Wait, What? Experts Claim That God Had A Wife?

Submitted by: fancylad 5 years ago
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/22/gods-wife-asherah_n_839226.html

God"s wife, Asherah, may have been edited out of the Bible Says theologian. This theory would explain so much.
There are 92 comments:
Male 128
oops paragraphed comments
see ya
0
Reply
Male 12,365
Also, you are moving the goalposts on the fly, which is never a good sign.

Friday, March 25, 2011 7:49:13 AM, you stated that there have been no changes in Christianity.

After a few of the many changes were pointed out, you moved the goalposts to "doctrinal changes to the bible itself" on Saturday, March 26, 2011 7:08:04 AM

Two very different statements.

I can point to doctrinal changes in currently existing English translations of the bible, let alone in Christianity.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
thephoenix27:

According to your "voracity of believers" argument, every aspect of every religion must be true because they`ve all had devout believers, including ones willing to die. Not just every religion either - there have been and are today some areligious ideologies that some people believe in so strongly that they will die for them.

It`s not a plausible argument.

Archaeologists and historians have not proved that your bible is an accurate history. They`ve proved that some of the places mentioned in it existed. That`s not even close to being the same thing.

There have been many changes in the bible itself, including many that people have been willing to die over. Both those who accepted the changes and those who rejected them, so by your argument they must both be true even when they directly contradict each other.
0
Reply
Male 128
oops paragraphed comments
see ya
0
Reply
Male 47
"there is absolutely zero proof that Jesus actually existed. The only "proof" is conjecture and/or blatant lies. "

The proof that Jesus existed can be found in the voracity of his believers. Here you have people who believe something so strongly that they are consistently willing to die rather than renounce it. This dates back to within the time period where there would still be people alive who knew whether or not Jesus existed. If he hadn`t existed the early Christians would have been relegated to a cult status and never really made a name for themselves.

Also, you should look at the arguments of Christianity`s earliest objectors: the Jewish leaders. They don`t argue that Jesus never existed, nor do they argue that he didn`t die on a cross and was found missing from his tomb three days later. If Jesus never existed, why wouldn`t they argue the point? It seems to me that would have put the nail in the coffin of Christianity.
0
Reply
Male 47
"there have been many changes."

What you refer to are not doctrinal changes to the bible itself. Not to mention that people used to believe in a flat earth is a myth.

"...are you serious right now? the bible is probably one of the least verifiable pieces of historical literature...your credibility is lost."

What I was saying is that the bible has been carried down through the ages accurately. However, if you want to argue that the bible is not accurate as a historical document, aside from the theological aspects, you would be going against the majority of archaeologists and historians. The peoples and places mentioned in the bible have been found to be highly accurate.

"how do you know you`re not the crackpot misinterpreting facts? Are you a theologian or just a person who goes to church every other sunday..sometimes..."

I don`t claim to be a theologian. I just know what the bible teaches and what is inconsiste
0
Reply
Male 12,365
I`m not putting words in your mouth, Nageki. If you had an argument, you wouldn`t need to pretend I am.

Anyone who cares can scroll down and see what was actually written by both of us.

Since you`ve stooped to that, the gloves are off. Here`s what I really think, bluntly:


You referred to lack of belief (atheism) as belief. That is wrong.

You argued that rather than just believing what they`re told is true, people should study stories that they`re told are true (religious books) and you presented that as fairness and open-mindedness. That is wrong.

Your line of argument is basically the same as those creationists who argue that christian creationism should be taught as science in schools as if it was equal to evolution and say that`s fair and equal.

I think your argument isn`t even superficially plausible enough to be specious.
0
Reply
Male 110
@Angilion
Quit putting words in my mouth, I was just trying to get people to look at what the do or do not believe and back it up with facts, or at least a good hard look at why the do or do not believe. I`m not bashing anyone, atheist or not.
0
Reply
Male 734
Does anyone really care?
0
Reply
Male 236
Wow, Angilion pretty much just manhandled everybody on his own.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Recent geological evidence, not too mention recordings and artistic renderings from just about every culture around the world, is pointing towards the possibility of a world wide flood and a group of survivors who rode in a boat to overcome it.
You don`t have to be a bible reader to believe that. [/quote]

You don`t have to be a bible reader, but you do have to be a reader of fanciful religious stories.

Your statement is completely untrue.

There is no geological evidence of a worldwide flood at any point in time, ever.

There is a lot of geological evidence of a lot of seperate floods in many parts of the world over a long period of time, which some people might pretend is the same thing in order to fabricate false evidence for their agenda.

As for geological evidence of a group of people in a boat, well that`s just plain silly.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
For the sake of accuracy:

The partial copy of Tacitus` work that we have now was written some time in the 11th century. It is claimed to be an accurate copy of an accurate copy of an accurate copy all the way back to when Tacitus wrote it in ~115AD. It might well be - scribes were trained to make accurate copies of writings and the references Tacitus makes to christianity are not the sort of thing you`d expect christians to add in later. Although particularly devious ones might have had it done, maybe.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Roman historical documents mark the existence of a man in Jerusalem who claimed himself as King, and that they crucified the man.[/quote]

No, they don`t.

You`re referring to the history written by Tacitus (whether you know it or not).

There are a few issues regarding that:

i) It was written much later, probably ~115AD.

ii) Tacitus was reporting on what some people believed, which is not necessarily the same as what is true.

iii) Tacitus wrote morality tales as much as history. If you read his work, that leaps out at you. It is not an objective statement of facts.

iv) Tacitus did not write that Chrestus had proclaimed himself king.

v) "Roman historical documents" strongly implies more than one document along the lines of a census, tax record, court record, etc. There is nothing like that at all.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
Nageki:

Given that you think that lack of belief is belief, maybe you should take your own advice and do some studying.

If there was any reason to question my lack of belief, I would. That would require evidence, not merely some utterly unsubstantiated stories that some people have told me are true. Your advice doesn`t hold up.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
thephoenix27:

I can`t tell if you`re joking or if you`re serious. Comments such as

"The truth of the matter is that there have been no `changes`." [in Christianity]

and

"In fact, the bible is one of the most heavily sourced and historically verifiable books in all of history."

are obviously so ludicrously inconsistent with reality that they are jokes, but you don`t seem to be joking.
0
Reply
Male 110
Wake up everyone, atheist and christian alike and question your beliefs... Just believing whatever someone tells you is idiotic and dumb. Prove to yourself with actual study what is the truth and what is not, you WILL be surprised by what you find. I double dog dare ya.
0
Reply
Male 1,582
Mad theist Trypno, is mad. Nice attempt to bullpoo your way through a debate. But most atheists who actually debate their beliefs, actually research both sides. Theists use stories from an ancient book and pretend like it`s fact.. then when asked for proof, they shut up. Ask us for proof.. we present it.. with logical reasoning and science.

Fail theist is fail
0
Reply
Male 936
Also, I think its funny that you ask me to do some research when I am quite certain I have done much more research on the topic than you have. This isn`t my first Christianity debate, I`ve been correcting peoples false beliefs for a long time now.
0
Reply
Male 936
can you provide *credible* links.....


there is absolutely zero proof that jesus actually existed. The only "proof" is conjecture and/or blatant lies.
0
Reply
Male 382
Trypno, can you provide links, I`d like to read that stuff, plz.
0
Reply
Male 474
also @skullgrin
Roman historical documents mark the existence of a man in Jerusalem who claimed himself as King, and that they crucified the man. However in Roman times this man who has come to be known as Jesus in the Greek barely made a splash among Roman historians, who barely bothered to document his existence in relation to the grand goings on of the Roman Empire.
How about you actually do some research instead of spouting off random atheist dogma that you read off the internet.
0
Reply
Male 474
@skullgrin
Recent geological evidence, not too mention recordings and artistic renderings from just about every culture around the world, is pointing towards the possibility of a world wide flood and a group of survivors who rode in a boat to overcome it.
You don`t have to be a bible reader to believe that.
0
Reply
Male 936
(cont from previous post)

...are you serious right now? the bible is probably one of the least verifiable pieces of historical literature...your credibility is lost.

/waiting for that moses parting the sea verification, the great flood, jesus` existence...
0
Reply
Male 936
[quote]"The truth of the matter is that there have been no `changes`. All this article represents is one crackpot and a misinterpretation of the facts."[/quote]

there have been many changes.

the belief that the world is flat, priests being able to marry, the acceptance of life on other worlds, even evolution is starting to be more accepted by the church...

how do you know you`re not the crackpot misinterpreting facts? Are you a theologian or just a person who goes to church every other sunday..sometimes...


[quote]And let me clear something up: the apocrypha were not included in the bible due to their being incongruous with the rest of the scriptures and their dubious origin. The books that were included were already widely used in the early churches and their origin was verifiable. In fact, the bible is one of the most heavily sourced and historically verifiable books in all of history."[/quote]

wow...are you serious ri
0
Reply
Male 1,312
@DJDoubleb TLDNR
0
Reply
Male 382
This is really nothing new, there are two thought and of coarse everyone is going to take the side that they agree with already. Bleow you see what a quick search of Wikipedia has on the topic.
0
Reply
Male 382
Divergent scholarship

A combination of iconography and inscriptions at a religious center/lodging place for travelers at Kuntillet Ajrud was discovered, in the northern Sinai desert that dates to the 8th century BCE.[10] Among various other artifacts was a large storage jar that has attracted much attention. The side of the jar contains iconography showing three anthropomorphic figures and an inscription that refers to "Yahweh … and his asherah". The inscription led to some early identifications of two standing figures in the foreground as representing Yahweh and his consort Asherah, but later work identified them as Bes figures.[11] A number of scholars, including archeologist William G. Dever[12] and Judith Hadley,[13] continue to interpret the inscription in a way that it refers to Asherah as an Israelite goddess and consort of Yahweh.
0
Reply
Male 382
Dever authored the book Did God Have a Wife? that references archaeological evidence pointing to many female figurines unearthed in ancient Israel as supporting his hypothesis that Asherah functioned as a goddess and consort of Yahweh in Israelite folk religion of the monarchal period and was worshiped as the Queen of Heaven—the Hebrews baked small cakes for her festival.[14] However, while acknowledging it as "readable," professor of Biblical studies Shmuel Ahituv also faults Dever`s book for being historically incomplete; moreover, Dever comes to a number of demonstrably incorrect conclusions given his lack of fluency in ancient languages or Hebrew.[15]
0
Reply
Male 382
In contrast to interpretations of "asherah" as a goddess in the Kuntillet ‘Ajrud inscriptions, a number of other authors, including Mark S. Smith,[16] biblical scholar John Day,[17] and Andre Lemaire,[18] view the asherah in these inscriptions as a cult object, stylized tree, or location of worship through which Yahweh’s blessing was imparted rather than a goddess who could function as a consort.[19] "Neither the iconography nor the texts force us to interpret the relationship between ‘Yahweh ... and his asherah’ in Iron Age IIB in the sense of a (sexually-determined) relationship of two forces that are paired and thus compel us to assume that asherah has the status as a partner. ‘Yahweh’s asherah’ does not have equal rank with Yahweh but is rather a mediating entity that brings his blessing and is conceived in the mind in the shape of a stylized tree that was thus subordinate to Yahweh."[20]
0
Reply
Male 382
Indeed, Day doubts any heavenly association, asserting "there is nothing in first-millennium BCE texts that singles out Asherah as `Queen of Heaven` or associates her particularly with the heavens at all."[21]
0
Reply
Male 382
The majority of the forty references to Asherah in the Hebrew Bible derive from the euteronomist, always in a hostile framework: the Deuteronomist judges the kings of Israel and Judah according to how rigorously they uphold Yahwism and suppress the worship of Asherah and other deities. King Manasseh, for example is said to have placed an Asherah pole in the Holy Temple, and was therefore one who "did evil in the sight of the LORD" (2 Kings 21:7); but king Hezekiah "removed the high places, and broke the pillars, and cut down the Asherah", (2 Kings 18.4), and was noted as the most righteous of Judah`s kings before the coming of the reformer Josiah, in whose reign the Deuteronomistic history of the kings was composed. In addition to the authors of Exodus, Deuteronomy, Kings, and Judges, the prophets Isaiah (Isaiah 17:8, 27:9), Jeremiah (Jereimiah 17:2), and Micah (Micah 5:14) also condemned worship of Asherah and praised turning from this idolatry to worship Yahweh al
0
Reply
Male 382


The Hebrew Bible uses the term asherah in two senses, as a cult object and as a divine name.[22] As a cult object, the asherah can be "made", "cut down", and "burnt", and Deuteronomy 16:21 prohibits the planting of trees as asherah, implying that a stylised tree or lopped trunk is intended.[23] At other verses a goddess is clearly intended, as, for example, 2 Kings 23:4–7, where items are being made "for Baal and Asherah".[24] The references to asherah in Isaiah 17:8 and 2:8 suggest that there was no distinction in ancient thought between the object and the goddess.[25]
0
Reply
Male 47
"If Christianity was real, there would be no changes or upgrades." The truth of the matter is that there have been no `changes`. All this article represents is one crackpot and a misinterpretation of the facts. And let me clear something up: the apocrypha were not included in the bible due to their being incongruous with the rest of the scriptures and their dubious origin. The books that were included were already widely used in the early churches and their origin was verifiable. In fact, the bible is one of the most heavily sourced and historically verifiable books in all of history.
0
Reply
Male 936
So, Christians...how does it feel to know the religion you`ve dedicated your life to is incomplete? Do you think you will go to hell for not worshiping Ashera as well as God, and what`s up with the first commandment talking about worshiping no other god but himself? Sounds like God and Ashera were to be worshiped as a pair...

Doesn`t the fact that something as important as God`s wife being left out of the bible by "editors" raise huge red flags for you? What else was left out? What else was modified? Why, or better yet, how can you have faith in a religion that is constantly being changed?

If Christianity was real, there would be no changes or upgrades.
0
Reply
Male 3,076
bible is stupid and full of fails and bullpoo...
0
Reply
Male 12,138
[quote]how many more secret things are they going to find in the bible that aren`t really there? sheesh. if the `theologian` was so up on his bible knowledge he would`ve known...[/quote]
And if you had actually bothered to read the article before spouting you would have known that the `theologian` in question is bereft of a dick. Therefore making him a "she".

Reading articles before commenting on them is becoming a lost art from, in my humble opinion.
0
Reply
Male 179
how many more secret things are they going to find in the bible that aren`t really there? sheesh. if the `theologian` was so up on his bible knowledge he would`ve known that the canaanites split from the israelites right near the beginning. israelites were forbidden to marry canaanites because they worshipped an idol. the torah mentions straight off that there are a lot of people around the area who worship idols, but it is forbidden to make anything in the image of G-d. it`s just another guy trying to piss everyone off.
0
Reply
Male 2,096
The Apocryphon of John is an Essenes text that lists the complete creation, includes an opposite to God. The triad base of pos/neg/neutral abounds thruout Judeo Christian mythology
0
Reply
Male 2,402
@Snow Crash it has been since the Council of Nicea in 325 AD. It was an Roman cultural practice of women being 2nd class and subserviant to men. Can`t have equal footing with the men you know.

Second I think your meaning the Babylon Goddess Ishtar. Ashur or aka Assur was Assyrian male god whose wife was Nanlil who he took from another god named Enlil.
0
Reply
Male 185
Old news, really. The Jews were originally polytheistic. Anyone who`s ever given the bible a serious thought knows it`s heavily edited and redacted.
0
Reply
Female 211
[i]Who knows what they meant by it? Literally, i.e. polytheism? An example of omnipotence - being limited to a single occurence would not be omnipotent? A linguistic thing used when referring to one god in multiple ways, e.g. the great, the wise, the all-knowing, etc?[/i]

Alternately, Yaweah and Ashera are the same being. If I`m not mistaken early Hebrew texts also say that man and woman were made as one being, then seaprated (in the story of Lilith). It ties in with the whole idea of humankind being made in god`s image.

And to handys003, it`s shocking because on of the pillars of society has been male domiance, backed by the notion that there is only one omnipotent being, and it is male. Suddenly that notion may be false and/or manipulated.

Anyway, isn`t there a Syrian god that goes by the name Ashur?
0
Reply
Male 3,431
Now we know who the Devil *really* is.
0
Reply
Male 10,845
@fatpill

Non-sequitor
0
Reply
Male 725
Well, having a wife would probably explain why he was always so trigger happy in the Old Testament.
0
Reply
Male 2,402
Well if you all kept abreast of Mormon theology. You would know that they teach not only is there a Heavenly Father, but a Heavenly Mother. Thus a wife.

Shocking isn`t it. If God exists why not have a wife? He deserves some action. Besides how can you counsel on marriage when you don`t have a spouse. That`s like those who don`t have kids tell us parents how to manage them.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Well Davymid, keep in mind that could have just been a screw-up in the translation process.[/quote]

That certainly happened a lot, but the oldest extant Hebrew copies have their god as both plural and singular.

Who knows what they meant by it? Literally, i.e. polytheism? An example of omnipotence - being limited to a single occurence would not be omnipotent? A linguistic thing used when referring to one god in multiple ways, e.g. the great, the wise, the all-knowing, etc?

Back to the original subject for a moment - there`s a possible parallel with the new testament, with Mary being hugely downplayed in the editing.
0
Reply
Male 439
does anyone here believe tabloids when they read them?
0
Reply
Male 10,440
Can we get rid of the spammers please?
0
Reply
Male 255
I Cor 1:18
For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
0
Reply
Male 1,815
Well Davymid, keep in mind that could have just been a screw-up in the translation process.
Really, the idea that people base their lives around a text that has so many inconsistencies and, historically, doesn`t make any sense, is totally ridiculous.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
vv Brimstone`s either high, or he`s Yoda. Either way`s cool by me.
0
Reply
Male 2,229
Fail to see problem, other than that those that wanted subjugation of others (women, children, poor, other beliefs) would distort religoin to suit their needs.

For every male component, there is an equal opposite female component. Like the taoist Yin-Yang. For a health religion, a health society, one must have equals, balance. If not the consequences are dire. For self destruction will become inevitable, for BOTH components.
0
Reply
Male 2,422
Not as interesting as the Nag Hammadi writings.
0
Reply
Male 10,440
[quote] Meh! Lots of cults and sects have had weird ideas over the centuries. [/quote]
your hubris is funny.
0
Reply
Male 43
Maybe God had sisters too. Maybe instead of making us in His image, he made us in the image of his favourite Niece and Nephew.... Or maybe we are trying to resolve God and his form with no more success than an ant may resolve ours. The thing that upsets me is that Christianity / Judaism is seen as a soft target because believers aren`t going to come back at you with suicide bombers and a personal vendetta against unbelievers. i-am-bored is happy to show a drawing of Jesus on a skateboard, but I can`t recall seeing a drawing of Mohammed on a skateboard. I wonder why that is. I`ve nothing against Mohammed per se, but I can`t help detecting an imbalance here.
The truth as I see it is that we are all trying to understand the form of a creator through personal glimpses, and the words of our prophets (whether we believe the supreme prophet to be Jesus, Buddha, Mohammed or whoever). If you idly care to speculate that God had a wife, then fair enough, but don`t ridicule others who don`t.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
Would go some way towards explaining Genesis 1:26, which I found confusing: "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness".

I was like "Wut? How many *ARE* there of you guys?"
0
Reply
Male 36,476
Meh! Lots of cults and sects have had weird ideas over the centuries.
0
Reply
Male 379
@Fishyboy

Way to miss my point. I was making the point that at the time the Bible was written for the first time, and when it was edited, neither religion allowed divorce, so God would still have a wife.
0
Reply
Female 3,598
well, it makes sense that at the time the bible was written, the people in charge of keeping it were men. and women were property and viewed the same as cattle, so a being that is also a woman and powerful and above them wouldn`t sit right with them, so why not just write her right out? not saying any of it is true, but for the people making this shiz up, why not?
0
Reply
Male 17
It`s all fiction anyway so who cares? Maybe god got a divorce and in the same way one might burn old photos of someone they are no longer with, god removed her from the bible. See, mystery solved.
0
Reply
Male 1,451
Aseroth?
0
Reply
Male 43
Well Congratulations on finding a flaw in the Holy Bible! I`m sure that y`all have good fun finding faults in the Torah and Bible. Maybe you have a giggle at the cartoons and videos on here that have a pop at Jesus, Moses or whoever. Here`s another one for you..... the Prophet Mohammed married his last wife when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death). Anyone care to make a joke out of that? Tell you what, you brave critics of Judaism / Christianity, draw your cartoons, jokes, witty comments regarding Mohammed (May Allah honour him and grant him peace) along with your home address, and I`ll laugh along with ya.
0
Reply
Male 1
There has only ever been, only ever will be... one Asherah
0
Reply
Male 25,416
ok then....
0
Reply
Male 247
Okay, pay attention: The Old Testament is a collection of accounts of the Israelites` history and their relationship to Yahweh. A lot of that text depicts the rebelliousness of the Israelites, and the fact that they created other idols and gods throughout their history, which got them in trouble with Yahweh. Doesn`t mean that Yahweh is nonexistent, evil, or anything else you people want Him or think Him to be. It only means that that humans are rebellious, and God is perfect.
0
Reply
Male 3,578
there are 3 gods named in the bible and they remove the name of the god its a about
0
Reply
Male 257
yahweh the original god of war of the polytheist isrealities had a whife named asherah the god of i con`t remeber at this moment. the religion of the israelites only become monotheistic when they were being threated by outside tribes and it was believed they could only survive by worshipping one god only yahweh the god of war ie. why the isrealities went on a long killing rampage and conquered a fair amount of territory
0
Reply
Male 2,868
This shouldn`t be a surprise. Religion, just like everything else, evolves gradually. The Bible didn`t just appear one day. It`s a carefully edited selection of ancient stories. The notion that any one particular collection of ancient stories is more true than any other is absurd.
0
Reply
Male 916
uh... what do you mean "experts *claim* god had a wife"? it`s well known that until the bible was heavily revised yahweh had ashera. there are even several passages where the bible still comes darned close to mentioning her.

god also isn`t omnipotent or omnipresent... have a look at various bits of the old testament where he doesn`t know what`s happening in various places (has a human look for pious people in sodom, goes to dinner at various people`s houses).

caananites, semites and hittites stitched together several pantheistic religious beliefs and many years later, after creating a holy text a hardline yawhist went back through it and edited out the other gods.
0
Reply
Male 12
Gibson, the Bible has been edited and modified, many times throughout history. The thing wasn`t written all at once by one person, it`s the product of many writers and the inputs of many religious and political bodies. What is in there and what isn`t is largely due to whatever the dominant clerical group of the day was, and not divine inspiration.
0
Reply
Male 290
Also I think the phrase Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes (in this case a wife for God) certainly applies here ;-)
0
Reply
Male 121
asherah means ten in arab.
0
Reply
Male 290
@Volsunga: The word "sophia" was an epithet of Athena in ancient Greek philosophy, namely this word meant the wisdom and divine superiority of Athena. This word is still used in Greek, both to mean wisdom, and as a female name.
Also, the theologian referred to in this article is of Greek origin.
0
Reply
Female 9,402
Whatever.
0
Reply
Male 93
According to the Bible I read it says in Judges 3:7.

"The Israelites did evil in the eyes of the LORD; they forgot the LORD their God and served the Baals and the Asherahs."

So worshiping the Asherahs was evil in God`s eyes. This theme comes up continually. People that suggest otherwise, or even that the Bible was edited and modified significantly, are nutty.

0
Reply
Female 290
Wait, so God is a lesbian?
0
Reply
Male 217
You mean that our existence is based on the procreation of god and his wife? Well, I guess we are the "children of God" after all... makes sense. I wouldn`t doubt that something like that could be true... after all, the Bible has been changed so much over the years that nobody really knows what is missing and what was added.
0
Reply
Male 10,440
I don`t care.
0
Reply
Male 65
asherah was not supposed to be worshiped. whoever she was, it wasn`t supposed to happen. here is aquick reference about it deut. 16:21. the verse in kings is talking about an action of one of the kings of Israel,manesseh, who put up an "asherah pole" in the temple. this was NOT supposed to be done, so later on king Josiah took it down. She was just like the golden calf in exodus. people worshiped it and were not supposed to.
0
Reply
Male 759
That`s all well and good but my God who goes by the name of Clive has got 3 Staffordshire Terriers, 5 kids, a boyfriend named Terry and two girlfriends - Pauline who is from Essex and Sqargle who is from Mars.
0
Reply
Female 7,836
This has been around for ages, certainly goddess worship was not unknown and if I remember correctly was very common at one time.
0
Reply
Male 1,548
A semi-accurate claim blown out of proportion by crazy feminists. Remember that until about 500 BCE, Jews were henotheists (believed in many gods but worshiped only one). The Semitic pantheon was nearly parallel to the Egyptian and Greek. What this article fails to mention is that there was already a prominent feminine deity that was worshiped in small Jewish cults until around the First century CE. Hokhmah, the goddess of wisdom and daughter of Yahweh was referenced in the writings of the intellectual class (notably Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Sirach). She was essentially the same character as Athena from Greece with a very similar origin myth. In later works her name was Hellenized as Sophia. A lot of things being attributed to Asherah in this article are more likely related to Hokhmah. While Asherah was a character in Hebrew mythology, she was taken out long before there was anything written. It`s the same reason you don`t hear many myths about Hera.
0
Reply
Male 183
"So for a Christian or a Jew who believes this theory, shouldn`t it be God HAS a wife, not had?"

No, isn`t it obvious? It wasn`t man who edited the Bible, it was God. He was happy in the beginning, with his wife. Then, they probably got into a spat, and got divorced, so God revised his Bible. It explains why he got so bitchy later on in the Old Testament. He was probably all "No more worshiping both of us, now you don`t worship anyone but me. F**k her!"

At some point, he got some new totty, and was happy again, had a son and became all loving and forgiving.

Thank the Lord for his new bit on the side, or else we would all still be living with fire and brimestone!
0
Reply
Male 87
im pretty sure asherah is mentioned in the bible. I`m on my phone, someone check on blueletterbible.com for me
0
Reply
Female 412
"expert" not experts. and Francesca Stavrakopoulou is a rather large muppet in human clothing
0
Reply
Male 1,249
The bible was edited?!?! No way...
0
Reply
Male 759
You`re my wife now, Dave
0
Reply
Male 15,510
Oh my goddess
0
Reply
Male 379
So for a Christian or a Jew who believes this theory, shouldn`t it be God HAS a wife, not had?
0
Reply
Male 260
well that changes everything
0
Reply
Male 1,598
Dan Brown`s mouth is probably foaming with glee at this. I`d call him to tell him, but my cell phone doesn`t have a dial tone right now, so I guess I don`t have service.
0
Reply
Male 19,862
Link: Wait, What? Experts Claim That God Had A Wife? [Rate Link] - God`s wife, Asherah, may have been edited out of the Bible Says theologian. This theory would explain so much.
0
Reply