by JTH »

Chapabel wrote:
Tue Jan 07, 2020 5:01 pm
JTH...now you can begin to understand why I warned you about SEG. He rejects any truth except what he believes to be truth. His experts are usually bloggers or atheist "Biblical" scholars who reject the authority of the Bible. His responses are neither well thought out nor meaningful. If you look at his responses to you, you will notice his guile. Any discussions with him is a waste of time because he will never admit you may be right or he may be wrong. Good luck.
You know him so well eh!

User avatar
Chapabel
Posts: 908
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2018 10:27 pm
Location: Tennessee

Re: God's Wife Asherah

Post by Chapabel »

JTH wrote:
Wed Jan 08, 2020 11:23 pm
Chapabel wrote:
Tue Jan 07, 2020 5:01 pm
JTH...now you can begin to understand why I warned you about SEG. He rejects any truth except what he believes to be truth. His experts are usually bloggers or atheist "Biblical" scholars who reject the authority of the Bible. His responses are neither well thought out nor meaningful. If you look at his responses to you, you will notice his guile. Any discussions with him is a waste of time because he will never admit you may be right or he may be wrong. Good luck.
You know him so well eh!
Well enough that I won’t waste time trying to have discussion with him any more.

JTH
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Nov 01, 2019 5:21 pm

Re: God's Wife Asherah

Post by JTH »

@searchengineguy
Appreciate your response.

1. You’ve butchered my post just like u do the bible verse. The first chapter in the book of Genesis is connected to the last chapter in the book of Revelation. The former sections of my post is connected even to the last line of my post. It’s like a string of pearl. You can’t just pull out one pearl from the centre and still think that the string is intact. It’s the same as I mentioned about the bible verse, “Misunderstanding happens easily when someone removes a verse out of its context and then try to interpret its meaning.” It IS unfair that U’d pluck out one bead and assume the thread isn’t broken.

2.
“Sure! but would you agree that all religions evolve and don't stay static?”
We were talking about God, not religions. Then, why would you bring religions inside? Religion is man-made, it changes all the time. It’s common knowledge.

3. We all know wiki is hardly a proper source. I’m surprised you’d even take the time to quote it. But still, to humor your
“I don't believe Yahweh and El are the same gods. Yahweh was originally believed to be one of many gods that the ancient Israelites worshipped.”
, there’s a difference between what someone believes and what is actually true! You sound like the kind of person that is swayed easily. Most of your statements are, “That scholar believes this, I believe this...” rather than, “I believe this because...” and the times you do use “because”, sorry but it’s very weak!

4.
“Of course! Do you know that most biblical scholars don't believe he existed?”
Again, “I believe coz that scholar said such and such” doesn’t make it the truth. Most scholars make statements to get a societal credential or to make money. A lot of them are good in what they do but their work is only for reference not for belief! Like @moonwoodthehare said previously about you, I’m paraphrasing of course, you lack independence in your belief statements. Btw, I’m sure you know that there’s enough evidence for Moses, his upbringing and what he did in his lifetime.

5.
“Moses was a henotheist in that he believed that Yahweh was the greatest among all of the other gods.”
That’s a demeaning label! Especially when you don’t know someone or their life. Where can you point to that says that Moses believed exactly that or that he was that?

6. When you said “Agreed” on God vs. God’s name, I thought we might be getting somewhere but then you straight up jump into the least of the priorities, capital H. Are you from this century?? If not, here - when something is capitalized in texting, it is to em..pha..size. I’m the one who texts, so I can Emphasize whichever I want to be emphasized! My perks ^_^

7.
“But it was originally sons of God It wasn't until the the ninth century that the Masoretic text replaces "sons of God" with "sons of Israel". Why change the so called word of God?”
Where in the world does it say that in the ORIGINAL Text it was “sons of God”? The Hebrew Bible? Torah? The Qumran? Septuagint? And even if it was, it can still be the correct reading positioned in Deuteronomy 32:8 as in no way it requires one to view Israelite religion as polytheistic.
Yet, If I have to follow your so-called line of reasoning, I’ll say, “sons of Kings does not equal kings. Hence, sons of God does not equal gods. Monotheism. Ta-da!”
There are deeper sources to support that “sons of God” in Deuteronomy 32:8 can still be the correct reading while in no way requires one to view Israelite religion as polytheistic. But I’m not sure you’re ready for that deep yet.

8.
“Misunderstandings also happen when people try and brainwash you into believing what is not true.”
I could say the same about you! I can say that you have misunderstood Bible translations as you’ve been brainwashed into believing what’s not true.

9.
“Absolutely! The Masoretes changed the text because they wanted to avoid polytheistic implications.”
Translations help remove misunderstandings. Polytheistic implication - it is just that! Mere Implications. That’s why they reversion.
“Or screw the meanings to fit their own theologies.”


There are people who do that but then again, Theology IS NOT the Bible! That’s why you shouldn’t base your beliefs on what scholars say.

‭‭ 10.
“It looks like you don't believe that Judaism evolved from previous polytheistic religions. Am I right?”


If Israelite religion evolve from polytheistic religion, From where did polytheistic religions evolve from?

I’ve already mentioned what I believe and why.
From my previous response:
“At different time periods, Israelites did disobey their ONE TRUE GOD and worshipped other gods and idols but that DOESN’T EVER make Yahweh himself any other than monotheistic God of Israel.”


Religion is man-made, it changes. But the God of Israel, I AM never ever changes. People change their minds in what they believe about who God is but that doesn’t make it true of God just coz someone believes it.

searchengineguy
Posts: 474
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2019 9:26 pm

Re: God's Wife Asherah

Post by searchengineguy »

JTH wrote:
Thu Jan 09, 2020 2:53 am
@searchengineguy
Appreciate your response.
You're very welcome!
JTH wrote:
Thu Jan 09, 2020 2:53 am
1. You’ve butchered my post just like u do the bible verse. The first chapter in the book of Genesis is connected to the last chapter in the book of Revelation. The former sections of my post is connected even to the last line of my post. It’s like a string of pearl. You can’t just pull out one pearl from the centre and still think that the string is intact. It’s the same as I mentioned about the bible verse, “Misunderstanding happens easily when someone removes a verse out of its context and then try to interpret its meaning.” It IS unfair that U’d pluck out one bead and assume the thread isn’t broken.
I don't know how the first chapter in the book of Genesis is connected to the last chapter in the book of Revelation. You could say that ANY verses in the Bible, it's all interpretation and subjective. Sorry for the butchering, but you'll get over it!
2.
“Sure! but would you agree that all religions evolve and don't stay static?”
We were talking about God, not religions. Then, why would you bring religions inside? Religion is man-made, it changes all the time. It’s common knowledge.
You're god evolved pretty substantially too, from a badass war god to a meek and mild lamb. At least the war god only tortured and killed you once, Jesus introduced eternal torture for finite sins.
3. We all know wiki is hardly a proper source. I’m surprised you’d even take the time to quote it. But still, to humor your
“I don't believe Yahweh and El are the same gods. Yahweh was originally believed to be one of many gods that the ancient Israelites worshipped.”
, there’s a difference between what someone believes and what is actually true! You sound like the kind of person that is swayed easily. Most of your statements are, “That scholar believes this, I believe this...” rather than, “I believe this because...” and the times you do use “because”, sorry but it’s very weak!
Wrong. I'm very sceptical if you haven't worked that out yet and have no trust in faith as a mechanism for determining the truth. If Francesca Stavrakopoulou (who is a professor of the Hebrew Bible and Ancient Religion) believes that Asherah was God's consort because of her extensive research into the evidence, that to me is pretty convincing.

4.
“Of course! Do you know that most biblical scholars don't believe he existed?”
Again, “I believe coz that scholar said such and such” doesn’t make it the truth. Most scholars make statements to get a societal credential or to make money. A lot of them are good in what they do but their work is only for reference not for belief! Like @moonwoodthehare said previously about you, I’m paraphrasing of course, you lack independence in your belief statements. Btw, I’m sure you know that there’s enough evidence for Moses, his upbringing and what he did in his lifetime.
There isn't actually. What's your best evidence? Please don't tell me that he wrote the Pentateuch. If the consensus of biblical scholars today accept that he was a mythical character, why can't you? Have you any Egyptian sources that write about this amazing person that supposedly freed all of their slaves?
5.
“Moses was a henotheist in that he believed that Yahweh was the greatest among all of the other gods.”
That’s a demeaning label! Especially when you don’t know someone or their life. Where can you point to that says that Moses believed exactly that or that he was that?
It wasn't meant to be demeaning, it was meant to be a factual statement. Read Exodus 18:11 for example:
Now I know that the LORD is greater than all other gods, for he did this to those who had treated Israel arrogantly."
It's obvious that Moses believed (or knew) other gods existed and his god was the best of them.
6. When you said “Agreed” on God vs. God’s name, I thought we might be getting somewhere but then you straight up jump into the least of the priorities, capital H. Are you from this century?? If not, here - when something is capitalized in texting, it is to em..pha..size. I’m the one who texts, so I can Emphasize whichever I want to be emphasized! My perks ^_^
I find it a waste of time, especially when your own KJV doesn't bother with it.
7.
“But it was originally sons of God It wasn't until the the ninth century that the Masoretic text replaces "sons of God" with "sons of Israel". Why change the so called word of God?”
Where in the world does it say that in the ORIGINAL Text it was “sons of God”? The Hebrew Bible? Torah? The Qumran? Septuagint?

That's actually a good point. NO-ONE knows what the original text of god's so called word was, as we don't have anything original. Only copies of copies that have been fiddled with and changed by scribes with evangelising agendas.
And even if it was, it can still be the correct reading positioned in Deuteronomy 32:8 as in no way it requires one to view Israelite religion as polytheistic.

But there is heaps of evidence in your own bible that the ancient Israelites WERE polytheistic. Surely you know that Judaism sprang from polytheistic ancient Semitic religions like the Canaanites?
There are deeper sources to support that “sons of God” in Deuteronomy 32:8 can still be the correct reading while in no way requires one to view Israelite religion as polytheistic. But I’m not sure you’re ready for that deep yet.
If William G. Dever, (a Syro-Palestinian archaeologist) could should you the evidence for Yahweh having a consort (wife) named Asherah would you change your mind?

10.
“It looks like you don't believe that Judaism evolved from previous polytheistic religions. Am I right?”

If Israelite religion evolve from polytheistic religion, From where did polytheistic religions evolve from?

That's easy, from more primitive polytheistic religions.
Religion is man-made, it changes. But the God of Israel, I AM never ever changes. People change their minds in what they believe about who God is but that doesn’t make it true of God just coz someone believes it.
If I gave you just one instance of God changing, would your opinion change?
Last edited by searchengineguy on Fri Jan 10, 2020 8:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
“One would go mad if one took the Bible seriously; but to take it seriously one must be already mad.”
Aleister Crowley

User avatar
Moonwood the Hare
Posts: 455
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2018 4:59 pm

Re: God's Wife Asherah

Post by Moonwood the Hare »

searchengineguy wrote:
Thu Jan 09, 2020 8:06 am
I don't know how the first chapter in the book of Genesis is connected to the last chapter in the book of Revelation. You could say that ANY verses in the Bible, it's all interpretation and subjective. Sorry for the butchering, but you'll get over it!
It is not subjective in any meaningful sense of that much abused word. It is collective as judgements about canon and interpretation always have been.
2.
“Sure! but would you agree that all religions evolve and don't stay static?”
We were talking about God, not religions. Then, why would you bring religions inside? Religion is man-made, it changes all the time. It’s common knowledge.
You're god evolved pretty substantially too, from a badass war god to a meek and mild lamb. At least the war god only tortured and killed you once, Jesus introduced eternal torture for finite sins.
You seem to be conflating the ontological and the conceptual. Ideas about God have changed over time as have ideas about everything. Ideas about say gravity have changed; that does not mean gravity has kept changing. I am not sure what you mean by evolved, but if that is just a fancy word for changed then of course.
Wrong. I'm very sceptical if you haven't worked that out yet and have no trust in faith as a mechanism for determining the truth. If Francesca Stavrakopoulou (who is a professor of the Hebrew Bible and Ancient Religion) believes that Asherah was God's consort because of her extensive research into the evidence, that to me is pretty convincing.
SEG, you are skeptical about some things and credulous about others. Your position with regard to academic experts is clearly a faith position but you find it hard to admit that.
There isn't actually. What's your best evidence? Please don't tell me that he wrote the Pentateuch. If the consensus of biblical scholars today accept that he was a mythical character, why can't you? Have you any Egyptian sources that write about this amazing person that supposedly freed all of their slaves?
Some scholars regard Moses as legendary. I don't know of any serious scholar who thinks he is mythical, though there may be some who think there are mythical elements in the story.
5.
“Moses was a henotheist in that he believed that Yahweh was the greatest among all of the other gods.”
That’s a demeaning label! Especially when you don’t know someone or their life. Where can you point to that says that Moses believed exactly that or that he was that?
It wasn't meant to be demeaning, it was meant to be a factual statement. Read Exodus 18:11 for example:
Now I know that the LORD is greater than all other gods, for he did this to those who had treated Israel arrogantly."
It's obvious that Moses believed (or knew) other gods existed and his god was the best of them.
So Moses did not exist but also held certain beliefs. I think that you mean that in the story Moses is depicted as a henotheist, but that would have to be a misreading, since the whole point of the redacted story is to present Moses as a believer in one god. The most you could say is that the story contains elements of earlier henotheistic accounts. But terms like monotheism and henotheism are modern and highly abstract they don't really reflect the thinking of people in that era except in a very general way.
That's actually a good point. NO-ONE knows what the original text of god's so called word was, as we don't have anything original. Only a copy of copies that has been fiddled with and changed by scribes with evangelising agendas.
There is realy no need for this kind of textual nihilism. Of course scribes will try to interpret a disputed text in line with what they think it is likely to have said but that is true in the present as well as the past. Textual studies are an attempt to get past that. If you were to say on the basis of our limited number of texts and the variations no one knows what, say, Plato thought people would laugh at you, same applies here.
If Israelite religion evolve from polytheistic religion, From where did polytheistic religions evolve from?

That's easy, from more primitive polytheistic religions.
even if you are using the post Hegelian model of religious development that was developed by nineteenth century anthropologists then the answer would be animism not earlier polytheism. However there are flaws with this model and lots of evidence to suggest belief in one God is much older than polytheism even if the two existed alongside each other for a long time.
Religion is man-made, it changes. But the God of Israel, I AM never ever changes. People change their minds in what they believe about who God is but that doesn’t make it true of God just coz someone believes it.
If I gave you just one instance of God changing, would your opinion change?
Those influenced by Greek thought where there is a strong antithesis between being and becoming tend to interpret the I AM in that way but in Hebrew a single word means both being and becoming. So Yahweh can mean I become as well as I am. The best translation is probably 'mind your own business'. It's an existential thing God is what he does.

JTH
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Nov 01, 2019 5:21 pm

Re: God's Wife Asherah

Post by JTH »

Religion is man-made, it changes. But the God of Israel, I AM never ever changes. People change their minds in what they believe about who God is but that doesn’t make it true of God just coz someone believes it.
If I gave you just one instance of God changing, would your opinion change?
@searchengineguy,
Do you agree that Religion is man-made and so it changes?
Do you agree that just coz someone believes something to be true doesn’t make it the truth?

searchengineguy
Posts: 474
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2019 9:26 pm

Re: God's Wife Asherah

Post by searchengineguy »

searchengineguy wrote:
Thu Jan 09, 2020 8:06 am
I don't know how the first chapter in the book of Genesis is connected to the last chapter in the book of Revelation. You could say that ANY verses in the Bible, it's all interpretation and subjective. Sorry for the butchering, but you'll get over it!
Moonwood the Hare wrote:
Thu Jan 09, 2020 6:10 pm
It is not subjective in any meaningful sense of that much abused word. It is collective as judgements about canon and interpretation always have been.
C'mon Moon, of course it is subjective, that's why there are over 45,000 versions of Christianity! They all have there own opinions and interpretations.
2.
“Sure! but would you agree that all religions evolve and don't stay static?”
We were talking about God, not religions. Then, why would you bring religions inside? Religion is man-made, it changes all the time. It’s common knowledge.
Your god evolved pretty substantially too, from a badass war god to a meek and mild lamb. At least the war god only tortured and killed you once, Jesus introduced eternal torture for finite sins.
You seem to be conflating the ontological and the conceptual. Ideas about God have changed over time as have ideas about everything. Ideas about say gravity have changed; that does not mean gravity has kept changing. I am not sure what you mean by evolved, but if that is just a fancy word for changed then of course.
More like developed according to cultural change.
Wrong. I'm very sceptical if you haven't worked that out yet and have no trust in faith as a mechanism for determining the truth. If Francesca Stavrakopoulou (who is a professor of the Hebrew Bible and Ancient Religion) believes that Asherah was God's consort because of her extensive research into the evidence, that to me is pretty convincing.
SEG, you are skeptical about some things and credulous about others. Your position with regard to academic experts is clearly a faith position but you find it hard to admit that.
I don't make decisions about anything using faith alone (like you do), it's an incredibly poor tool to work out what is the truth.
There isn't actually. What's your best evidence? Please don't tell me that he wrote the Pentateuch. If the consensus of biblical scholars today accept that he was a mythical character, why can't you? Have you any Egyptian sources that write about this amazing person that supposedly freed all of their slaves?
Some scholars regard Moses as legendary. I don't know of any serious scholar who thinks he is mythical, though there may be some who think there are mythical elements in the story.
Serious Scottish scholars? May be some? How many do you think there are, less than 5 or 6? Really Moonward, have you got your head buried in the sand on this?
That’s a demeaning label! Especially when you don’t know someone or their life. Where can you point to that says that Moses believed exactly that or that he was that?
It wasn't meant to be demeaning, it was meant to be a factual statement. Read Exodus 18:11 for example:
Now I know that the LORD is greater than all other gods, for he did this to those who had treated Israel arrogantly."
It's obvious that Moses believed (or knew) other gods existed and his god was the best of them.
Moonwood the Hare wrote:
Thu Jan 09, 2020 6:10 pm
So Moses did not exist but also held certain beliefs. I think that you mean that in the story Moses is depicted as a henotheist, but that would have to be a misreading, since the whole point of the redacted story is to present Moses as a believer in one god. The most you could say is that the story contains elements of earlier henotheistic accounts. But terms like monotheism and henotheism are modern and highly abstract they don't really reflect the thinking of people in that era except in a very general way.
That would only make sense if you could present evidence that Moses only believed in one god. It gets thrown out the window with the verses depicting him believing in other gods.
That's actually a good point. NO-ONE knows what the original text of god's so called word was, as we don't have anything original. Only a copy of copies that has been fiddled with and changed by scribes with evangelising agendas.
There is realy no need for this kind of textual nihilism. Of course scribes will try to interpret a disputed text in line with what they think it is likely to have said but that is true in the present as well as the past. Textual studies are an attempt to get past that. If you were to say on the basis of our limited number of texts and the variations no one knows what, say, Plato thought people would laugh at you, same applies here.
Except that generations of evangelical scribes didn't fiddle with what Plato wrote to suit their agendas.
If Israelite religion evolve from polytheistic religion, From where did polytheistic religions evolve from?
That's easy, from more primitive polytheistic religions.
even if you are using the post Hegelian model of religious development that was developed by nineteenth century anthropologists then the answer would be animism not earlier polytheism.

You're not saying that animists didn't believe in lots of gods are you?
Religion is man-made, it changes. But the God of Israel, I AM never ever changes. People change their minds in what they believe about who God is but that doesn’t make it true of God just coz someone believes it.
If I gave you just one instance of God changing, would your opinion change?
Those influenced by Greek thought where there is a strong antithesis between being and becoming tend to interpret the I AM in that way but in Hebrew a single word means both being and becoming. So Yahweh can mean I become as well as I am. The best translation is probably 'mind your own business'. It's an existential thing God is what he does.
You didn't answer my question.
Last edited by searchengineguy on Fri Jan 10, 2020 8:46 pm, edited 3 times in total.
“One would go mad if one took the Bible seriously; but to take it seriously one must be already mad.”
Aleister Crowley

searchengineguy
Posts: 474
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2019 9:26 pm

Re: God's Wife Asherah

Post by searchengineguy »

JTH wrote:
Fri Jan 10, 2020 7:09 am
Religion is man-made, it changes. But the God of Israel, I AM never ever changes. People change their minds in what they believe about who God is but that doesn’t make it true of God just coz someone believes it.
If I gave you just one instance of God changing, would your opinion change?
@searchengineguy,
Do you agree that Religion is man-made and so it changes?
Absolutely!
Do you agree that just coz someone believes something to be true doesn’t make it the truth?
Yes, including your gods and God-like entities like demons, saints and angels. Now, could you answer my question?
“One would go mad if one took the Bible seriously; but to take it seriously one must be already mad.”
Aleister Crowley

searchengineguy
Posts: 474
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2019 9:26 pm

Re: God's Wife Asherah

Post by searchengineguy »

JTH wrote:
Thu Jan 09, 2020 2:53 am

If Israelite religion evolve from polytheistic religion, From where did polytheistic religions evolve from?

I'm sure you won't like this, but this is what I found: https://people.brandonu.ca/nollk/canaanite-religion/
Canaanite religion was strongly influenced by their more powerful and populous neighbors, and shows clear influence of Mesopotamian and Egyptian religious practices. Like other people of the Ancient Near East Canaanite religious beliefs were polytheistic, with families typically focusing on veneration of the dead in the form of household gods and goddesses, the Elohim, while acknowledging the existence of other deities such as Baal and El, Asherah and Astarte.
...Here's the author's qualifications:
Kurt Noll, Ph.D. Professor

Education
Ph.D., Union Theological Seminary in Virginia (now called Union Pesbyterian Seminary).
Master of Theology, Union Theological Seminary in Virginia.
Master of Arts, with Honors, Lutheran Theological Seminary at Gettysburg (now called United Lutheran Seminary).
Bachelor of Arts, Summa Cum Laude, Shippensburg University.
Quote taken from:
Canaan and Israel in Antiquity: A Textbook on History and Religion.
Second Edition.
London: T&T Clark/Bloomsbury, 2012.
“One would go mad if one took the Bible seriously; but to take it seriously one must be already mad.”
Aleister Crowley

Post Reply