11 Jan 10
Originally posted by wolfgang59I can only answer from my own understanding and of course, what I've been taught.
"Adam & Eve" = believe (Cocney rhyming slang)
The few Christians I know tell me that they do not take the bible literally whoever i note that a lot of posters on RHP do. How do you cope with this:
In Genesis 1:27 God creates man (male [b]and female) and in Genesis 1:28 tels them to "Be fruitful, and multiply"
Two questions
1.Was it God's int ...[text shortened]... accounts (which is fine) but how can you take it literally if they contradict each other?[/b]
A. The Bible NEVER contradicts itself.
B. The Bible consists of the ORIGINAL scriptures, which today, we do not have, at least, not in its purest form. We have some very old, very good manuscripts, but only the originals are the real, inerrant deal.
C. In instances where the Bible appears to be contra-indicatorty (Genesis story(s); lineages; "double predestination"😉, it is only because we are unable to rightly understand God's Word. When we get to heaven, this will all look blatantly obvious and not at all contradictory.
Note: I never said this was a particularly comprehensive or satisfactory answer, only that it's the one I've been taught and, I suspect, many other Christians have as well.
12 Jan 10
Originally posted by rwingettI cannot speak for all of Judaism; I’m not sure anyone can. I can speak for part of it, based on my own studies as part of my own (still nondualist!) spiritual venture.
I'm not sure that most Jewish people interpret the story literally, either with or without Lilith. So I don't think they view it as altering the 'facts' so much as they do as making it a better story. But I do not presume to speak for all of Judaism (or for any part of it, really).
Judaism is fundamentally, on one level, a hermeneutical religion, as opposed to more doctrinal religions (so said the President of the Jewish Theological Seminary, anyhow). The rabbis weave stories from the stories in the written Torah. They do so creatively and innovatively. That is what midrash is, simply put.
My favorite story to illustrate this (and one which I repeat often) is told by Rami Shapiro, in one of his books, Hasidic Tales. Shapiro is a Reconstructionist rabbi, but I believe that the “Reb Reuven” in the story was Orthodox—
One Shabbos afternoon, Reb Reuven called me into his study. He was sitting behind his desk and motioned me to take the chair across from him. A volume of the Zohar was lying open in front of him.
“Do you know what the Zohar is?” he asked.
“Of course,” I said. “It is a mystical commentary on Torah written by Moshe deLeon, a thirteenth century Spanish kabbalist who....”
“Nonsense!” he yelled at me, half rising out of his chair. “The Zohar isn’t just a commentary; it’s a Torah all by itself. It is a new Torah, a new telling of the last Torah. You do know what Torah is, don’t you?”
Suspecting that I didn’t, and afraid to invoke his wrath a second time, I waited silently, certain that he would answer his own question. I was not disappointed.
“Torah is story. God is story. Israel is story. You, my university-educated soon-to-be a liberal pain in the ass rabbi, are a story. We are all stories! We are all Torahs!...Listen, Rami,” Reuven said in a softer voice. “Torah starts with the word b’reisheet,* ‘Once upon a time!’”
* Conventionally translated as “in the beginning” or “with beginning” or “when God began…”.
__________________________________________________
You are right in that some of the stories woven by the rabbis are attempts to resolve contradictions in the Torah text—and some are aimed at justifying or excusing bad behavior, even on the part of God. But they are not all aimed at that; and the covenantal basis of Judaism—as opposed to a basis of submission—allows one to argue even with God (speaking here within a dualist/theist framework).
12 Jan 10
Originally posted by rwingettThank you, something NEW!!
There are some interpretations which state that there are two different stories because there were two different women. The woman from Genesis 1:27 was Lilith, who was Adam's first wife. As they were both created in the same manner she would not submit to Adam and ran away. So god made Adam a second wife, Eve, from Adam's rib.
Is Lilith in the bible or is this by tradition?
12 Jan 10
Originally posted by vistesdSo what's your take on Lilith?
I cannot speak for all of Judaism; I’m not sure anyone can. I can speak for part of it, based on my own studies as part of my own (still nondualist!) spiritual venture.
Judaism is fundamentally, on one level, a hermeneutical religion, as opposed to more doctrinal religions (so said the President of the Jewish Theological Seminary, anyhow). The r ...[text shortened]... submission—allows one to argue even with God (speaking here within a dualist/theist framework).
12 Jan 10
2 edits
Originally posted by rwingettWell, the relationship between Lilith and Adam seems to come out of later folk tradition, and from there kabbalah, than the Talmudic or Midrashic aggadah. (the only reference to Lilith that I have in Sefer ha’Aggdah, the Book of Legends, refers to her simply as a “night demon”.
So what's your take on Lilith?
—http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lilith#Jewish_tradition
It is, to me, clearly fanstasy (much of the aggadah is, and does not pretend otherwise). The following, I would say, represents an attitude that is distinctly anti-feminist:
After God created Adam, who was alone, He said, 'It is not good for man to be alone.' He then created a woman for Adam, from the earth, as He had created Adam himself, and called her Lilith. Adam and Lilith immediately began to fight. She said, 'I will not lie below,' and he said, 'I will not lie beneath you, but only on top. For you are fit only to be in the bottom position, while I am to be the superior one.' Lilith responded, 'We are equal to each other inasmuch as we were both created from the earth.' But they would not listen to one another. When Lilith saw this, she pronounced the Ineffable Name and flew away into the air.
Adam stood in prayer before his Creator: 'Sovereign of the universe!' he said, 'the woman you gave me has run away.' At once, the Holy One, blessed be He, sent these three angels Senoy, Sansenoy, and Semangelof, to bring her back.
Said the Holy One to Adam, 'If she agrees to come back, what is made is good. If not, she must permit one hundred of her children to die every day.' The angels left God and pursued Lilith, whom they overtook in the midst of the sea, in the mighty waters wherein the Egyptians were destined to drown. They told her God's word, but she did not wish to return. The angels said, 'We shall drown you in the sea.’
'Leave me!' she said. 'I was created only to cause sickness to infants. If the infant is male, I have dominion over him for eight days after his birth, and if female, for twenty days.’
When the angels heard Lilith's words, they insisted she go back. But she swore to them by the name of the living and eternal God: 'Whenever I see you or your names or your forms in an amulet, I will have no power over that infant.' She also agreed to have one hundred of her children die every day. Accordingly, every day one hundred demons perish, and for the same reason, we write the angels' names on the amulets of young children. When Lilith sees their names, she remembers her oath, and the child recovers.
—The Alphabet of Ben-Sira (quoted in wiki, above)
____________________________________________________
EDIT: I have a book of modern feminist midrash on the Torah called The Five Books of Miriam, in which Lilith is cast as one of the occasional commentators on Torah stories; I'll see if I can find a good quote from there...
13 Jan 10
Originally posted by vistesdI'm familiar with the general outline of the Lilith story. But if they are telling a story, it seems to be a particularly misogynistic one. That women are self-willed and rebellious she-devils. Lilith seems to be the prototype for the harpy of an ex-wife stereotype. It's no accident that Frasier's ex-wife in the self-titled TV show was named Lilith. And then again with Eve, it was she who disobeyed God and ate from the tree first. It seems that the point of those stories is that women should know their place and stay in it, which, I suppose, is not particularly surprising for an ancient culture. Although, again, there have been far more maternalistic cultures in antiquity than there have been in modern times. But if you have a more sympathetic treatment of Lilith from another source, I'd like to hear it.
Well, the relationship between Lilith and Adam seems to come out of later folk tradition, and from there kabbalah, than the Talmudic or Midrashic aggadah. (the only reference to Lilith that I have in Sefer ha’Aggdah, the Book of Legends, refers to her simply as a “night demon”.
—http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lilith#Jewish_tradition
It is, to m ...[text shortened]... ors on Torah stories; I'll see if I can find a good quote from there...
13 Jan 10
Originally posted by rwingettNo, I think misogynistic is a good word (I couldn’t think of the right word when I said “anti-feminist” ). If you’re interested in a good feminist treatment of Judaism, you might look at Judith Plaskow’s Standing Again at Sinai. The feminist dilemma might be summed up, in part, by the following:
I'm familiar with the general outline of the Lilith story. But if they are telling a story, it seems to be a particularly misogynistic one. That women are self-willed and rebellious she-devils. Lilith seems to be the prototype for the harpy of an ex-wife stereotype. It's no accident that Frasier's ex-wife in the self-titled TV show was named Lilith. And the ...[text shortened]... if you have a more sympathetic treatment of Lilith from another source, I'd like to hear it.
Our Daughters Exclaim: “Why doesn’t Noah’s wife have a name?
Lilith the Rebel Teaches: The Bible is filled with nameless women!
The Rabbis Protest: But we have given names to most of them, and stories as well.
Lilith the Rebel Retorts: “But too often those names and stories don’t reflect our experience! …”
—From the commentary on the Noah story in The Five Books of Miriam: A Woman’s commentary on the Torah
But the midrashic hermeneutic allows women to begin to weave new stories about those women, to challenge the patriarchal bias—in those days and ours. Some might ask: “Why bother?” That, I think, was theologian Mary Daly’s conclusion. But others feel a connection with “the sacred myths of Israel”, and an open, imaginative hermeneutic creates space in which they can work.
05 Feb 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieMaybe the English translation is lacking but if I gave Genesis as a comprehension test for 10 yr olds or 16 yr olds I am sure they would draw same conclusion as fabian.
why do i not accept it, because its pants, that is why! i have clearly shown, with reference that the animals were still being formed during the creation of eve, why you noobs do not understand this, i do not know?
The question is : Why would a god want to confuse us so?
05 Feb 10
1 edit
Originally posted by wolfgang59firstly there is no confusion except for the uninitiated, and secondly i do not deny that even eight to twelve year olds may form the same opinion as Fabian, after all, he is hardly what one could term, spiritually mature 😉
Maybe the English translation is lacking but if I gave Genesis as a comprehension test for 10 yr olds or 16 yr olds I am sure they would draw same conclusion as fabian.
The question is : Why would a god want to confuse us so?
05 Feb 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobiefirstly there is no confusion except for the uninitiated
firstly there is no confusion except for the uninitiated, and secondly i do not deny that even eight to twelve year olds may form the same opinion as Fabian, after all, he is hardly what one could term, spiritually mature 😉
So only those that know, know?
That really isn't helping much!
http://www.dictionary.net/initiated
And how does one get 'initiated'?