David Bokovoy Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 In 1998, Daniel Peterson published a fascinating proposal concerning a possible Book of Mormon allusion to the Northwest Semitic goddess Asherah. Peterson Link to comment
Zakuska Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 I wonder if Sacred trees and Ahserah has any link to the New movie out this weekedn called "Avatar".Its an excellent Movie! Link to comment
volgadon Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 David, wow. I've been thinking that a key to understanding a lot of the scriptures, or rather, to a more nuanced understanding, is just how sacred objects functioned nd what the nomenclature was.I also suppose that even though sitting under trees was a part of every day life, that the angels appearing to people sitting under them can also be symbolic, because of what role trees played in the religious and cultural awareness of the times. Link to comment
David Bokovoy Posted December 21, 2009 Author Share Posted December 21, 2009 David, wow. I've been thinking that a key to understanding a lot of the scriptures, or rather, to a more nuanced understanding, is just how sacred objects functioned nd what the nomenclature was.I also suppose that even though sitting under trees was a part of every day life, that the angels appearing to people sitting under them can also be symbolic, because of what role trees played in the religious and cultural awareness of the times.I think you're really on to an important insight. There's no question that sitting under a tree served an extremely practical purpose. Even God, as an anthropomorphic being, enjoys the cool of the shade in Eden. But in light of the great religious role that trees played as a symbol, I suspect that on occasion, they appear intentionally in a biblical text as a allusion to the revelatory process. The same is no doubt true for other religious icons.The interesting point that I'm trying to express with this thread is that the tree serves very much like an idol/statue in traditional Near Eastern thought. It became a manifestation of God incarnate. Clearly later biblical traditions found this idea religiously offensive and the 'asherah was interpreted as a dangerous religious icon, yet in earlier forms of Israelite belief and in Nephi's vision, the tree serves as a physical incarnation of God and denotes his power to grant favor. I suspect there's also a direct link with the Nehushtan or brazen serpent. In addition to the connection Dan offers, I believe this represents a profound Semitic link. Link to comment
volgadon Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 I suspect that trees often represented God's power to grant things unto men. After all, trees provided both sustenance (and by extension of ideas, life) and protection (shade). Isaiah uses a canopy as a metaphor for the Lord's protection, and references to fruit throughout the OT are too numerous to mention, but I think Deut 20:19 is worth looking at. I think trees served as a tangible reminder of who provided people with what theybhad, and just as importantly, who it was who was able to answer their petitions.The inscriptions you mentioned certainly seem to provide that context. The asherah is the agent by which their prayers were (or would be) answered. Link to comment
volgadon Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 Oops, I should have noted that you wrote his ability to grant favor. Link to comment
volgadon Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 Also, wasn't the concept of love connected with granting favours? I'm thinking of Frank Moor Croos's arguments for God being the divine kinsman. Link to comment
WalkerW Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 In 1998, Daniel Peterson published a fascinating proposal concerning a possible Book of Mormon allusion to the Northwest Semitic goddess Asherah. Peterson Link to comment
cinepro Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 Was the tree in Pocahontas an Asherah as well, or is that something different...? Link to comment
Daniel Peterson Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 Nice, David!Since I first noticed the link with Asherah or with the asherah back in the nineties, I've always insisted that the tree of 1 Nephi 11 points to both Mary and Jesus. Link to comment
Zakuska Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 Nice, David!Since I first noticed the link with Asherah or with the asherah back in the nineties, I've always insisted that the tree of 1 Nephi 11 points to both Mary and Jesus.Thats how I would interpret it to. Isn't Jesus a "Root of Jessie". "he is the branch" in Jeremiah. A branch comes out of a tree. Link to comment
volgadon Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 Thats how I would interpret it to. Isn't Jesus a "Root of Jessie". "he is the branch" in Jeremiah. A branch comes out of a tree.Not just any tree, but an olive tree. Link to comment
David T Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 When I think "I am the vine, and ye are the branches", this is the tree image that first comes to my mind: Link to comment
rockslider Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 The Jewish Ten Sephiroth tree of life is also a interesting comparison, with its male/female sides Link to comment
David Bokovoy Posted December 21, 2009 Author Share Posted December 21, 2009 Hello Cinepro, Was the tree in Pocahontas an Asherah as well, or is that something different...?Well, aren't all Native Americans "Lamanites"? Link to comment
sethpayne Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 In 1998, Daniel Peterson published a fascinating proposal concerning a possible Book of Mormon allusion to the Northwest Semitic goddess Asherah. Peterson Link to comment
Zakuska Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 Hello Cinepro, Well, aren't all Native Americans "Lamanites"?Not to throw a fly in the ointment, but would not DNA disprove that. Link to comment
Zakuska Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 David,Excellent insight, as usual. I'm curious, why do you think a pole was employed to represent a female deity/entity? It seems that in many cultures the pole would be seen as a phallic, or male symbol. SethDon't forget that before the cross became a symbol Christ was said to have been nailed to a tree, or a Pole to be executed.Some verses were removed from the OT to hide this fact according to Justin Marytr. Link to comment
volgadon Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 David,Excellent insight, as usual. I'm curious, why do you think a pole was employed to represent a female deity/entity? It seems that in many cultures the pole would be seen as a phallic, or male symbol. SethI wonder how much of that is Frazerian or Gravesian. Link to comment
volgadon Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 Don't forget that before the cross became a symbol Christ was said to have been nailed to a tree, or a Pole to be executed.Some verses were removed from the OT to hide this fact according to Justin Marytr.It seems that the usual method of crucifixion was to take a cross beam and nail it to a tree or pole. Probably wasn't very high either. Link to comment
David Bokovoy Posted December 21, 2009 Author Share Posted December 21, 2009 Hey Seth,Excellent insight, as usual. I'm curious, why do you think a pole was employed to represent a female deity/entity? It seems that in many cultures the pole would be seen as a phallic, or male symbol. Thanks for the kind words, Brother. You've asked a really great question. I don't know how many of the Canaanite representations you've looked at linking trees with the female goddess, but many of them are highly explicit. The vertical tree appears as a traditional representation of the female pubic line with the branches artistically woven to reflect feminine pubic hair. Hence, in terms of the female symbol, I don't think that it's the "pole" image as much as it is the wood/tree motif that originally reflects the goddess. The traditional Near Eastern symbol associated with male sexuality are stones which makes for an interesting observation in terms of Jeremiah 2:27 which refers to the house of Israel "who say to a tree, 'You are my Father,' and to a stone, 'You gave me birth." This verse appears to polemically reverse the roles of Asherah maternalism with the traditional Near Eastern iconography for paternity. Best. Link to comment
Zakuska Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 Hey Seth,Thanks for the kind words, Brother. You've asked a really great question. I don't know how many of the Canaanite representations you've looked at linking trees with the female goddess, but many of them are highly explicit. The vertical tree appears as a traditional representation of the female pubic line with the branches artistically woven to reflect feminine pubic hair. Hence, in terms of the female symbol, I don't think that it's the "pole" image as much as it is the wood/tree motif that originally reflects the goddess. The traditional Near Eastern symbol associated with male sexuality are stones which makes for an interesting observation in terms of Jeremiah 2:27 which refers to the house of Israel "who say to a tree, 'You are my Father,' and to a stone, 'You gave me birth." This verse appears to polemically reverse the roles of Asherah maternalism with the traditional Near Eastern iconography for paternity. Best.I read in the Nephi and his asherah Article by DCP that the Israelite equivalet of these Canannite images were usually devoid of the Pubic region Imagery infavor of the suckling Mother. That the lower part of the image was just represented by a pole finding its roots in mother earth. Link to comment
volgadon Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 Perhaps, like many polemicists, jeremiah was making fun of his target? Link to comment
David Bokovoy Posted December 21, 2009 Author Share Posted December 21, 2009 I read in the Nephi and his asherah Article by DCP that the Israelite equivalet of these Canannite images were usually devoid of the Pubic region Imagery infavor of the suckling Mother. That the lower part of the image was just represented by a pole finding its roots in mother earth.It seems to me that it's more of a historical issue than a cultural/religious distinction. Despite what most people think, in truth, we really can't maintain a radical cultural separation between "Canaanites" and "Israelites" for the Iron I period (1200-1000 BC). Link to comment
David Bokovoy Posted December 21, 2009 Author Share Posted December 21, 2009 Perhaps, like many polemicists, jeremiah was making fun of his target?Indeed. Jeremiah was the Daniel Peterson of pre-exilic apologetics. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.