Excellent post Keena!!

You can always count on the Judao-Christian religions to cast women as every man's downfall. I always found it telling that Eve chose knowledge and Adam was simply a sheep that followed.

Ya good one, but its true you need to give the credit to those sites you took the info from and post links, as well as separate whatever quotes you get from those sites and separate your own thoughts.

We are not trying to flame you but what we are telling you can help you not getting in trouble in ATS or any other forums. Also, when quoting another site, don't post eveything from that site, just the main points and post the link, or links, from where you took the information.

I don't know what Bible THAT comes from, but as I've always understood it (and I was raised Protestant), Adam and Eve were the first man and woman on the planet.

What's up with that ?

What's up with that ?

what's up is that there is more out there than what we were taught in sunday school...different versions of the Creation story, different versions of the Noah and the Great Flood story, and in the new testament...different versions of the Christ story...

In this particular story...i have to agree with the quoted article in the initial post...in a way it does sound like a conspiracey...a way to "put women in their place"...a way to explain the evils of a strong female personality...


~Oracle

There are many books and stories that were taken out from the bible, this story is just one of them.

Originally posted by Keena
Prof. Witcombe is given credit at the top of the article. The fact is, you don't really know who I am, I could be Chris Witcombe in Real Life, therefore, those would actually be my thoughts from my website.

Ok Prof. Witcombe, do you really think that your wide eyed explanation is fooling anyone? The problem is that you have now edited your original post to include the author of the text to make it seem like you weren’t plagiarizing the author. Nice try.

Originally posted by Keena
The Trap Springs!

Give me a break.

Originally posted by Keena
Methinks my question makes you a bit unconfortable, so you avoid it by saying I should learn how to write my own "thoughts."

It’s not your question, it’s your plagiarism. You are somehow confusing my attempt to educate you with the rules of this site with a reluctance to answer Prof. Witcombe’s article. This is not the case.

Originally posted by Keena
You open your reply by discribing your emotional state

What the hell are you talking about?

Originally posted by Keena
Prof. Witcombe is given credit at the top of the article.

The fact is, you don't really know who I am, I could be Chris Witcombe in Real Life, therefore, those would actually be my thoughts from my website.

Nevertheless, if the information exist elsewhere, please post a modest summation or experpt and then link to the site. Please edit your original post sometime today othewise I'll have to do it and issue a warn.



Edit to thank Keena for the timely cooperation.

[Edited on 23-4-2004 by astrocreep]

The concept of Lilith is simply contrived, as it even says in the text Keena posted. Like a couple of you already mentioned, it was probably a way to justify that women weren't as good as men, because that's what many believed at that time. However, the bible never says anything about women being lesser than men. Men and women are unique of one another, and have different roles, but each are important.

Also, the writer mentioned it was some way to repair a contradiction in Genesis about the creation. If the writer is truly correct, then whoever saw a contradiction there, and developed the story of Lilith, was a moron. The first part of Genesis doesn't contradict itself, and that's without the addition of Lilith. We have to be discriminant between the original text, inspired by God, and the text (added or deleted or altered) or interpretation of the text that comes from people. People will screw things up. We feel we need to add in our own things.

Originally posted by SimpleTruth

Also, the writer mentioned it was some way to repair a contradiction in Genesis about the creation. If the writer is truly correct, then whoever saw a contradiction there, and developed the story of Lilith, was a moron. The first part of Genesis doesn't contradict itself, and that's without the addition of Lilith.

You have made a very good point about the context of Lilith in the story. Lilith leaves the garden by invoking the name of god, as the story goes. Some would view her as being stupid for doing such a thing. Adam, the hero, of course chooses not to leave the garden, and follow as he proclaims, follows god’s law.

The fact is, Lilith new the implications of her decision, yet choose as she did, meaning she had a choice, and made it. From Adam's point of view it was a bad choice. Lilith felt it was a good choice. The story told in its original form is on purpose a circular argument about choices, god and men and woman. It is Adam who proclaims Lilith Evil, not God, but from Adam's point of view, she is, because she is different.

Eve is a victim, clearly, and is framed, who framed her? Adam, because she is really Adam in another form. Or Fod, or Lilith?

The answer is, all and none, because Eve is technically good, as she is a part of Adam, therefore can do no wrong. God cannot be wrong because God made the rules, Lilith suggested the possibilities, but does not force Eve.

It is a lesson in the Wisdom of No Escape, which, in my opinion was the the original story as told in Moses' time.

This is to say, that the Christian scholar also new this as in fact an alagory of the Wisdom of no Escape. In a very honest way, they felt it should be changed (fixed) because it would not be understood. So in doing so, women were demoted by the Church, to serve man.
That is, there can never be a Female Pope in Rome! Regardless of the merits of her life in serving Jesus.
So in a way, we are being robed of the possibility of the advanced as men, but women Leaders and Scholars, because Eve is not a truly a woman. She is a product of man's mind, his own rib.





[Edited on 23-4-2004 by Keena]

[Edited on 23-4-2004 by Keena]

What the hell are you talking about?


Kinglizard, you are still avoiding the question. You think you are attacking me, but you are denying yourself. Who I am, or where the question came from is not the question at hand. The question was, who framed Eve? In your opinion.