When God created

[John Wells]

Let's get to the bottom of this Hebrew mythical insertion in some MSS, but apparently not all, as it only appears in the NRSV. For info on Lilith, see:
http://www.acs.ucalgary.ca/~elsegal/Shokel/950206_Lilith.html

Would like expert input on how Lilith got into an apparent few MSS?

 

[Ernie Brazee]

What does this Lilith have to do with anything? Did God find this important enough to put in his word?

Oh I forgot, for some the KJV is not sufficient for many today!

Ernie

 

[Rev. Joshua]

Katie,

Brown, Driver and Briggs point out that the etymology of /lilyth/ (3917) from /layalah/ (3915), although popular with early translators, is unlikely. /lilyth/ is clearly used as a proper name for the Babylonian mythological figure in the Talmud and in several other texts which they list.

The fact that some translators skirt the issue by saying "night hag/monster" doesn't change what it actually says right there in the text.

As for what is taught in seminary, I don't remember much discussion of Lilith. We did go through Enuma Elish (the Babylonian creation story) and look at how the story was worked into the canon (BWSmith is something of a lay expert in how the various editors of the OT affected its composition). I also know that the focus of several of my papers in seminary was on how local or tribal myths were incorporated into the Genesis account.

I'm sure that among IFB seminaries and what's left of the SBC seminaries (after the fundamentalist takeover) you won't find much discussion of the influence of Babylonian mythology. The CBF partner schools, however, should be a different story. Likewise any Methodist, Episcopal, or Presbyterian (USA) seminaries.

Joshua

 

[Rev. Joshua]

John,

Your link does address concerns about the presence of the Lilith account in Rabbinic tradition. It does not address the fact that her name is in every extant Hebrew manuscript of Isaiah that I know of.

If I remember correctly, the first reference to Lilith in the Garden is in the preface to the Epic of Gilgamesh, although there is some debate about whether the Akkadian word translated as "Lilith" is actually her.

Joshua

 

[John Wells]

Joshua said, "what's left of the SBC seminaries (after the fundamentalist takeover)"

I beg your pardon! Check the history of the SBC. It was founded fundamental. I agree there is a struggle for control going on, but it is the fundamentalists who are trying to retain/take back the foundational fundamentals. A classic case of liberals waltzing in and acting like they own the place and everybody owes 'em something!

 

[rhoneycutt]

Joshua,
Doesn't "Epic of Gilgamesh" contain Flood story and sending out dove from Ark?
I can't remember its been a while and Im not at home to check. Can you do my research for me.
Thanks
Russell

 

[Rev. Joshua]

Russell,

Although I'm hesitant to drag us any farther off-topic, I believe the flood account is also in Gilgamesh. (I know it's in there somewhere, just no sure where.)

The flood and creation stories in Genesis are some of the oldest in recorded human history, and clearly circulated in that area for several generations and in several ways.

Joshua

P.S. I'm thumbing through my copy of Myths From Mesopotamia: Creation, The Flood, Gilgamesh and Others translated by Stephanie Dalley. I recommend picking up a copy. It's about an 8 $ book in paperback. One final note, even Akkadian linguists don't work off the cuneiform, they work off the transliteration. (If you decide you want to delve that deeply)

[ October 24, 2001: Message edited by: Rev. Joshua Villines ]

 

[Dr. Bob]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by rhoneycutt:
I believe the Bible is true!! The Bible is not necessarily completely factual. Russell<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>That is hard for me to swallow. Remember, I teach ethics and logic in a secular university and hear this kind of NEWSPEAK all the time.

From Webster - Fact: "a thing that has happened or is true; state of things that are; reality, actuality, truth; to tell the truth."

Need some help getting through my thick skull that something can be a "fact" but not be "true".

And what other part of the Bible might contain such "untrue facts"? Jesus taught about Adam and Eve and Noah as "fact". Maybe He was not being true. Then John 3:16 might just be a lie as well.

Can you see the smoke rising from my head. I am really irritated over blatant god-denying and bible-shredding liberalism. Always have been.

 

[rhoneycutt]

Sorry to irritate you Dr Griffin. I am not saying facts are not true.

I am saying truth doesn't necessarily have to be factual.

I don't see what is so difficult to comprehend about this.

 

[Pastor Larry]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by rhoneycutt:
I am saying truth doesn't necessarily have to be factual.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't laugh outloud when I am by myself very often. It just ain't cool to do. But I must admit this one got me. You should run for president. I think you have what it takes.

 

[DocCas]

Time for me to step in and post the definitive statement concerning this conundrum!

Lilith, was a female demon of Jewish folklore; her name and personality are derived from the class of Mesopotamian demons called lilû (feminine: lilitu). In rabbinic literature Lilith is variously depicted as the mother of Adam's demonic offspring following his separation from Eve or as his first wife, who left him because of their incompatibility. Three angels tried in vain to force her return; the evil she threatened, especially against children, was said to be counteracted by the wearing of an amulet bearing the names of the angels. A cult associated with Lilith survived among some Jews as late as the 7th century AD.

That is the myth much like our Boogy man myth, used to frighten children.

Now let's look at the truth. The Hebrew word is liyliyth and is used for any animal which makes frightening sounds in the night, such as the English "bogy."

The contention that "liyliyth" is a proper name is completely unfounded and not at all in keeping with the structure of the Hebrew. Look at the word in Hebrew. Is it a feminine singular absolute? If not, it is not a proper name, but a common noun used for any number of nocturnal creatures which make frightening sounds. QED!

 

[rhoneycutt]

Hey Larry,
Can I rely on you for a contribution?

 

[DocCas]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pastor Larry:
I don't laugh outloud when I am by myself very often. It just ain't cool to do. But I must admit this one got me. You should run for president. I think you have what it takes.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Actually, rhoneycutt is right and I agree with him. He said "I am saying truth doesn't necessarily have to be factual."

It is true the serpent said in Genesis 3:4, "Ye shall not surely die:" but what he said is not factual.

 

[swaimj]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I believe the Bible is true!! The Bible is not necessarily completely factual.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Let me apply this statement to the story of Peter Pan to see if I can understand what you are trying to say. Peter Pan is a story that has a moral about a boy who does not want to grow up but discovers that he will grow up, he must grow up, and it is good to grow up. The story is not factual. It never happened. It is made up. It is a myth. But we can see it as true because it contains a truth that we can apply to life. In similar fashion, you see the Bible as a book that that contains true things that we can live by, but the stories themself are not factual. Am I on the right track?

 

[donnA]

Joshua
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Some folks understand how a story can be "true" even if it didn't actually happen, others do not <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

and the rest of us know a lie.

rhoneycutt
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I don't see what is so difficult to comprehend about this. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

asking myself the samething.


Thomas Cassidy
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>It is true the serpent said in Genesis 3:4, "Ye shall not surely die:" but what he said is not factual. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


They did die, spiritually. And I think thats the whole point of just about everything in the bible, we are spiritually dead/ seperated from God.

Dr. Bob
I would assume that since something that is factual is true, then if the bible is true, then it is factual.
Am I assuming correctly?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

 

[Joey M]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> The creation accounts in Genesis use narrative and myth to describe our relationship to God. Without Christ, we are innately drawn to rebellion, excess, and sin. The stories in Genesis do not have to be historical to be true. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If they are myth then the linage must also be myth, and therefore not only is Genisis myth but so is the rest of the Bible. Seeing that if we follow the linage from Adam we come to Christ or vice versa, if we follow the linage from Christ we ultimately end up at Adam. So either you believe the Bible is truth or you believe the Bible is myth. Which is it?

I think we can conclude a few things from these posts.
1) John Wells had the best and most biblical answer to the question that was asked.
2) That Josh believes the Bible is myth and we should follow secular fokelore.
3) Josh also believes that homosexuality is ok, abortion is ok. And though God's word condemns these actions, Josh says it's ok.
4) due to the above two, we can conclude that Josh's views are hipocrisy, and he is (not in my terms, but the Bible's) an heritic spreading false doctrine.
6) If ever we feel the need to take on a secular (worldy) postion, we know who to call on.

(edited by me, due to my heated and unthoughtout answer.)

[ October 24, 2001: Message edited by: Joey M ]

 

[rhoneycutt]

Joey
Your point is what? I would suggest you edit some more.
Babbling on about Joshuas interpretation of scripture is pathetic and unhealthy.

 

[Joey M]

His interpretation is not even scripture, his interpretation is of secular focklore. And I edit all that I feel should have been edited. Thank you very much.

 

[Joey M]

And furthermore what is pathetic is that you would defend such heresy. I don't know it you have ever read 2 John 10 and 11 before, but I would suggest that you do.

 

[Pastor Larry]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Thomas Cassidy:
It is true the serpent said in Genesis 3:4, "Ye shall not surely die:" but what he said is not factual.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Apples and oranges. It is factual that the serpent said that. Joshua and RL are denying that what Scripture says concerning an event is true. You are admitting that what Scripture says about an event is true. In other words, Joshua and RL are discussing the first part of your statement. When Scripture says something, it is a true reflection of what happened. In Gen 3:4, they would probably both deny that the serpent actually said that.