So far as scholars can determine, there is only one source for the notion that Oester (or Eoster) was a genuine deity among the primitive Germanic tribes — Venerable Bede. The Brothers Grimm were convinced he was right, but aside from Bede’s comment, all we have is what is termed “linguistic evidence.” That is, the name is associate with words that mean something consistent with the legend.
Instead, the label has become a symbol for modern social mythology. Whether there ever was a widely regarded goddess named Oester (or variations thereof) isn’t nearly so important as a distinct thread of belief that most certainly does affect our society today. If there was no actual Cult of Oester in ancient Europe, there is one in the West now.
We are familiar with the primary canon law of this cult: Women are the root of civilization. Men are never more than overgrown boys. Women are inherently virtuous and men need to be feminized in order to be useful. These are the doctrines of modern Western feminism. Oddly enough, it was restricted to upper middle-class Western women until recent history. So far as anyone can tell, the primary political agenda of feminism falls flat outside of those who embrace Western middle-class values. In other words, it dies without materialistic assumptions.
Obviously, the whole message of the Bible includes countering materialism. One of the clearest biblical statements on the issue is also the most difficult for Westerners to grasp. Ancient Hebrew mysticism, with it’s symbolic logic, need not be so puzzling if you really want to understand it, but you can’t cling to the notion that it is inferior logic. It is simply different and must be accepted and understood in its own right. The paragraph beginning in Zechariah 5:5 is actually not all that difficult, but you have to pull in the wider background, so we need to take a detour first.
Perhaps you are familiar with Solomon’s writing about women. On the one hand, he never hesitated to add one more princess to his harem. This goes way beyond “skirt chaser.” Yet we know that he regarded noble and royal women as a major pain in the ass. They could be truly noble, but he didn’t seem to think many in his harem were. Instead, we are told he was too indulgent in their numerous idolatries and went so far as to join them, earning a serious warning. He refused to heed the warning (1 Kings 11). As you survey the rest of the Old Testament, you see hints that this symbolizes the primary weakness of women so bluntly stated by Paul in the New Testament: Eve was deceived about moral issues. Adam wasn’t deceived, just too lazy to intervene (1 Timothy 2:9-15).
I note that many Westerners are just as confused about Paul’s comments, reading Western values back into Paul’s Hebrew mind. Paul’s comments were not about “oppressing” women, but recognizing that God vested males with moral responsibilities and the equipment to deal with it. Women are relieved of the duty, and should not presume to judge on fundamental morality. It’s not that the Fall is blamed on women, but that Eve’s error revealed something of the nature of femininity. Women have tremendous authority over the household, and particularly child rearing. Westerners want to ignore that women ruled over the child’s life until around age nine, at which point a child becomes a social asset for covenant living. It’s roughly the point when gender differences start to matter. Between weaning and age nine, mama shares authority with the papa. However, up to weaning, the child’s life and death was mama’s business alone.
Oh, how blind is Western Christianity! You’ll notice the Bible ignores our Western political boundaries and many of our primary issues of contention.
Back to the symbolism in Zechariah: I want you to notice that virtuous women remove the threat posed by this small woman in the basket. The wings represent power to take action in this case; it is theirs to handle. The chick in the basket is small because she diminishes womanhood. She represents what would have been feminism in that age, making a deity of something that perverts feminine morality. The angelic voice tells Zechariah that she is going back to Mesopotamia where she belongs. Someone will surely build a temple to her there. Her cult has no place in the Restoration (Post-Exile). It was a bad influence brought back from their Babylonian Captivity; we know this from other sources. The heavy lid of lead was to make sure the little goddess didn’t escape. The net result of the passage is a prophetic call to women to recognize their moral duty under the covenant to purge their own ranks of this threat.
You’ll notice that the little goddess isn’t named properly, but simply called Wickedness (Hebrew feminine rishah, a moral injustice). That’s because the whole idea of female deity flies in the face of God revealing Himself as a father figure — not the mama. It’s not as if God has no feminine characteristics, if you look for them, but the whole idea is not that He’s male, but that male is the default gender in a fallen world. That’s why Genesis makes a point of saying Adam was created and Even was built from him. Ancient Hebrew didn’t ask the silly questions we do, but they could have told you that God transcends gender. The justification for avoiding a feminine deity is all the trouble caused by permitting women to take up priesthood and worshiping whatever they chose. Even the New Testament makes room for women in every other church office. If you see that as oppression, it’s your problem. You are the one who is missing the point; God came before us and clearly revealed His requirements after the Fall.
Females are fallen, too. Male and female both have their characteristic weaknesses and redemption means embracing God’s call to face them according to where He placed you.
