Political correctness carried to its most idiotic apex. ( Excuse me for employing the term "apex" as it is derived from Latin, the speech of an imperalistic, toxic male dominated society - sarcasm)
Asherah has always been the Main Goddess. See also Jeremiah 44:15-30.
Later, in the beginning of the patriarchy, the relatively unknown weather god Yahweh was added to HER side. When the patriarchy was firmly established among Jews, Yahweh became the sole god and Asherah played an ever smaller role. This has been a patriarchal and thus misogynous process. It also took place in Greek mythology. Hera was known thousands of years before Zeus. In patriarchy she rather became a "wife".
In response to Billybob, You did not read the article closely enough. The author states that it was an Early version of Deuteronomy 33.2-3 that mentioned Asherah
If you didn't see it in your presumably modern translation of the Bible than that is why. As the author points out she was increasingly excluded and marginalized from the "book" religion that came to predominate what has become the later Abrahamic religions.
I personally thought the article was well balanced and scientifically logical.
Amdre King TUT was 100% Black African, so was his Father Ahkenaten, as well as his 100% Black grandmother, Queen Tye. By the way, DNA does not define race, instead, it defines distant locations of people who are clustered together from other people. For instance, Black Aussie aborigines, Thailand Mani’s, Phillipine Ate’s, Papua New Guinea Blacks in the South Pacific, and Nicobar/Andaman Island Black race people all have different DNA from each other, but they are all Black (NEGROID) people. Black African people on the continent also have different geographial DNA from each other, and so does European IRISH and ENGLISH have different DNA from each other, but it doesn’t change the race….DNA is used to idemtify different locations, and the further the DISTANCE the more difference in DNA…...educate yourself and come back for some more schooling...
In this article, Deuteronomy 33.2-3 is refernced as if it supports the argument that Asherah was at one time the wife of the hebrew God. Deuteronomy 33.2-3 makes no mention of Asherah. Ms. Leonard has made a calculated and measured effort to blend ancient folklore with biblcal scripture, presumably to validate her assertion that the early Jews belived that YAHWEY had a wife.
Baloney. The whole theory of Neanderthal-Homosapien mixture was based on the supposition that Africans had none of the genes presumes to be Neanderthal. At this point we really don't know that the presumably Neanderthal genes are actually that. I predicted they would find these genes in Africans years ago.
I think that the Urfa man is actually a woman, and he is not holding his genitals, rather she is holding a baby, a new born.
holding the baby by the and you can see arms and legs, the top part of the baby is gone, it may have been broken off.
I am not sure why the statues are all assumed to be men, holding the belly is a woman pose related to fertility, it is almost instinctive for a woman to hold protectively her belly while she is pregnant .
just a thought
The story of Marcum is NOT accurate. There is a 1st telling of creation. Told by Marduk's father EA. Was told generations after the tower of Babel. A LOT more was told. When Marduk became ruler of Babylon he had the story re-written
I have now read the updated article. The story of coming to power of Darius is clearly from Herdotus and the Bistun incription but where does this none sense about the immigrant tribe of Magi come from. If you have any serious source how does it compare to the current accepted view of this event? We know that like India Iranian society had a priestly class, the evidance for this right up to the Arab invasion is overwhelming. This nonesense about a persian holocust is totally false and in the context of the current Zionist issues with Iran highly political. Your motivation in presenting this falsehood brings your credintials as a person writing Historical articles into serious question.
I didn't realise there were two stones! Thanks. The pictured stone may relate to Draco, what remarkable is that this may be referring to precession and they have the celestial axis pretty close. I've considered the top illustration which seems to be alignment if one of the astronomers can identify the planets then it may assist to date the stone. This seems to relate to an eclipse and possible venus crossing the sun, possibly mercury - this alignment would be very rare and why they want to record it.
I've written a couple of articles and there is a link with islands in deep antiquity. This is not at as far-fetched as it may seem, trade was good before bronze age collapse, the Minoan tech seems to have transferred to the Phoenicians which resume trade. TAke a look at https://www.quora.com/What-caused-the-fall-of-the-Minoan-civilization/an... https://www.quora.com/What-was-the-significance-of-snakes-in-Minoan-cult... https://www.quora.com/Is-the-Antikythera-mechanism-overhyped
These articles are about MInoan tech but do touch on transfer to Phoenicia that in this articles context is interesting.
I would like to point out the remarkable similarity of the "Bannerstones" to the ancient Cretan ceremonial double axe or “Labrys”. It is known that there is a strong presence of the X haplogroup in Mitchingan area, as well as in East Mediterranean (where the Greek island of Crete lays) and this, among other things (as the double axes, for example) can lead to the speculation of "ties" between these places, many thousands of years ago.
Ploutarch in Moralia, “The face of the moon”, passage 941, writes about the "great continent to the west", where the Greeks had landed well before his time.
Just food for thought.
George Metaxas
Marcelle Levy, I am not a muslim but I live in a muslim country. Suleiman the Great of the Ottoman Empire could of course have a harem but that does not mean Islam sanctioned the practice of concubinage. In Islam there exists only marriage and the maximum a man could marry is 4.
You're right. The 4 wives in Islam are all wives and of equal standing. The writer was wrong to call the other 3 wives concubines. The children of all 4 women are of equal status. The inheritance laws in Islam are clear-cut.
The women in the harems of Muslim heads of state are indeed concubines.
Veronica Parkes, Did you edit your work at all? You wrote :-
"...Lady Wan, out of jealousy over Chenghua being named Hongzhi’s heir. Prior to this Lady Wan had murdered as many of the Emperor’s children as she could find, often killing the mothers as well in an attempt to gain favour for her never-to-be-born son. As such, Chenghua saw the damage that could come from having too many concubines and giving them power and prominence within the imperial house. As such, he only has two empresses, one after the other, and there is no documentation to suggest that he was as violent, torturous, or evil as any of the other Ming Emperors."
Chenghua was the father of Hongzhi but your first sentence in the quotation indicated that Hongzhi was the father. Chenghua was a debauched emperor while Hongzhi had a monogamous marriage to his empress. Kindly check your facts before posting. How do readers trust your site if you make such glaring mistakes???
In the case of China they were not simply castrated. If so they could indeed still service women but will not be able to impregnate them. In the harems of China they remove not only the penis but also the scrotum. This is the reason why many of them suffer from incontinence,smell bad and are shunned by courtiers who are whole men and they despise the eunuchs.
Every year these eunuch are checked to make sure their penises/scrotum don't grow back LOL as if they could. The emperor is not going to allow his women to play with the eunuchs. You want an easy life you got to accept the fact that you'll be sleeping alone almost every night hah.
Here you can navigate quickly through all comments made in any article sorted by date/time.
Can someone please post an actual refernce to the "Early version" of Deuteronomy 33.2-3 that mentioned Asherah?
Political correctness carried to its most idiotic apex. ( Excuse me for employing the term "apex" as it is derived from Latin, the speech of an imperalistic, toxic male dominated society - sarcasm)
How do they know about blotches? Looks Middle Eastern.
Asherah has always been the Main Goddess. See also Jeremiah 44:15-30.
Later, in the beginning of the patriarchy, the relatively unknown weather god Yahweh was added to HER side. When the patriarchy was firmly established among Jews, Yahweh became the sole god and Asherah played an ever smaller role. This has been a patriarchal and thus misogynous process. It also took place in Greek mythology. Hera was known thousands of years before Zeus. In patriarchy she rather became a "wife".
hi
Thanks for providing this article for us. Nice article.
Best Wishes
Swati sem
http://www.cinemaexpress.com/
In response to Billybob, You did not read the article closely enough. The author states that it was an Early version of Deuteronomy 33.2-3 that mentioned Asherah
If you didn't see it in your presumably modern translation of the Bible than that is why. As the author points out she was increasingly excluded and marginalized from the "book" religion that came to predominate what has become the later Abrahamic religions.
I personally thought the article was well balanced and scientifically logical.
Amdre King TUT was 100% Black African, so was his Father Ahkenaten, as well as his 100% Black grandmother, Queen Tye. By the way, DNA does not define race, instead, it defines distant locations of people who are clustered together from other people. For instance, Black Aussie aborigines, Thailand Mani’s, Phillipine Ate’s, Papua New Guinea Blacks in the South Pacific, and Nicobar/Andaman Island Black race people all have different DNA from each other, but they are all Black (NEGROID) people. Black African people on the continent also have different geographial DNA from each other, and so does European IRISH and ENGLISH have different DNA from each other, but it doesn’t change the race….DNA is used to idemtify different locations, and the further the DISTANCE the more difference in DNA…...educate yourself and come back for some more schooling...
In this article, Deuteronomy 33.2-3 is refernced as if it supports the argument that Asherah was at one time the wife of the hebrew God. Deuteronomy 33.2-3 makes no mention of Asherah. Ms. Leonard has made a calculated and measured effort to blend ancient folklore with biblcal scripture, presumably to validate her assertion that the early Jews belived that YAHWEY had a wife.
Baloney. The whole theory of Neanderthal-Homosapien mixture was based on the supposition that Africans had none of the genes presumes to be Neanderthal. At this point we really don't know that the presumably Neanderthal genes are actually that. I predicted they would find these genes in Africans years ago.
Look into the dna of king tut, hardly african.
Hi
I think that the Urfa man is actually a woman, and he is not holding his genitals, rather she is holding a baby, a new born.
holding the baby by the and you can see arms and legs, the top part of the baby is gone, it may have been broken off.
I am not sure why the statues are all assumed to be men, holding the belly is a woman pose related to fertility, it is almost instinctive for a woman to hold protectively her belly while she is pregnant .
just a thought
The story of Marcum is NOT accurate. There is a 1st telling of creation. Told by Marduk's father EA. Was told generations after the tower of Babel. A LOT more was told. When Marduk became ruler of Babylon he had the story re-written
I have now read the updated article. The story of coming to power of Darius is clearly from Herdotus and the Bistun incription but where does this none sense about the immigrant tribe of Magi come from. If you have any serious source how does it compare to the current accepted view of this event? We know that like India Iranian society had a priestly class, the evidance for this right up to the Arab invasion is overwhelming. This nonesense about a persian holocust is totally false and in the context of the current Zionist issues with Iran highly political. Your motivation in presenting this falsehood brings your credintials as a person writing Historical articles into serious question.
I didn't realise there were two stones! Thanks. The pictured stone may relate to Draco, what remarkable is that this may be referring to precession and they have the celestial axis pretty close. I've considered the top illustration which seems to be alignment if one of the astronomers can identify the planets then it may assist to date the stone. This seems to relate to an eclipse and possible venus crossing the sun, possibly mercury - this alignment would be very rare and why they want to record it.
I've written a couple of articles and there is a link with islands in deep antiquity. This is not at as far-fetched as it may seem, trade was good before bronze age collapse, the Minoan tech seems to have transferred to the Phoenicians which resume trade. TAke a look at
https://www.quora.com/What-caused-the-fall-of-the-Minoan-civilization/an...
https://www.quora.com/What-was-the-significance-of-snakes-in-Minoan-cult...
https://www.quora.com/Is-the-Antikythera-mechanism-overhyped
These articles are about MInoan tech but do touch on transfer to Phoenicia that in this articles context is interesting.
I would like to point out the remarkable similarity of the "Bannerstones" to the ancient Cretan ceremonial double axe or “Labrys”. It is known that there is a strong presence of the X haplogroup in Mitchingan area, as well as in East Mediterranean (where the Greek island of Crete lays) and this, among other things (as the double axes, for example) can lead to the speculation of "ties" between these places, many thousands of years ago.
Ploutarch in Moralia, “The face of the moon”, passage 941, writes about the "great continent to the west", where the Greeks had landed well before his time.
Just food for thought.
George Metaxas
Marcelle Levy, I am not a muslim but I live in a muslim country. Suleiman the Great of the Ottoman Empire could of course have a harem but that does not mean Islam sanctioned the practice of concubinage. In Islam there exists only marriage and the maximum a man could marry is 4.
You're right. The 4 wives in Islam are all wives and of equal standing. The writer was wrong to call the other 3 wives concubines. The children of all 4 women are of equal status. The inheritance laws in Islam are clear-cut.
The women in the harems of Muslim heads of state are indeed concubines.
Veronica Parkes, Did you edit your work at all? You wrote :-
"...Lady Wan, out of jealousy over Chenghua being named Hongzhi’s heir. Prior to this Lady Wan had murdered as many of the Emperor’s children as she could find, often killing the mothers as well in an attempt to gain favour for her never-to-be-born son. As such, Chenghua saw the damage that could come from having too many concubines and giving them power and prominence within the imperial house. As such, he only has two empresses, one after the other, and there is no documentation to suggest that he was as violent, torturous, or evil as any of the other Ming Emperors."
Chenghua was the father of Hongzhi but your first sentence in the quotation indicated that Hongzhi was the father. Chenghua was a debauched emperor while Hongzhi had a monogamous marriage to his empress. Kindly check your facts before posting. How do readers trust your site if you make such glaring mistakes???
In the case of China they were not simply castrated. If so they could indeed still service women but will not be able to impregnate them. In the harems of China they remove not only the penis but also the scrotum. This is the reason why many of them suffer from incontinence,smell bad and are shunned by courtiers who are whole men and they despise the eunuchs.
Every year these eunuch are checked to make sure their penises/scrotum don't grow back LOL as if they could. The emperor is not going to allow his women to play with the eunuchs. You want an easy life you got to accept the fact that you'll be sleeping alone almost every night hah.
Noah had no choice in the latter. He was a passenger in an unsteerable barge. He was not the pilot. The ark had no motor, sails or rudder.
God placed the ark where ever it rested.
Pages