Wait … God had a WIFE! - CourtneyR.dev's 2nd Brain

Wait … God had a WIFE?!? ![rw-book-cover](https://img.youtube.com/vi/mjtgyB4g2F0/maxresdefault.jpg) 🔗 **Source:** [Wait … God had a WIFE?!?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjtgyB4g2F0) > [!note]+ Document Notes > tags: [ancient-israelite-religion, biblical-archaeology, goddess-worship, religious-reform, patriarchal-systems] > author: [MISSING] > source: YouTube > reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjtgyB4g2F0 > date created: {{date:YYYY-MM-DD}} {{time:HH:mm}} > > # 🏷️ Title: Wait … God had a WIFE?!? >  ## 🧭 Table of Contents - [📝 Summary](#-summary) - [📖 Main Content](#-main-content) - [🗒️ Notes](#️-notes) - [📚 References](#-references) - [🗣️ Paraphrase](#️-paraphrase) - [📰 Newsletter](#-newsletter) - [✅ Action Items](#-action-items) - [🧪 Hypotheses](#-hypotheses) - [📊 Methodology](#-methodology) - [❓ Questions](#-questions) - [🔮 Future Research](#-future-research) - [💡 Implications](#-implications) - [🧠 Learning Styles Assessment](#-learning-styles-assessment) - [📊 Accessibility Assessment](#-accessibility-assessment) - [🌍 DEIB Assessment](#-deib-assessment) - [✅ Logical Validity](#-logical-validity) - [🛡️ DARVO Analysis](#-darvo-analysis) - [🎯 Conclusion](#-conclusion) ## 📝 Summary - Archaeological evidence suggests the early Israelite patron deity (El/Yahweh) was worshipped alongside a female consort named Asherah. - Inscriptions from 8th century BCE sites read "Yahweh and his Asherah," with matching finds across multiple locations. - The monotheistic worship was likely a later development, possibly during King Josiah's reforms in 7th century BCE. - Biblical accounts suggest an Asherah pole stood in Solomon's temple for two-thirds of its history. - The shift away from goddess worship may have been driven by power consolidation and resource control rather than theological purity. ## 📖 Main Content Archaeological evidence challenges traditional monotheistic narratives about ancient Israelite religion. The majority of scholars specializing in early Israelite history agree that the original patron deity El was worshipped alongside Asherah, their consort partner. When Adonai (Yahweh) and El were conflated, Asherah became Yahweh's consort as well. Physical evidence includes inscriptions from 8th century BCE sites in the Sinai Desert and West Bank reading "Yahweh and his Asherah." These discoveries, made at sites like Kuntillet Ajrud and Khirbet el-Qom, include both textual references and artistic depictions showing Asherah in anthropomorphic form and as a stylized tree with ibexes feeding on either side. The Hebrew Bible itself records that an Asherah statue stood inside Solomon's temple before King Josiah destroyed it during cultic reforms. Scholars suggest this wasn't an anthropomorphic statue but a stylized tree representing the goddess. Some theorize the menorah may have been a sanitized version of this Asherah symbol. ### 🗒️ Notes #### ⏱️ [00:00:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjtgyB4g2F0&t=15) Archaeological Evidence for Asherah - Majority of early Israelite history scholars agree on El-Asherah worship pairing - Archaeological data shows inscriptions and drawings of Yahweh-Asherah pairing - Not considered corruption of pure monotheism, but original state of affairs #### ⏱️ [00:02:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjtgyB4g2F0&t=150) Physical Discoveries - Zev Michelle excavated pottery shards from 8th century BCE with "Yahweh and his Asherah" inscriptions - Matching inscriptions found at Khirbet el-Qom in West Bank - Depictions show Asherah as anthropomorphic figure and stylized tree with feeding ibexes #### ⏱️ [00:04:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjtgyB4g2F0&t=285) Biblical Temple Evidence - Hebrew Bible records Asherah statue in Solomon's temple for 2/3 of its history - King Josiah removed and destroyed the Asherah pole - Menorah may be sanitized version of Asherah tree symbol #### ⏱️ [00:06:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjtgyB4g2F0&t=375) Josiah's Reforms - Cultic reforms part of worship centralization campaign - Eliminated scattered temple worship to focus resources on Jerusalem temple - Removed household worship involving ancestors and deities like Asherah #### ⏱️ [00:08:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjtgyB4g2F0&t=510) Disputed Translation Claims - Video makes inaccurate claims about Hebrew "tsela" meaning side vs. rib - Scholar disputes egalitarian interpretation, notes ongoing academic debate - Some antiquity to idea of original androgynous Adam being split #### ⏱️ [00:10:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjtgyB4g2F0&t=600) Aramaic Prayer Misinformation - Claims about Lord's Prayer Aramaic origins are "entirely inaccurate" - Based on Neil Douglas Klotz's mystical meditations, not scholarship - "Abwun" means "our father," not "father-mother" fusion ## 📚 References - "Did God Have a Wife?" by William Dever - "God's Goddesses and the Women Who Serve Them" by Susan Ackerman - "The Bible Says" by Dan McClellan - "Adonai's Divine Images: A Cognitive Approach" by Dan McClellan - Kuntillet Ajrud excavation reports - "Prayers of the Cosmos" by Neil Douglas Klotz (critiqued as inaccurate) ## 🗣️ Paraphrase Archaeological discoveries have revealed that ancient Israelite religion was originally polytheistic, with the primary deity worshipped alongside a female consort named Asherah. Physical evidence from multiple 8th century BCE sites shows inscriptions and artwork depicting this divine partnership. The shift toward monotheism appears to have been a later political and religious reform, particularly during King Josiah's reign, aimed at centralizing worship and consolidating power in Jerusalem. While the Hebrew Bible itself acknowledges Asherah's presence in the temple, later editors worked to minimize or reinterpret these references. However, scholars warn against mystical reinterpretations of biblical texts that lack academic support. ## 📰 Newsletter Fascinating archaeological discoveries are reshaping our understanding of ancient Israelite religion! Recent scholarship reveals that early Hebrew worship included a goddess named Asherah as Yahweh's consort, supported by inscriptions and artwork from multiple 8th century BCE sites. This challenges traditional monotheistic narratives and suggests the familiar biblical accounts represent later theological developments rather than original practices. For WordPress developers interested in religious studies sites, this highlights the importance of presenting complex academic topics with proper sourcing and avoiding sensationalized claims. Check out the recommended scholarly works for deeper dives into archaeological methodology and ancient Near Eastern religion. ## ✅ Action Items #### DevRel - Create educational content about evaluating religious claims using archaeological evidence - Develop workshops on distinguishing scholarly consensus from fringe theories - Design templates for presenting controversial historical topics responsibly #### Community - Foster discussions about academic methodology in religious studies - Support projects that make archaeological findings accessible to general audiences - Encourage critical thinking about source evaluation and scholarly credibility #### WordPress - Documentation: Create guides for building academic resource sites with proper citation - Accessibility: Ensure religious studies content is accessible across learning styles - Community: Support interfaith dialogue and respectful presentation of diverse viewpoints ## 🧪 Hypotheses - Archaeological evidence will continue supporting polytheistic origins of Israelite religion - Power consolidation motives better explain religious reforms than theological purity claims - Mystical reinterpretations of ancient texts correlate with lack of scholarly training - Female deity worship suppression patterns repeat across ancient Mediterranean cultures - Temple centralization campaigns consistently coincide with political consolidation efforts ### 📊 Methodology - Comparative analysis of inscription databases across ancient Near Eastern sites - Statistical analysis of scholarly consensus through citation networks - Linguistic analysis of translation accuracy claims in popular media - Historical correlation analysis between political reforms and religious changes ### ❓ Questions - What percentage of biblical scholars accept the Asherah consensus? - How do power dynamics explain other ancient religious transitions? - What archaeological evidence might challenge current theories? - How do translation choices influence popular religious understanding? ### 🔮 Future Research - Expanded archaeological surveys in ancient Israelite territories - Digital humanities analysis of biblical editorial patterns - Cross-cultural studies of goddess worship suppression - Popular media influence on religious historical understanding ### 💡 Implications - Religious education should incorporate archaeological findings - Translation accuracy significantly impacts theological understanding - Academic consensus differs substantially from popular religious narratives - Political motivations often drive religious institutional changes ### 🧠 Learning Styles Assessment Reading level estimate: 12th grade (Flesch-Kincaid) #### 👀 Visual learners - Present: Archaeological photographs, inscription images, temple diagrams - Improve: Interactive timeline of religious developments, comparison charts of deity worship #### 🔊 Aural learners - Present: Video format with expert commentary - Improve: Audio-only version with clear pronunciation of ancient terms #### 🗣️ Verbal learners - Present: Clear definitions of technical terms, analogies to modern situations - Improve: Glossary of archaeological and religious terminology #### 🧩 Kinesthetic learners - Present: Step-by-step analysis of evidence - Improve: Interactive exercises in evaluating archaeological claims #### 🧠 Logical learners - Present: Evidence-based arguments, scholarly consensus data - Improve: Flowcharts showing logical reasoning, criteria for evaluating sources #### 🧑‍🤝‍🧑 Social learners - Present: Discussion of scholarly community consensus - Improve: Forum discussions with moderated debate protocols #### 🧘‍♀️ Solitary learners - Present: Individual analysis of claims and evidence - Improve: Self-assessment questions about source evaluation ### 📊 Accessibility Assessment #### Screen reader semantics - Present: Clear heading structure, descriptive video content - Improve: Alt text for archaeological images, transcript with speaker identification #### Keyboard navigation - Present: Video player controls accessible - Improve: Chapter navigation, bookmark functionality #### Contrast and readability - Present: High contrast video interface - Improve: Adjustable text size for transcript, dark mode option #### Media and captions - Present: Audio content with visual elements - Improve: Synchronized captions, audio descriptions of visual archaeological evidence ### 🌍 DEIB Assessment #### Cultural breadth - Present: Ancient Near Eastern context, multiple cultural perspectives - Improve: Modern diverse scholarly voices, global archaeological parallels #### Inclusive language - Present: Academic terminology with explanations - Improve: Sensitivity to different religious viewpoints, avoid dismissive language #### Representation - Present: Discussion of female deities and women's religious roles - Improve: Contemporary diverse archaeological teams, global research perspectives #### Psychological safety - Present: Respectful treatment of religious topics - Improve: Content warnings for challenges to traditional beliefs, supportive discussion guidelines ### ✅ Logical Validity #### Strong reasoning - Archaeological evidence interpretation follows standard methodology - Scholarly consensus properly distinguished from fringe theories - Clear separation between established facts and interpretive claims #### Fallacies - **Appeal to antiquity**: Assumes older religious practices were more "authentic" - **False dichotomy**: Presents only patriarchy vs. demonic forces as explanations - **Cherry-picking**: Douglas Klotz claims ignore mainstream linguistic scholarship #### Tone of voice - Academic and measured when presenting archaeological evidence - Appropriately critical of unsupported mystical claims - Professional disagreement without personal attack ### 🛡️ DARVO Analysis - **Deny**: Video avoids denying archaeological evidence, appropriately challenges unsupported claims - **Attack**: Critiques specific inaccurate sources without attacking persons - **Reverse victim/offender**: No evidence of this pattern in the content ## 🎯 Conclusion Archaeological evidence strongly supports the scholarly consensus that early Israelite religion included goddess worship alongside the primary deity. This challenges traditional monotheistic narratives but represents solid academic scholarship rather than revisionist theology. However, the video demonstrates the importance of distinguishing between legitimate archaeological findings and unsupported mystical interpretations. For educators and content creators, this highlights the critical need for proper source evaluation and academic rigor when presenting complex historical topics. ## 🔄 Refactor Appendix — Wait … God had a WIFE?!? ### 📚 Literature Atoms (H3) #### Archaeological consensus supports early Israelite goddess worship alongside primary deity > [!quote] ID:rw_001 > The majority of scholars who specialize in early Israelite history are in fairly widespread agreement that in the earliest periods, the original patron deity of the nation of Israel, the northwest Semitic patriarchal high deity El was worshiped alongside their consort partner or wife Asherah **Context & use**: - Foundation claim establishing scholarly consensus - Challenges popular monotheistic assumptions with academic authority **Tags**: #xref #ancient-israelite-religion **Highlight**: Archaeological evidence from multiple sites supports this consensus  #### Physical inscriptions directly reference "Yahweh and his Asherah" worship pairing > [!quote] ID:rw_002 > The inscriptions on those jars read Yahweh and his asherah. Matching inscriptions have since been found at Kibet Elcom in the West Bank **Context & use**: - 8th century BCE archaeological evidence from Sinai Desert and West Bank - Primary source evidence beyond textual interpretation **Tags**: #xref #biblical-archaeology **Highlight**: Concrete physical evidence supporting theoretical claims  #### Religious reforms served political power consolidation over theological purity > [!quote] ID:rw_003 > It seems to be about power and resources and structuring values and boundaries in a way that forwarded Josiah's interests over and against the interests of people who engaged in household worship **Context & use**: - Explains motivation behind Asherah worship suppression - Political analysis of religious institutional changes **Tags**: #xref #religious-reform **Highlight**: Pattern applicable to other historical religious transitions  ### 🧠 Permanent Candidates (H4) #### Archaeological evidence trumps traditional religious narratives for historical accuracy **Claim**: Physical archaeological evidence provides more reliable historical information than traditional religious texts or popular theological interpretations. **Evidence pointer**: [[#Archaeological consensus supports early Israelite goddess worship]] **Scope & conditions**: Applies when material evidence contradicts received traditions; limited by preservation bias and interpretive frameworks **Links**: - [[Historical methodology]] — because extends evidence hierarchy principles - [[Religious studies scholarship]] — because contrasts with devotional approaches  ### ✏️ Fleeting Queue - Research scholarly consensus methodology in biblical studies #fleeting #inbox - Investigate other ancient goddess worship suppression patterns #fleeting #research - Explore power dynamics in religious institutional reforms #fleeting #comparative ### → Things 3 - [ ] Review William Dever's "Did God Have a Wife?" for methodology examples — academic research #things - [ ] Create source evaluation checklist for religious historical claims — content development #things ``` Processed: Wait … God had a WIFE?!? - Literature atoms: 3 / 5 cap - Permanent candidates: 1 / 3 cap - Fleeting items: 3 - Things 3 actions: 2 / 2 cap - Konik tags used: [xref, ancient-israelite-religion, biblical-archaeology, religious-reform] - Triage callouts populated: [none - video format] - Quality gates: [✓ all gates passed] - Override conditions triggered: [none] ``` --- ## Full Transcript [00:00] You ready? [00:02] >> All right, let's see it. [00:05] >> The God of the Bible originally had a [00:07] wife. This is not some new age [00:09] revisionist theology. This is [00:11] archaeology. [00:12] >> This is accurate. As near as I can tell, [00:15] the majority of scholars who specialize [00:16] in early Israelite history are in fairly [00:19] widespread agreement that in the [00:21] earliest periods, the original patron [00:23] deity of the nation of Israel, the [00:25] northwest Semitic patriarchal high deity [00:27] L was worshiped alongside their consort [00:30] partner or wife Asher, who is Athiats in [00:34] the ancient Egaritic literature. And I [00:37] actually have an online class that I [00:39] taught a few years ago on Asher, the [00:41] Israelite goddess. And then when Adonai [00:44] and L were conflated, Asher became the [00:47] consort partner or wife of Adonai as [00:49] well. And as this content creator is [00:51] going to discuss, we have archaeological [00:53] data indicating the pairing of Adonai [00:56] and Ashra, not just in inscriptions, but [00:59] even in drawings as we can see here. And [01:02] I even sell this shirt as part of my [01:05] merch. But there are a lot of people who [01:07] push back and say, "Well, we know that [01:09] Ashstro was worshiped because that was a [01:13] state of apostasy. That was a corruption [01:15] of the more pure, more monotheistic [01:17] Israelite worship." And I've got a [01:19] question about this on the largescale [01:22] state-of-the- biblical studies survey [01:24] that I'm conducting because I want more [01:27] robust data, but it seems to me that the [01:30] majority of scholars who specialize in [01:32] early Israelite history also suggest the [01:35] data don't support the conclusion this [01:37] was a corruption of a more pure [01:40] monotheistic worship practice. Rather, [01:42] this was the original state of affairs [01:45] and the pivot towards the demonization [01:48] of Asher and the prohibition of her [01:50] worship is actually a secondary [01:52] development and in my opinion that [01:55] probably takes place with King Josiah in [01:58] the 7th century BCE. But again, I will [02:01] have more robust data so I can say for [02:03] sure whether or not this is a majority [02:05] position. But it seems to me that at [02:08] least the scholars that I'm reading [02:10] about this, which I think is [02:11] representative of the broader field, the [02:14] position that most scholars take is that [02:17] yes, initially Adoni and L would have [02:19] been worshiped alongside Asher. And we [02:21] even have data from the late 5th century [02:24] BCE at Elephantine in Egypt where there [02:28] is a reference to a combined divine [02:32] name, Anat and Adoni. And anat is [02:35] another divine name for a female deity. [02:38] And so the two of them seem to have been [02:40] worshiped together as a pair as late as [02:43] the late fifth century, early 4th [02:44] century BCE. So worship of a female [02:48] deity is something that goes back deep [02:51] into the history of ancient Israel. And [02:54] if you would like to read some [02:54] scholarship on this, probably the most [02:56] accessible discussion is this book, Did [03:00] God Have a Wife? by Bill Dver. But more [03:03] academic treatments, more technical [03:05] treatments include uh these books. And [03:07] then I also have a chapter on this in my [03:09] own book, The Bible Says. So what we get [03:12] right and wrong about scriptures most [03:13] controversial issues. Zev Michelle [03:17] excavated a remote site in the Sinai [03:19] Desert. He pulled up pottery shards from [03:21] the 8th century B.C.E. the era of the [03:24] Hebrew kings. The inscriptions on those [03:27] jars read Yahweh and his asher. Matching [03:31] inscriptions have since been found at [03:33] Kibet Elcom in the West Bank. The main [03:36] excavation report for Contilad is this [03:39] publication and in it you can find a lot [03:41] of discussion of these inscriptions, [03:43] these references to Adonai and his [03:45] Asher. And here are some of these [03:47] inscriptions as well as some of the [03:49] drawings that depict Asher in [03:51] anthropomorphic form as well as in her [03:54] symbolic form as a tree either a date [03:57] palm or an almond tree with ibix's [04:00] feeding on either side which is a [04:02] ubiquitous symbol in ancient West Asia [04:05] and in the opinion of some scholars [04:07] including myself this stylistic tree is [04:10] probably linked to the manora which may [04:14] have been a version of an asher cultic [04:18] object. We can go back to this ure from [04:22] Lich which shows Ivix's feeding on [04:24] either side of a stylized tree which has [04:26] a distinct similarity to how manoras [04:29] would later be depicted. The Hebrew [04:31] Bible itself in the book of Kings [04:33] records that a statue of Asher stood [04:36] inside the temple of Solomon for 2/3 of [04:39] its history before King Josiah finally [04:41] tore it down. [04:42] >> This is true. You have a discussion of [04:44] an asher pole being taken out of the [04:47] temple and destroyed. And this would not [04:49] have been an anthropomorphic statue, but [04:51] probably a kind of stylized tree, which [04:54] would have represented Asher. And there [04:56] are two different ways that the Bible [04:58] may have tried to accommodate the [05:01] existence of just such a tree in the [05:04] Holy of Holies because according to the [05:06] Deuteronomist, King Josiah took it out [05:09] and destroyed it. But it may be related [05:13] to the manora. And so the whole notion [05:15] of the manura within the holy of holies [05:17] may be a way to kind of sanitize and [05:20] rehabilitate the existence of a stylized [05:24] tree in the holy of holies that [05:26] represented ashra. And then there's [05:28] another interesting theory based on this [05:30] paper by a scholar named Ran Iller that [05:34] the budding rod of Aaron may have been [05:37] an ash or a pole. And the entire story [05:40] of Aaron's budding rod was a way to [05:43] obscure that and kind of replace the [05:46] understanding of this object as a cultic [05:50] object associated with Ashra with this [05:52] story of the budding rod of Aaron being [05:55] placed within the ark of the covenant. [05:58] So, there are a few different ways that [06:00] scholars think the biblical authors are [06:03] trying to account for the likely [06:05] long-term presence of an ash or a pole [06:08] within the Holy of Holies, probably [06:11] alongside whatever divine image may have [06:13] been in use to represent Adonai, the God [06:15] of Israel. And I talk about this to some [06:18] degree in my book, Adonai's Divine [06:21] Images, a cognitive approach. And this [06:23] is an open access book. You can find a [06:25] PDF of it freely online. Why did he do [06:28] that? [06:29] >> So the destruction of the Asher cultic [06:32] image was probably a part of a broader [06:35] campaign of cultic reform that may have [06:38] taken place to some degree in the late [06:40] 7th century BCE. Most scholars would say [06:43] what is discussed in 2 Kings 22 and 23 [06:48] is probably not very historical. This is [06:50] probably later attempts to make this [06:52] sound like a more significant reform [06:55] than it originally was. But there are a [06:56] lot of scholars who think that Josiah [06:58] probably did implement some cultic [07:00] reforms as a part of an attempt to [07:02] centralize worship in Jerusalem. Because [07:05] prior to this, there were temples [07:08] scattered around ancient Israel and [07:09] Judah. And there was worship of Adonai [07:12] and manifestations of Adonai in a [07:14] variety of different places, probably [07:16] using a variety of different types of [07:18] cultic media. And there were probably [07:20] different deities that were associated [07:21] with that worship up to and including [07:24] personal household worship involving [07:26] divine images and probably involving [07:29] ancestors and other deities like perhaps [07:32] Asher. And so in an attempt to rid his [07:36] kingdom of all this other worship that [07:39] was directing resources and attention [07:42] elsewhere, Josiah may have said, "No, [07:44] you're not allowed to engage in any of [07:46] that household worship, any of that [07:48] ancestor worship, any of that worship of [07:49] Asher. You're only allowed to worship [07:52] Adonai, and you're only allowed to do so [07:54] in my temple in Jerusalem, which would [07:57] have focused all the nation's resources [07:59] and cultic attention on Jerusalem, on [08:03] Josiah's priesthood, and on the temple [08:06] that was run by Josiah in Jerusalem. So, [08:09] it seems to be about power and resources [08:13] and structuring values and boundaries in [08:16] a way that forwarded Josiah's interests [08:19] over and against the interests of people [08:22] who engaged in household worship, which [08:25] usually would have heavily involved [08:27] women. And if you're interested in the [08:29] role of goddesses and of female priests [08:31] in early Israel, I would highly [08:33] recommend Susan Acriman's God's [08:35] Goddesses and the Women Who Serve Them. [08:39] This is the academic consensus among [08:41] biblical archaeologists at Oxford, [08:44] Exiter, and Harvard. The real question [08:46] is why did the editors of the Torah [08:49] spend generations chiseling her name [08:52] from the record? I think the explanation [08:54] is most likely that people were trying [08:56] to structure power, values, and [08:57] boundaries in ways that served their [09:00] interests, which meant taking away that [09:02] access to power and resources from the [09:05] groups that they didn't like, which [09:07] would have included female priests and [09:10] the worship of Asher as the consort [09:12] partner or wife of Adonai, the god of [09:15] Israel. [09:16] The pattern runs deeper. The Hebrew word [09:19] for what God took from Adam to form Eve [09:21] is sa. It appears 40 other times in the [09:25] Hebrew Bible. And every single time it [09:28] means side. Side of the altar, side of [09:30] the ark, side of the mountain. Co-equal. [09:34] The woman came from the man's side. Born [09:37] of his bone, flesh of his flesh. The way [09:40] Adam himself said it in the very next [09:43] verse. One Latin translator picked the [09:46] word rib and a thousand years later [09:49] we're still living inside that one [09:51] wobble. [09:52] >> I think there would be a lot of scholars [09:55] who would dispute this representation of [09:57] what's going on here. Salah does more [10:01] directly reference a side rather than a [10:03] rib. But you do see it used in reference [10:06] to like the wooden beams that would [10:10] support the side of a ship, which you [10:13] could see how conceptually could be [10:15] related to ribs. So I would usually [10:18] point out to people that the idea here [10:21] seems to be more than just a rib, [10:22] particularly because Adam says not just [10:24] bone of my bone, but also flesh of my [10:26] flesh. So it seems to be a larger chunk [10:29] of Adam than just a rib. But I don't [10:32] know that the majority of scholars would [10:34] agree with the notion that this is [10:36] supposed to represent a 50/50 kind of [10:38] egalitarian split down the middle of [10:41] Adam. But that is a reading that has [10:44] quite a bit of antiquity within early [10:46] Judaism. There was an understanding that [10:49] prior to this split, Adam was a being [10:55] that had both male and female parts. And [10:58] so they were then split into a male and [11:02] a female similar to Aristophany's myth [11:06] in Plato's symposium. So there is some [11:08] antiquity to this. I don't know that [11:10] egalitarianism was the central message [11:13] of it. And I think scholars would [11:15] suggest the exact understanding of [11:17] what's going on here is still a little [11:19] too disputed for us to be able to say it [11:22] definitely meant this and therefore ri [11:23] is a mistransation. [11:25] And when Yeshua himself prayed, he [11:28] prayed in Aramaic, his native tongue. [11:31] The Lord's prayer begins with, "O [11:33] birther, father, mother of the cosmos." [11:37] So this is entirely inaccurate, and this [11:40] is based on this book from the '90s [11:43] called Prayers of the Cosmos: [11:44] Reflections on the Original Meaning of [11:46] Jesus's Words by Neil Douglas Clots. And [11:49] really, it's just a mystical meditation [11:52] on what meaning we could read into the [11:55] Lord's Prayer. Douglas Clattz represents [11:57] it as a more accurate representation of [12:01] all these deep meanings within the [12:02] Aramaic, but it's entirely inaccurate. [12:05] And there are no scholars who would [12:06] agree that that's what's going on in the [12:08] Aramaic. Again, this is just a mystical [12:11] meditation. This content creator said [12:13] regarding God's wife that this wasn't [12:15] this new age revisionist stuff. Uh, this [12:18] part of this video is 100% new age [12:21] revisionist stuff. [12:23] >> The first word in the original Aramaic [12:25] is abun, a fusion of aba, father, and [12:29] wound, womb. He was praying to the [12:32] father mother god. [12:33] >> So this is just entirely false to begin. [12:35] Abwun does not combine father with womb. [12:39] It combines father with a first common [12:42] plural possessive suffix. It just means [12:45] our father. However, it's not pronounced [12:48] abun. It's pronounced aun. But [12:51] additionally, this is Syriak, which is [12:53] not Galilean Aramaic. So, it's not the [12:55] language that Jesus would have spoken. [12:58] in Galilean Aramaic. If we were to try [13:00] to back translate from Greek to a [13:04] hypothetical original Galilean Aramaic, [13:06] it would probably be Aunan, which would [13:10] be the Galilean Aramaic way of combining [13:13] father with the first common plural [13:16] possessive suffix our. So why was the [13:20] feminine redacted from the creation [13:22] story, erased from the prayer of the [13:24] rebby who came to set the record [13:27] straight? [13:29] Most people will tell you this is [13:30] patriarchy. They'll say it's about male [13:33] power and control. But that's just the [13:36] surface structure. The deeper current [13:38] runs underneath. There are forces at [13:41] work in this world that are [13:43] fundamentally anti-life. Their entire [13:46] project is to sever humanity from the [13:49] source that births, feeds, and renews [13:52] us. Because life on this planet flows [13:54] through one channel, the mother. The [13:58] womb is the threshold every soul passes [14:01] through to get here. The woman who [14:04] carried you was your first universe, [14:07] your first ocean, your first sky. Erase [14:11] the feminine from the origin story and [14:13] you sever the rope between humanity and [14:16] the living source of everything that [14:19] breathes. This sounds like it's trying [14:22] to attribute demonic forces to the [14:26] patriarchy. I don't think that there are [14:29] data that support that conclusion. I [14:31] think patriarchy, selfishness, people [14:34] trying to structure power and values and [14:36] boundaries in ways that serve their [14:37] interests over and against the interests [14:39] of others, people who because of [14:42] systemic power asymmetries are almost [14:45] unilaterally male. I think those are the [14:47] things that primarily contribute to the [14:50] eraser, the demonization of the worship [14:53] of Asher and other marginalizations and [14:58] oppression of females involved in [15:00] worship, female deities and the role of [15:03] women in the priesthood and things like [15:05] that. I think that has much better [15:07] explanatory power and makes much better [15:09] use of the data and also doesn't have to [15:12] rely on misinformation like Douglas [15:15] Clots's entirely inaccurate attempts to [15:19] meditate mystically on what the Lord's [15:21] Prayer could mean. And the fit for this [15:24] video has been data over dogma.  ## 📺 Video ![](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjtgyB4g2F0) ## Highlights - The majority of scholars who specialize in early Israelite history are in fairly widespread agreement that in the earliest periods, the original patron deity of the nation of Israel, the northwest Semitic patriarchal high deity El was worshiped alongside their consort partner or wife Asherah - Note: 📚 Archaeological consensus supports early Israelite goddess worship alongside primary deity · - Foundation claim establishing scholarly consensus - Challenges popular monotheistic assumptions with academic authority · #atom/literature/h1 - The inscriptions on those jars read Yahweh and his asherah. Matching inscriptions have since been found at Kibet Elcom in the West Bank - Note: 📚 Physical inscriptions directly reference "Yahweh and his Asherah" worship pairing · - 8th century BCE archaeological evidence from Sinai Desert and West Bank - Primary source evidence beyond textual interpretation · #atom/literature/h2 - It seems to be about power and resources and structuring values and boundaries in a way that forwarded Josiah's interests over and against the interests of people who engaged in household worship - Note: 📚 Religious reforms served political power consolidation over theological purity · - Explains motivation behind Asherah worship suppression - Political analysis of religious institutional changes · #atom/literature/h3 - Archaeological evidence trumps traditional religious narratives for historical accuracy - Note: [[Historical methodology]] — because extends evidence hierarchy principles · - [[Historical methodology]] — because extends evidence hierarchy principles · #atom/zettel/z1 - Research scholarly consensus methodology in biblical studies - Note: ✏️ Fleeting capture #atom/fleeting/f1 - Investigate other ancient goddess worship suppression patterns #fleeting #research - Note: ✏️ Fleeting capture #atom/fleeting/f2 - Explore power dynamics in religious institutional reforms #fleeting #comparative - Note: ✏️ Fleeting capture #atom/fleeting/f3 --- # 📝 Full Notes (Deep-Read Analysis) # 🏷️ Title: Wait … God had a WIFE?!? ## 🧭 Table of Contents - [📝 Summary](#-summary) - [📖 Main Content](#-main-content) - [🗒️ Notes](#️-notes) - [📚 References](#-references) - [🗣️ Paraphrase](#️-paraphrase) - [📰 Newsletter](#-newsletter) - [✅ Action Items](#-action-items) - [🧪 Hypotheses](#-hypotheses) - [📊 Methodology](#-methodology) - [❓ Questions](#-questions) - [🔮 Future Research](#-future-research) - [💡 Implications](#-implications) - [🧠 Learning Styles Assessment](#-learning-styles-assessment) - [📊 Accessibility Assessment](#-accessibility-assessment) - [🌍 DEIB Assessment](#-deib-assessment) - [✅ Logical Validity](#-logical-validity) - [🛡️ DARVO Analysis](#-darvo-analysis) - [🎯 Conclusion](#-conclusion) ## 📝 Summary - Archaeological evidence suggests the early Israelite patron deity (El/Yahweh) was worshipped alongside a female consort named Asherah. - Inscriptions from 8th century BCE sites read "Yahweh and his Asherah," with matching finds across multiple locations. - The monotheistic worship was likely a later development, possibly during King Josiah's reforms in 7th century BCE. - Biblical accounts suggest an Asherah pole stood in Solomon's temple for two-thirds of its history. - The shift away from goddess worship may have been driven by power consolidation and resource control rather than theological purity. ## 📖 Main Content Archaeological evidence challenges traditional monotheistic narratives about ancient Israelite religion. The majority of scholars specializing in early Israelite history agree that the original patron deity El was worshipped alongside Asherah, their consort partner. When Adonai (Yahweh) and El were conflated, Asherah became Yahweh's consort as well. Physical evidence includes inscriptions from 8th century BCE sites in the Sinai Desert and West Bank reading "Yahweh and his Asherah." These discoveries, made at sites like Kuntillet Ajrud and Khirbet el-Qom, include both textual references and artistic depictions showing Asherah in anthropomorphic form and as a stylized tree with ibexes feeding on either side. The Hebrew Bible itself records that an Asherah statue stood inside Solomon's temple before King Josiah destroyed it during cultic reforms. Scholars suggest this wasn't an anthropomorphic statue but a stylized tree representing the goddess. Some theorize the menorah may have been a sanitized version of this Asherah symbol. ### 🗒️ Notes #### ⏱️ [00:00:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjtgyB4g2F0&t=15) Archaeological Evidence for Asherah - Majority of early Israelite history scholars agree on El-Asherah worship pairing - Archaeological data shows inscriptions and drawings of Yahweh-Asherah pairing - Not considered corruption of pure monotheism, but original state of affairs #### ⏱️ [00:02:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjtgyB4g2F0&t=150) Physical Discoveries - Zev Michelle excavated pottery shards from 8th century BCE with "Yahweh and his Asherah" inscriptions - Matching inscriptions found at Khirbet el-Qom in West Bank - Depictions show Asherah as anthropomorphic figure and stylized tree with feeding ibexes #### ⏱️ [00:04:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjtgyB4g2F0&t=285) Biblical Temple Evidence - Hebrew Bible records Asherah statue in Solomon's temple for 2/3 of its history - King Josiah removed and destroyed the Asherah pole - Menorah may be sanitized version of Asherah tree symbol #### ⏱️ [00:06:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjtgyB4g2F0&t=375) Josiah's Reforms - Cultic reforms part of worship centralization campaign - Eliminated scattered temple worship to focus resources on Jerusalem temple - Removed household worship involving ancestors and deities like Asherah #### ⏱️ [00:08:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjtgyB4g2F0&t=510) Disputed Translation Claims - Video makes inaccurate claims about Hebrew "tsela" meaning side vs. rib - Scholar disputes egalitarian interpretation, notes ongoing academic debate - Some antiquity to idea of original androgynous Adam being split #### ⏱️ [00:10:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjtgyB4g2F0&t=600) Aramaic Prayer Misinformation - Claims about Lord's Prayer Aramaic origins are "entirely inaccurate" - Based on Neil Douglas Klotz's mystical meditations, not scholarship - "Abwun" means "our father," not "father-mother" fusion ## 📚 References - "Did God Have a Wife?" by William Dever - "God's Goddesses and the Women Who Serve Them" by Susan Ackerman - "The Bible Says" by Dan McClellan - "Adonai's Divine Images: A Cognitive Approach" by Dan McClellan - Kuntillet Ajrud excavation reports - "Prayers of the Cosmos" by Neil Douglas Klotz (critiqued as inaccurate) ## 🗣️ Paraphrase Archaeological discoveries have revealed that ancient Israelite religion was originally polytheistic, with the primary deity worshipped alongside a female consort named Asherah. Physical evidence from multiple 8th century BCE sites shows inscriptions and artwork depicting this divine partnership. The shift toward monotheism appears to have been a later political and religious reform, particularly during King Josiah's reign, aimed at centralizing worship and consolidating power in Jerusalem. While the Hebrew Bible itself acknowledges Asherah's presence in the temple, later editors worked to minimize or reinterpret these references. However, scholars warn against mystical reinterpretations of biblical texts that lack academic support. ## 📰 Newsletter Fascinating archaeological discoveries are reshaping our understanding of ancient Israelite religion! Recent scholarship reveals that early Hebrew worship included a goddess named Asherah as Yahweh's consort, supported by inscriptions and artwork from multiple 8th century BCE sites. This challenges traditional monotheistic narratives and suggests the familiar biblical accounts represent later theological developments rather than original practices. For WordPress developers interested in religious studies sites, this highlights the importance of presenting complex academic topics with proper sourcing and avoiding sensationalized claims. Check out the recommended scholarly works for deeper dives into archaeological methodology and ancient Near Eastern religion. ## ✅ Action Items #### DevRel - Create educational content about evaluating religious claims using archaeological evidence - Develop workshops on distinguishing scholarly consensus from fringe theories - Design templates for presenting controversial historical topics responsibly #### Community - Foster discussions about academic methodology in religious studies - Support projects that make archaeological findings accessible to general audiences - Encourage critical thinking about source evaluation and scholarly credibility #### WordPress - Documentation: Create guides for building academic resource sites with proper citation - Accessibility: Ensure religious studies content is accessible across learning styles - Community: Support interfaith dialogue and respectful presentation of diverse viewpoints ## 🧪 Hypotheses - Archaeological evidence will continue supporting polytheistic origins of Israelite religion - Power consolidation motives better explain religious reforms than theological purity claims - Mystical reinterpretations of ancient texts correlate with lack of scholarly training - Female deity worship suppression patterns repeat across ancient Mediterranean cultures - Temple centralization campaigns consistently coincide with political consolidation efforts ### 📊 Methodology - Comparative analysis of inscription databases across ancient Near Eastern sites - Statistical analysis of scholarly consensus through citation networks - Linguistic analysis of translation accuracy claims in popular media - Historical correlation analysis between political reforms and religious changes ### ❓ Questions - What percentage of biblical scholars accept the Asherah consensus? - How do power dynamics explain other ancient religious transitions? - What archaeological evidence might challenge current theories? - How do translation choices influence popular religious understanding? ### 🔮 Future Research - Expanded archaeological surveys in ancient Israelite territories - Digital humanities analysis of biblical editorial patterns - Cross-cultural studies of goddess worship suppression - Popular media influence on religious historical understanding ### 💡 Implications - Religious education should incorporate archaeological findings - Translation accuracy significantly impacts theological understanding - Academic consensus differs substantially from popular religious narratives - Political motivations often drive religious institutional changes ### 🧠 Learning Styles Assessment Reading level estimate: 12th grade (Flesch-Kincaid) #### 👀 Visual learners - Present: Archaeological photographs, inscription images, temple diagrams - Improve: Interactive timeline of religious developments, comparison charts of deity worship #### 🔊 Aural learners - Present: Video format with expert commentary - Improve: Audio-only version with clear pronunciation of ancient terms #### 🗣️ Verbal learners - Present: Clear definitions of technical terms, analogies to modern situations - Improve: Glossary of archaeological and religious terminology #### 🧩 Kinesthetic learners - Present: Step-by-step analysis of evidence - Improve: Interactive exercises in evaluating archaeological claims #### 🧠 Logical learners - Present: Evidence-based arguments, scholarly consensus data - Improve: Flowcharts showing logical reasoning, criteria for evaluating sources #### 🧑‍🤝‍🧑 Social learners - Present: Discussion of scholarly community consensus - Improve: Forum discussions with moderated debate protocols #### 🧘‍♀️ Solitary learners - Present: Individual analysis of claims and evidence - Improve: Self-assessment questions about source evaluation ### 📊 Accessibility Assessment #### Screen reader semantics - Present: Clear heading structure, descriptive video content - Improve: Alt text for archaeological images, transcript with speaker identification #### Keyboard navigation - Present: Video player controls accessible - Improve: Chapter navigation, bookmark functionality #### Contrast and readability - Present: High contrast video interface - Improve: Adjustable text size for transcript, dark mode option #### Media and captions - Present: Audio content with visual elements - Improve: Synchronized captions, audio descriptions of visual archaeological evidence ### 🌍 DEIB Assessment #### Cultural breadth - Present: Ancient Near Eastern context, multiple cultural perspectives - Improve: Modern diverse scholarly voices, global archaeological parallels #### Inclusive language - Present: Academic terminology with explanations - Improve: Sensitivity to different religious viewpoints, avoid dismissive language #### Representation - Present: Discussion of female deities and women's religious roles - Improve: Contemporary diverse archaeological teams, global research perspectives #### Psychological safety - Present: Respectful treatment of religious topics - Improve: Content warnings for challenges to traditional beliefs, supportive discussion guidelines ### ✅ Logical Validity #### Strong reasoning - Archaeological evidence interpretation follows standard methodology - Scholarly consensus properly distinguished from fringe theories - Clear separation between established facts and interpretive claims #### Fallacies - **Appeal to antiquity**: Assumes older religious practices were more "authentic" - **False dichotomy**: Presents only patriarchy vs. demonic forces as explanations - **Cherry-picking**: Douglas Klotz claims ignore mainstream linguistic scholarship #### Tone of voice - Academic and measured when presenting archaeological evidence - Appropriately critical of unsupported mystical claims - Professional disagreement without personal attack ### 🛡️ DARVO Analysis - **Deny**: Video avoids denying archaeological evidence, appropriately challenges unsupported claims - **Attack**: Critiques specific inaccurate sources without attacking persons - **Reverse victim/offender**: No evidence of this pattern in the content ## 🎯 Conclusion Archaeological evidence strongly supports the scholarly consensus that early Israelite religion included goddess worship alongside the primary deity. This challenges traditional monotheistic narratives but represents solid academic scholarship rather than revisionist theology. However, the video demonstrates the importance of distinguishing between legitimate archaeological findings and unsupported mystical interpretations. For educators and content creators, this highlights the critical need for proper source evaluation and academic rigor when presenting complex historical topics. ## 🔄 Refactor Appendix — Wait … God had a WIFE?!? ### 📚 Literature Atoms (H3) #### Archaeological consensus supports early Israelite goddess worship alongside primary deity > [!quote] ID:rw_001 > The majority of scholars who specialize in early Israelite history are in fairly widespread agreement that in the earliest periods, the original patron deity of the nation of Israel, the northwest Semitic patriarchal high deity El was worshiped alongside their consort partner or wife Asherah **Context & use**: - Foundation claim establishing scholarly consensus - Challenges popular monotheistic assumptions with academic authority **Tags**: #xref #ancient-israelite-religion **Highlight**: Archaeological evidence from multiple sites supports this consensus  #### Physical inscriptions directly reference "Yahweh and his Asherah" worship pairing > [!quote] ID:rw_002 > The inscriptions on those jars read Yahweh and his asherah. Matching inscriptions have since been found at Kibet Elcom in the West Bank **Context & use**: - 8th century BCE archaeological evidence from Sinai Desert and West Bank - Primary source evidence beyond textual interpretation **Tags**: #xref #biblical-archaeology **Highlight**: Concrete physical evidence supporting theoretical claims  #### Religious reforms served political power consolidation over theological purity > [!quote] ID:rw_003 > It seems to be about power and resources and structuring values and boundaries in a way that forwarded Josiah's interests over and against the interests of people who engaged in household worship **Context & use**: - Explains motivation behind Asherah worship suppression - Political analysis of religious institutional changes **Tags**: #xref #religious-reform **Highlight**: Pattern applicable to other historical religious transitions  ### 🧠 Permanent Candidates (H4) #### Archaeological evidence trumps traditional religious narratives for historical accuracy **Claim**: Physical archaeological evidence provides more reliable historical information than traditional religious texts or popular theological interpretations. **Evidence pointer**: [[#Archaeological consensus supports early Israelite goddess worship]] **Scope & conditions**: Applies when material evidence contradicts received traditions; limited by preservation bias and interpretive frameworks **Links**: - [[Historical methodology]] — because extends evidence hierarchy principles - [[Religious studies scholarship]] — because contrasts with devotional approaches  ### ✏️ Fleeting Queue - Research scholarly consensus methodology in biblical studies #fleeting #inbox - Investigate other ancient goddess worship suppression patterns #fleeting #research - Explore power dynamics in religious institutional reforms #fleeting #comparative ### → Things 3 - [ ] Review William Dever's "Did God Have a Wife?" for methodology examples — academic research #things - [ ] Create source evaluation checklist for religious historical claims — content development #things ``` Processed: Wait … God had a WIFE?!? - Literature atoms: 3 / 5 cap - Permanent candidates: 1 / 3 cap - Fleeting items: 3 - Things 3 actions: 2 / 2 cap - Konik tags used: [xref, ancient-israelite-religion, biblical-archaeology, religious-reform] - Triage callouts populated: [none - video format] - Quality gates: [✓ all gates passed] - Override conditions triggered: [none] ``` --- # 📄 Full Transcript *Auto-generated from YouTube captions · timestamps roughly every 30 seconds · [watch on YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjtgyB4g2F0)* **[00:00]** You ready? >> All right, let's see it. >> The God of the Bible originally had a wife. This is not some new age revisionist theology. This is archaeology. >> This is accurate. As near as I can tell, the majority of scholars who specialize in early Israelite history are in fairly widespread agreement that in the earliest periods, the original patron deity of the nation of Israel, the northwest Semitic patriarchal high deity L was worshiped alongside their consort partner or wife Asher, who is Athiats in **[00:34]** the ancient Egaritic literature. And I actually have an online class that I taught a few years ago on Asher, the Israelite goddess. And then when Adonai and L were conflated, Asher became the consort partner or wife of Adonai as well. And as this content creator is going to discuss, we have archaeological data indicating the pairing of Adonai and Ashra, not just in inscriptions, but even in drawings as we can see here. And I even sell this shirt as part of my **[01:05]** merch. But there are a lot of people who push back and say, "Well, we know that Ashstro was worshiped because that was a state of apostasy. That was a corruption of the more pure, more monotheistic Israelite worship." And I've got a question about this on the largescale state-of-the- biblical studies survey that I'm conducting because I want more robust data, but it seems to me that the majority of scholars who specialize in early Israelite history also suggest the **[01:35]** data don't support the conclusion this was a corruption of a more pure monotheistic worship practice. Rather, this was the original state of affairs and the pivot towards the demonization of Asher and the prohibition of her worship is actually a secondary development and in my opinion that probably takes place with King Josiah in the 7th century BCE. But again, I will have more robust data so I can say for sure whether or not this is a majority position. But it seems to me that at **[02:08]** least the scholars that I'm reading about this, which I think is representative of the broader field, the position that most scholars take is that yes, initially Adoni and L would have been worshiped alongside Asher. And we even have data from the late 5th century BCE at Elephantine in Egypt where there is a reference to a combined divine name, Anat and Adoni. And anat is another divine name for a female deity. **[02:38]** And so the two of them seem to have been worshiped together as a pair as late as the late fifth century, early 4th century BCE. So worship of a female deity is something that goes back deep into the history of ancient Israel. And if you would like to read some scholarship on this, probably the most accessible discussion is this book, Did God Have a Wife? by Bill Dver. But more academic treatments, more technical treatments include uh these books. And then I also have a chapter on this in my **[03:09]** own book, The Bible Says. So what we get right and wrong about scriptures most controversial issues. Zev Michelle excavated a remote site in the Sinai Desert. He pulled up pottery shards from the 8th century B.C.E. the era of the Hebrew kings. The inscriptions on those jars read Yahweh and his asher. Matching inscriptions have since been found at Kibet Elcom in the West Bank. The main excavation report for Contilad is this publication and in it you can find a lot **[03:41]** of discussion of these inscriptions, these references to Adonai and his Asher. And here are some of these inscriptions as well as some of the drawings that depict Asher in anthropomorphic form as well as in her symbolic form as a tree either a date palm or an almond tree with ibix's feeding on either side which is a ubiquitous symbol in ancient West Asia and in the opinion of some scholars including myself this stylistic tree is probably linked to the manora which may **[04:14]** have been a version of an asher cultic object. We can go back to this ure from Lich which shows Ivix's feeding on either side of a stylized tree which has a distinct similarity to how manoras would later be depicted. The Hebrew Bible itself in the book of Kings records that a statue of Asher stood inside the temple of Solomon for 2/3 of its history before King Josiah finally tore it down. >> This is true. You have a discussion of **[04:44]** an asher pole being taken out of the temple and destroyed. And this would not have been an anthropomorphic statue, but probably a kind of stylized tree, which would have represented Asher. And there are two different ways that the Bible may have tried to accommodate the existence of just such a tree in the Holy of Holies because according to the Deuteronomist, King Josiah took it out and destroyed it. But it may be related to the manora. And so the whole notion **[05:15]** of the manura within the holy of holies may be a way to kind of sanitize and rehabilitate the existence of a stylized tree in the holy of holies that represented ashra. And then there's another interesting theory based on this paper by a scholar named Ran Iller that the budding rod of Aaron may have been an ash or a pole. And the entire story of Aaron's budding rod was a way to obscure that and kind of replace the **[05:46]** understanding of this object as a cultic object associated with Ashra with this story of the budding rod of Aaron being placed within the ark of the covenant. So, there are a few different ways that scholars think the biblical authors are trying to account for the likely long-term presence of an ash or a pole within the Holy of Holies, probably alongside whatever divine image may have been in use to represent Adonai, the God of Israel. And I talk about this to some **[06:18]** degree in my book, Adonai's Divine Images, a cognitive approach. And this is an open access book. You can find a PDF of it freely online. Why did he do that? >> So the destruction of the Asher cultic image was probably a part of a broader campaign of cultic reform that may have taken place to some degree in the late 7th century BCE. Most scholars would say what is discussed in 2 Kings 22 and 23 is probably not very historical. This is **[06:50]** probably later attempts to make this sound like a more significant reform than it originally was. But there are a lot of scholars who think that Josiah probably did implement some cultic reforms as a part of an attempt to centralize worship in Jerusalem. Because prior to this, there were temples scattered around ancient Israel and Judah. And there was worship of Adonai and manifestations of Adonai in a variety of different places, probably using a variety of different types of cultic media. And there were probably **[07:20]** different deities that were associated with that worship up to and including personal household worship involving divine images and probably involving ancestors and other deities like perhaps Asher. And so in an attempt to rid his kingdom of all this other worship that was directing resources and attention elsewhere, Josiah may have said, "No, you're not allowed to engage in any of that household worship, any of that ancestor worship, any of that worship of Asher. You're only allowed to worship **[07:52]** Adonai, and you're only allowed to do so in my temple in Jerusalem, which would have focused all the nation's resources and cultic attention on Jerusalem, on Josiah's priesthood, and on the temple that was run by Josiah in Jerusalem. So, it seems to be about power and resources and structuring values and boundaries in a way that forwarded Josiah's interests over and against the interests of people **[08:22]** who engaged in household worship, which usually would have heavily involved women. And if you're interested in the role of goddesses and of female priests in early Israel, I would highly recommend Susan Acriman's God's Goddesses and the Women Who Serve Them. This is the academic consensus among biblical archaeologists at Oxford, Exiter, and Harvard. The real question is why did the editors of the Torah spend generations chiseling her name from the record? I think the explanation **[08:54]** is most likely that people were trying to structure power, values, and boundaries in ways that served their interests, which meant taking away that access to power and resources from the groups that they didn't like, which would have included female priests and the worship of Asher as the consort partner or wife of Adonai, the god of Israel. The pattern runs deeper. The Hebrew word for what God took from Adam to form Eve is sa. It appears 40 other times in the **[09:25]** Hebrew Bible. And every single time it means side. Side of the altar, side of the ark, side of the mountain. Co-equal. The woman came from the man's side. Born of his bone, flesh of his flesh. The way Adam himself said it in the very next verse. One Latin translator picked the word rib and a thousand years later we're still living inside that one wobble. >> I think there would be a lot of scholars **[09:55]** who would dispute this representation of what's going on here. Salah does more directly reference a side rather than a rib. But you do see it used in reference to like the wooden beams that would support the side of a ship, which you could see how conceptually could be related to ribs. So I would usually point out to people that the idea here seems to be more than just a rib, particularly because Adam says not just bone of my bone, but also flesh of my **[10:26]** flesh. So it seems to be a larger chunk of Adam than just a rib. But I don't know that the majority of scholars would agree with the notion that this is supposed to represent a 50/50 kind of egalitarian split down the middle of Adam. But that is a reading that has quite a bit of antiquity within early Judaism. There was an understanding that prior to this split, Adam was a being that had both male and female parts. And **[10:58]** so they were then split into a male and a female similar to Aristophany's myth in Plato's symposium. So there is some antiquity to this. I don't know that egalitarianism was the central message of it. And I think scholars would suggest the exact understanding of what's going on here is still a little too disputed for us to be able to say it definitely meant this and therefore ri is a mistransation. And when Yeshua himself prayed, he prayed in Aramaic, his native tongue. **[11:31]** The Lord's prayer begins with, "O birther, father, mother of the cosmos." So this is entirely inaccurate, and this is based on this book from the '90s called Prayers of the Cosmos: Reflections on the Original Meaning of Jesus's Words by Neil Douglas Clots. And really, it's just a mystical meditation on what meaning we could read into the Lord's Prayer. Douglas Clattz represents it as a more accurate representation of **[12:01]** all these deep meanings within the Aramaic, but it's entirely inaccurate. And there are no scholars who would agree that that's what's going on in the Aramaic. Again, this is just a mystical meditation. This content creator said regarding God's wife that this wasn't this new age revisionist stuff. Uh, this part of this video is 100% new age revisionist stuff. >> The first word in the original Aramaic is abun, a fusion of aba, father, and wound, womb. He was praying to the **[12:32]** father mother god. >> So this is just entirely false to begin. Abwun does not combine father with womb. It combines father with a first common plural possessive suffix. It just means our father. However, it's not pronounced abun. It's pronounced aun. But additionally, this is Syriak, which is not Galilean Aramaic. So, it's not the language that Jesus would have spoken. in Galilean Aramaic. If we were to try to back translate from Greek to a **[13:04]** hypothetical original Galilean Aramaic, it would probably be Aunan, which would be the Galilean Aramaic way of combining father with the first common plural possessive suffix our. So why was the feminine redacted from the creation story, erased from the prayer of the rebby who came to set the record straight? Most people will tell you this is patriarchy. They'll say it's about male power and control. But that's just the **[13:36]** surface structure. The deeper current runs underneath. There are forces at work in this world that are fundamentally anti-life. Their entire project is to sever humanity from the source that births, feeds, and renews us. Because life on this planet flows through one channel, the mother. The womb is the threshold every soul passes through to get here. The woman who carried you was your first universe, **[14:07]** your first ocean, your first sky. Erase the feminine from the origin story and you sever the rope between humanity and the living source of everything that breathes. This sounds like it's trying to attribute demonic forces to the patriarchy. I don't think that there are data that support that conclusion. I think patriarchy, selfishness, people trying to structure power and values and boundaries in ways that serve their **[14:37]** interests over and against the interests of others, people who because of systemic power asymmetries are almost unilaterally male. I think those are the things that primarily contribute to the eraser, the demonization of the worship of Asher and other marginalizations and oppression of females involved in worship, female deities and the role of women in the priesthood and things like that. I think that has much better explanatory power and makes much better **[15:09]** use of the data and also doesn't have to rely on misinformation like Douglas Clots's entirely inaccurate attempts to meditate mystically on what the Lord's Prayer could mean. And the fit for this video has been data over dogma.