Lillith

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Catholic : One Thread

Do you believe in Lilith?

It is ancient lore that Lilith was Adam's first wife, created the same as he was. She wasn't submissive enough, however, and was banished from Eden, where she went to the Red Sea and became a demon, and a mother of demons.

I've always thought it was a very interesting legend...

So, watcha think about it? I've heard it is Hebrew in origin, but I am not entirely positive.

-- Shane X (shane2000x@Hotmail.com), May 05, 2003

Answers

I believe that it is Hebrew in origin.

It is an interesting story, there are many.

As to the truth of it, who knows. It's an old story, can't be proven/disproven. I have no feelins on it, it isn't something that I believe/don't believe in. I don't have any feelings on it.

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 05, 2003.


no, its a farce. humans do not become demons, only fallen angels are demons. the lilith story is a conjecture of a creation myth probably made up by a splinter sect of the judaic tribes a long long time ago

-- paul (dontsendmemail@notanaddress.com), May 05, 2003.

Paul, with all due respect, you have no way of knowing that, seeing as how, assuming the Garden of Eden tale is true, you weren't alive when the world came into being. I'm not saying any of it is true, I'm just saying it shouldn't be discounted.

-- Shane X (shane2000x@hotmail.com), May 05, 2003.

Paul is quite correct.

Demons and humans are quite different in nature - one can not become the other. There is a popular misunderstanding that says that when humans die, they become angels. Not true.

Lilith is just a fictional story. There are lots of them in Hebrew culture.

Demons are fallen angels, created originally as angels long before mankind. They have no "mother".

Dave

-- non-Catholic Christian (dlbowerman@yahoo.com), May 05, 2003.


What is a Demon ?

Human / Demon = Saddam Hussein

-- Jenny (jenny@myhome.com), May 05, 2003.



Saddam is human. Human beings can be influenced by demons, but they cannot become demons. The most evil man still retains some aspects of goodness. Perhaps loyalty to his country, or love of flowers or art, or respect for his mother. Demons possess nothing of goodness whatsoever. They do not love or respect or appreciate other demons, or even themselves, for they exist in total isolation from the source of all that is good - God.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), May 05, 2003.

Lilith represents the lure of evilness upon men. She is a man's worse choice for a wife. She represents disobedience and deceit. A man's life would surely fall if she were not cast out of his life.

I can't remember where I read this. The Old Testament in the Catholic Bible perhaps?

rod. .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 05, 2003.


Paul: What proof of this do you have, hmm?

-- Shane X (shane2000x@hotmail.com), May 05, 2003.

Oh .. okay.. Demons/ evil humans .. they are the same in my eyes. Just my thought on that.. The almighty GOD needs to put his foot down and destroy all evil .. Well God will have his revenge in the end .. Right.

-- jenny (jenny@myhome.com), May 05, 2003.

Uh.....humans still have a chance for God's grace, demons are pretty much condemned to ........hell.

rod. .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 05, 2003.



"Well God will have his revenge in the end"
I'm thinking God is more after justice, really....

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 05, 2003.

"OperaDiva"?

Do you know what "Diva" means?

rod. .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 05, 2003.


One of the reasons I never felt right with any form of Christianity...God is supposed to be loving, yet he is hypocritical in that way, because, well, he ISN'T, if what you all say is to be believed.

And anyway, according to Biblical records, wasn't Adam supposed to walk among God before he sinned? Which meant he could have ORIGINALLY been an angel, or something...so the Lilith legend could hold water.

-- Shane X (shane2000x@hotmail.com), May 05, 2003.


Humm.. Justice...Revenge.. How ever you want to look at it..

-- Jenny (jenny@myhome.com), May 05, 2003.

Justice and revenge are two different things. Justice is everything getting what they deserve, while revenge is inflicting an injury, of any kind (mental, physical, etc.) on something in response to something else. The results can be the same in some cases, or similar, but justice and revenge are not the same things.

-- Shane X (shane2000x@hotmail.com), May 05, 2003.


"God is supposed to be loving, yet he is hypocritical in that way, because, well, he ISN'T, if what you all say is to be believed"

This depends on what the definition of love is...

diva-
1. An operatic prima donna
2. A female operatic star anche,
Italian, from Latin dva, goddess, feminine of dvus, god No, I don't think I'm a god/ess. I sing opera. I subscribe to the operatic definition.

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 05, 2003.

Blah Blah.. In myh eyes it is all the same..

The So -called GOD will take care of those who need to be taken care of.

By the way .. WHO created GOD ? If he created man.. How and who created him ??

Just a thought..

-- jenny (jenny@myhome.com), May 05, 2003.


Umm.. God just existed. Sure it's far-fetched, so is the Big Bang. It's a choice to believe it.

Justice/revenge; human/demon; since they are words that obviously have different definitions, they can't be the same thing....

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 05, 2003.


Wasn't Lilith Frazier's girl?

Karl

-- Karl (Parkerkajwen@hotmail.com), May 05, 2003.


Hmmm. That is an interesting question... ha ha.
I love Fraiser.

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 05, 2003.

I'm comfortable in hearing that you subscribe to those definitions, OperaDiva. We share a talent it seem--MUSIC.

Shane! READ THE BIBLE AND STOP GUESSING ABOUT BIBLICAL THINGS!

Adam was not an angel. He was a HUMAN. Adam did not mate with angels. Eve was his mate.

The cit-com character "Lilith" seemed like a good name for her.

rod. .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 05, 2003.


Logic tells us that every existing thing must have had an origin, and that every event that has occurred must have had a cause. Logic tells us that every event and every object we observe is but a momentary link in a long chain of causes and effects that stretches back to the beginning of time. By the same logic, time, since it exists, must have had an origin and a source, and that this source must therefore have preceded time, and therefore must exist outside of time. Since an observable sequence of causes and effects likewise exists, logic dictates that this sequence itself must also have had an origin and a cause, and that this initial source must therefore not have had an origin or a cause of its own; for otherwise it would merely be an effect of a previous cause, and a momentary element in the chain of causes and effects, not an original cause. Therefore, the same logic which tells us that all existing things must have an origin and a cause forces us to accept that there necessarily must be an initial source, an uncaused cause, which exists outside of time and space. For those who are unaware of spiritual reality, this first cause is and always will be ? For those who are aware of spiritual reality, this uncaused cause, this original source, is God.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), May 05, 2003.

Ron,
Music? What kind?

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 05, 2003.

Hi Shane I see you found the other forum. Good to see you still posting. Further up you asked for "proof." This is something you really can't reasonably expect anyone to give you. The answer you're looking for can only be found in the concept of "Faith," it does no good to ask for proof. Proof and reason are found in the material world but they are not really germane when discussing spirituality, or religious belief. Thats where "Faith" comes in. I'm not preaching, I'm not very good in the "Faith" department, I'm filled with doubts. But after living in the agnostic world of proof and reason for the last 20 years I find I want more than rational answers, hense my return to Catholicism. That last sentence may prompt you to think that a return to Catholisism involves some form of intellectual regression, but I think not. Its easy to ask for proof, its easy to be agnostic, Faith however is very difficult. Faith is real though and I've known many very brilliant people who have it. This forum has a host of contributers who are both very intelligent and who have Faith. I was struck by this realization the first few times I looked in here. I think confusion often occurrs when a question is asked from the empirical-scientific perspective, and the answer comes from knowlege based in Faith.

-- Jim Furst (furst@flash.net), May 05, 2003.

well typed Paul

Shane said One of the reasons I never felt right with any form of Christianity...God is supposed to be loving, yet he is hypocritical in that way, because, well, he ISN'T, if what you all say is to be believed.

Shane, God gave us Paradise until our parents, your ancestors, made a breach in the sacred family bond with God. We, our parents who passed on their sin to us in our genetic code (if you want to get modern), chose to have suffering become a part of their/our life by this relationship breach. They chose to disobey God. Now God simply reminds us that accepted suffering has become our way back to him. Of course he used Jesus to also let us know that He is the one who gives us the chance to suffer in order to get back to heaven. God doesn't even have to allow us that much. Our creator was under no obligation to create us in the first place or sustain us afterward. And any later obligation was one that he placed on himself, thus he later "swore to himself" to uphold the promise he made with us. We need God to back up our word, but God backs up his own word himself. So I suppose the point is, if you don't like it, the only option is to go to hell, literally (not said in the vulgar manner). That is our option. Choose hell or accept our cross, that began with our parent's choice to sin. This works out in life too. It makes plain sense. How did we learn to read and write so we could eventually enjoy this forum unless we suffered with trying to learn the alphabet, learn grammar, learn sentence structure etc and all with some frustration but also with a final reward. So our life and eternity works similarly. No point in rejecting what are the facts. If we see, ought not deny, unless we want to go to hell. Be my guest but I rather you didn't.

Shane also said, And anyway, according to Biblical records, wasn't Adam supposed to walk among God before he sinned? Which [Shane thinks] meant he could have ORIGINALLY been an angel, or something...so the Lilith legend could hold water.

Angels are pure spirits, they don't walk so Adam could not be an angel. Also your legend might hold water as creative writing. It is not in the Bible and there is no historical record from those times. The point of Adam and Eve is to teach us a lesson about the nature of God and of man and their relationship. Your legend doesn't come close to fitting in with biblical salvation history. It doesn't fit.

:-)

-- Mike H. (michael.hitzelberger@vscc.cc.tn.us), May 05, 2003.


OperaDiva-

I'm a jack of all music and a master of none. What do you expect from a music teacher?

Uh....who is Ron?

rod. .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 05, 2003.


I meant Rod ;)

Yay for music teachers! I love music teachers. I wouldn't be where I am today without my music teachers :D
Snaps to you!

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 05, 2003.

I wouldn't be where I am today if it weren't for music students. But, I'm sure that you are way beyond "student" and a master of music. I've been catching up on some Beethoven piano stuff.

The only place in the Bible where "Lilith" is to be found is in Isaiah 34:14.

"Wildcats shall meet with desert beasts, satyrs shall call to one another; There shall the lilith repose, and find for herself a place to rest."

The footnote in my 1977 NAB reads as follows:

"Lilith: a female demon thought to roam about the desert. to rest."

I knew about Lilith way back when. I just can't remember where I read it. This is not good.

rod.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 05, 2003.


Actually, I'm in college, so I'm a student in action, and have years yet to learn. Not to mention, opera is not exactly a career where the young start out on top ;) So I have plenty of time to learn.

I love it though. I couldn't have picked a more fun and challenging field!

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 05, 2003.


rod, lilith might have been a popular myth at the time that was written, or perhaps it even is a demon, but that doesnt make shanes little creation myth true... in fact, granted that God didnt send adam and eve out to become demons after they screwed up means that if something like that HAD happened then it certainly would have been recorded. since it wasnt then we must assume that either the story is a farce, or lilith is the name of a fallen angel that preys in a desert.

-- paul (dontsendmemail@notanaddress.com), May 05, 2003.

Hi Paul.

Trust me. I don't believe that Adam and Eve were reduced to demons. I also do not accept the idea that Lilith was Adam's first wife.

And, Shane's creations are entertaining. I think that he saw the word "demon" and got all roused up.

I do tend to believe the footnote about Lilith the demon. It didn't exactly say that she was real. It was "thought" to have happen.

Shane-Your tone has changed, but you're fiddling the same melodies.

rod.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 05, 2003.


(c) God then formed Lilith, the first woman, just as He had formed Adam, except that He used filth and sediment instead of pure dust. From Adam's union with this demoness, and with another like her named Naamah, Tubal Cain's sister, sprang Asmodeus and innumerable demons that still plague mankind. Many generations later, Lilith and Naamah came to Solomon's judgement seat, disguised as harlots of Jerusalem'. 4 (d) Adam and Lilith never found peace together; for when he wished to lie with her, she took offence at the recumbent posture he demanded. 'Why must I lie beneath you?' she asked. 'I also was made from dust, and am therefore your equal.' Because Adam tried to compel her obedience by force, Lilith, in a rage, uttered the magic name of God, rose into the air and left him. (e) Some say that Lilith ruled as queen in Zmargad, and again in Sheba; and was the demoness who destroyed job's sons. 7 Yet she escaped the curse of death which overtook Adam, since they had parted long before the Fall. Lilith and Naamah not only strangle infants but also seduce dreaming men, any one of whom, sleeping alone, may become their victim. 8

-- Jenny (jenny@myhome.com), May 06, 2003.

Oh, I have read that somewhere before...

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 06, 2003.

The Lilith Myth Presented here is a chapter discussing Lilith, taken from Hebrew Myths: The Book of Genesis by Robert Graves and Raphael Patai (New York: Doubleday, 1964), pp 65-69. Graves and Patai have collected traditional Hebrew myths that amplify (and sometimes radically alter) stories found in the Book of Genesis. This chapter, titled "Adam's Helpmeets", deals in part with the Lilith myth.

-- Jenny (jenny@myhome.com), May 06, 2003.

Adam complained to God: 'I have been deserted by my helpmeet' God at once sent the angels Senoy, Sansenoy and Semangelof to fetch Lilith back. They found her beside the Red Sea, a region abounding in lascivious demons, to whom she bore lilim at the rate of more than one hundred a day. 'Return to Adam without delay,' the angels said, `or we will drown you!' Lilith asked: `How can I return to Adam and live like an honest housewife, after my stay beside the Red Sea?? 'It will be death to refuse!' they answered. `How can I die,' Lilith asked again, `when God has ordered me to take charge of all newborn children: boys up to the eighth day of life, that of circumcision; girls up to the twentieth day. None the less, if ever I see your three names or likenesses displayed in an amulet above a newborn child, I promise to spare it.' To this they agreed; but God punished Lilith by making one hundred of her demon children perish daily; 5 and if she could not destroy a human infant, because of the angelic amulet, she would spitefully turn against her own. 6

-- Jenny (jenny@myhome.com), May 06, 2003.

Here is even more information..Very Interesting..

Lilith is the most important of a small collection of named female demons in Jewish legend. Historically, she is actually older than Judaism (at least Judaism as defined as a post-restoration phenomenon). Her earliest appearance is probably in ancient Sumer. Although it is far from certain, she may be a minor character in a prologue to the Epic of Gilgamesh. In the ancient world she also sometimes appears in magical texts, amulets, etc., intended to thwart her activities. She appears once in the Bible (Isaiah), in a context that associates her with demons of the desert, and again in some Dead Sea Scroll passages clearly based on the Isaiah reference. We see somewhat more of her in late Roman/early medieval Judaism. She appears frequently on prophylactic magical bowls. In this context, she is clearly associated with childbirth (e.g. as a threat), and perhaps also as a succubus against which men need protection. In these bowls she is often countered by invoking the powers of her nemesis angels: Snvi, Snsvi, and Smnglof (we don't know what vowels to use with these names, but presumably they were intended to be pronounceable). She also shows up in the Talmud, and is clearly linked with the demonic world. Here also, her role as succubus begins to take clear shape.

Somewhere between the eighth and tenth centuries, CE, she makes an appearance in a satirical work entitled the Alphabet of Ben Sira. It is here that she is first given what has become her most famous persona: the first wife of Adam (before Eve). In this story, she is created at more or less the same time as Adam, and, as was Adam, out of the ground. Because of this she tries to assert her equality -- an assertion which Adam rejects. Refusing to conform to Adam's desires, she escapes from Eden, and is subsequently replaced by the more subservient Eve (who has less claim to equality, since she was made out of Adam's side). Having escaped Eden, Lilith takes on her renowned role as baby-stealer and mother of demons. She also promises to leave babies alone who are protected by amulets with the names of the three angels mentioned above.

While it is true that there was a rabbinic tradition that Adam briefly had another wife before the creation of Eve (Genesis Rabbah), there is a great deal of doubt as to whether Lilith had any connection at all to this first wife of Adam story prior the publication of the Alphabet. The satirical nature of the Alphabet casts further doubt on the authenticity of this Lilith connection. But whatever its origins, the connection between Lilith and the first Eve seems to have struck a chord with Jewish folk imagination and it is now an inexorable part of those traditions. It has been able to function both as a 'woman's story' (in which Lilith is a role model for uppity women), and as a patriarchal story (in which we see the dire consequences of being an uppity woman). As a midrash, it also helps to solve a problem that arises from the fact that Genesis 1 has mankind created "male and female," but when we get to Genesis 2, Adam seems to be alone and in need of a partner.

Kabbalistic literature is occasionally aware of the Alphabet story, but more frequently not. Here Lilith usually appears as a partner for Samael (=Satan), and as the chief feminine expression of the Left (evil) Emanation. In some passages, she participates in the temptation of Eve/Adam, and, after the expulsion, she serves as succubus to Adam, generating hoards of demons from his seed. She is also the personification of temptation, and is for all intents and purposes identified with the woman Folly from the early chapters of Proverbs. In one story, she actually serves as consort to the Holy One.

She also appears in Christian iconography. Most late medieval and renaissance paintings of the temptation of Adam and Eve have portrayed the serpent as having a woman's head and often torso as well. This is usually referred to by art historians as 'Lilith,' but there is no Jewish story which easily corresponds to the pictorial representations (the one exception is Bacharach, 'Emeq haMelekh 23c- d, but it is confusing, and problematic at best). I am led to presume that there were Christian versions of the Lilith myth in which the identification between her and the Serpent were made explicit. Unfortunately, none of these versions have survived in either text or known folklore.

Lilith enjoyed something of a revival in literature beginning in the mid 19th century. Usually she represents the feminine dark side (the part that men subliminally fear). Carl Jung made use of her as prime expression of the anima in men (the suppressed feme within), and the best monograph on her still belongs to one of Jung's disciples (Siegmund Hurwitz).

She has also been embraced by many modern, particularly Jewish, feminists. Based mainly, or entirely, on the Alphabet, she is presented as the proto-feminist, willing to sacrifice even the paradise of Eden as the necessary cost of freedom and equality. Of course, her role as baby-stealer is usually down-played (or assigned to a patriarchal layer of the tradition). Some neo-pagan groups have taken up her cause as well, either accepting her dark nature as part of larger sacred reality, or finding the erotic goddess within after removing the clutter of what they argue are patriarchal and monotheistic condemnations.

Finally, she has a place in vampire lore either as the first and most powerful of the vampires, or at least as their queen. She is sometimes presented as either the daughter or the consort of Dracula. In her role as succubus, she has, of course, particular control of nightmares and erotic dreams. She also rules a horde of other succuba and incubi.



-- Jenny.. (jenny@myhome.com), May 06, 2003.


I am not interested in Lilith or related myths and stories. It has nothing to do with Catholicism. It is a distraction. You might want to find a literature forum to post on.

Respectfully

-- Mike H. (michael.hitzelberger@vscc.cc.tn.us), May 06, 2003.


Well Here was the question in this thread..

*****Do you believe in Lilith? It is ancient lore that Lilith was Adam's first wife, created the same as he was. She wasn't submissive enough, however, and was banished from Eden, where she went to the Red Sea and became a demon, and a mother of demons. *****

Just giving information on it.. THANK YOU>.

-- Jenny. (jenny@myhome.com), May 06, 2003.


Jenny-

Interesting information.

Mike-

Lilith is mentioned in the Bible. There must be some pertinents(sp?) or she would not have been mentioned. Now, we know that Lilith had something to do with Hebrew mythology.

Knowledge can be a booger sometimes.

rod. .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 06, 2003.


Rod,

I've never seen her mentioned, but then, I've been wrong before today! Could you direct me to the passage where "lilith" is discussed?

Thanks in advance,

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), May 06, 2003.


This little thread I started has grown more than I expected it to...

Paul, I think it was, said I saw the word demon and went ahead without knowledge, or something like that. Well, that is not true, and I take offense to that. When you get right down to it, I don't really even believe in demons, because I do not believe in absolute evil in any way, shape, or form. Don't go wandering off accusing me.

Anyway, apparently, there is a lot of controversy over this Lilith topic. I believe in Lilith, just not as a demon(ess?). She IS of Hebrew origination, at least as far as the records of her go. I'm enjoying reading this topic, now that I've started it...I like the contrasting viewpoints.

what's with the music discussion that occasionally surfaces here? Heh, its just confusing...

-- Shane X (shane2000x@hotmail.com), May 06, 2003.


You believe in her, but not as a demon. So, what is she? The only possibilities I know of are: god(ess), angel, demon, human, animal

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), May 06, 2003.

Hi Frank.

The footnote is very brief and "lilith" is mentioned only once, as far as I can detect. Here is the verse:

The only place in the Bible where "Lilith" is to be found is in Isaiah 34:14.

"Wildcats shall meet with desert beasts, satyrs shall call to one another; There shall the lilith repose, and find for herself a place to rest."

(This was posted earlier in this thread.)

rod

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 06, 2003.


Shane-

I made the remark that "roused" you up. Controversy? Huh? It seems that you are the only one who believes in Lilith. I believe that the myth exists. Myth. It is humorous to me that the Bible depicts Lilith out in the desert all alone with nobody to bother. So, don't go looking for her.

The music talk is a simple polite chit-chat with someone who shares a talent for music. Do you have a talent for music?

rod. .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 06, 2003.


Rod,

I've looked online at several versions of the Bible, and as usual think this is a translation "indescretion" made by the translator.

The Douay-Rheims has the passage as

"And demons and monsters shall meet, and the hairy ones shall cry out one to another, there hath the lamia lain down, and found rest for herself"

the Vulgate has:

"et occurrent daemonia onocentauris et pilosus clamabit alter ad alterum ibi cubavit lamia et invenit sibi requiem"

The same word "lamia" is used here, which means either a monster or a witch, but does not refer to "Lilith" or any other individual specifically. Perhaps someone can correct me, but at this point I feel your interpretter was taking poetic license in his interpretation. Perhaps since your version was printed in 1977 some schismatic influence altered the text towards their own ends... ;-).

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), May 07, 2003.


My Catholic Bible is wrong?!

How can this be?

All these years with an error in my Bible?

Well, this is why I've spent hours and money obtaining different Bibles.

The fact of the matter is that "Lilith" is found in the 1977 New American Bible along with some great pictures of the Pope.

rod. .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 07, 2003.


an "error" in the Bible is something I would NOT assert, as I am not qualified to do so. I definitely would question it though, given what the Vulgate & Douay-Rheims have, and would encourage you to do the same if you are going to base your beliefs on it!

For me, I PERSONALLY will regard the "Lilith" phrase as an overreaching on the translator's part.

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), May 07, 2003.


Hi Frank.

Don't get me wrong. I agree completely with your comments.

As far as Sola Scriptura goes, I do accept Traditions. But, I'm still a skeptic in some areas. This is why I'm such a "lurky" in these parts. I'm learning to read the Bible under a new light.

rod. .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 07, 2003.


"lurky"??

That must have been a translator overreaction. I meant "lurker".

rod. .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 07, 2003.


I used to play the saxophone...I've got a talent for music, I just haven't used it in awhile, so I'm not sure how good I'd be anymore.

The Lilith information in the Bible may have been a mistranslation, or misinterpretation, or whatever, but that doesn't automatically negate the Hebrew legend...

Paul: I don't believe she is a demon(ess), but I haven't formed full beliefs on her. Many others believe she was a goddess of higher intelligence, and a representitive of the Star People.

-- Shane X (shane2000x@hotmail.com), May 07, 2003.


Shane,

My point is that as a Christian, if something is IN the Bible, then it is useful for us spiritually to try and understand it. On the other hand, there are LOTS of "myths" which may not contain any truth at all.

To me then, it would make a Large difference if the Bible really refered to "lilith" or not. Personally, at this point, I think "not".

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), May 07, 2003.


BTW, Shane,

I was also a woodwinds player, Clarinet, alto sax and oboe, but similarly haven't played in a long time. I have restarted with the piano though, as the kids are now old enough to be taking lessons of their own.

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), May 07, 2003.


Well, I'm not a Christian, so...

Also, I'm fairly confident the Lilith story pre-dated the Bible. What does that mean, really? Nothing much. Just thought I'd throw that out there.

-- Shane X (shane2000x@hotmail.com), May 07, 2003.


Christianity pre-dated the Bible.

"Lilith" is mentioned in the Jerusalem Bible, but is replaced with "herself" in the RSV, the NASB, and the ESB. So, Lilith has been erased from some of the more recent versions of the Bible.

rod. .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 07, 2003.


Rod,

If we both are refering to the same Jerusalem Bible, it was created in the 1950's, which is still very *new* for a bible. The vulgate OTOH was made in ~370 a.d.!

I'd say that "lilith" was *added* much later, and thankfully, soon removed.

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), May 07, 2003.


Jmj

Shane, you wrote: "The Lilith information in the Bible may have been a mistranslation, or misinterpretation, or whatever, but that doesn't automatically negate the Hebrew legend ..."

No, THAT "doesn't automatically negate" it, but something else does ...
Please recall that you are visiting a Catholic discussion forum. Practicing Catholics and Jews KNOW -- beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Lilith story is pure fiction. It is "automatically negate[d]" by the fact that God has revealed it to be false. Christians and Jews are aware of the fact thats that ...
--- there was a first man created by God [known traditionally as Adam]
--- there was a first woman created by God [known traditionally as Eve]
--- these first two people were espoused to each other
--- therefore, it was physically impossible for Adam to have a "first wife" before Eve.
--- ergo, "Lilith" is a fable. [We can call it "Lilyth the myth." There is no such thing as a "goddess" or a "representative of the Star People." We are grown-up Christians here.]

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), May 07, 2003.


Hi Frank.

Sorry about my confusion. The average person only has access or knowledge of what they are told to get or can find. So, the average person is gonna settle for those popular Bibles. Now, if they do go in deeply for answers they will go to the oldest sources available. Septiguint(sp?), Codex, Dead Sea Scrolls, etc.

I guess my point is that the casual reader may never know which Bible is reliable and closest to the truth. Unless, they are fortunate to encounter truthful teachings. Thanks Frank.

I've asked this question in other forums: Which Bible? And, the replies are varied. Ultimately, this forum will answer with,"It isn't necessarily the Bible, but the Traditions of the One and Only True Church." This answer is the ultimate "editions" to any Bible I happen to stumble upon.

ro

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 07, 2003.


About the whole lillith appearing in the bible thread:

In the quotation that contains There shall the lilith repose, and find for herself a place to rest.", the word lillith can take on an alternate meaning which is "Screech-Owl". This would make sense, considering that the entire quotation speaks of beasties and what not, but it could be interpereted differently. The screech-owl meaning could be taken as (if one believes the Lillith before eve theory) Lillith's speaking out against Adam, as in her 'rebelling' against him.

Heh heh.. sorry.. I kinda stumbled across this forum..

-- Imoen (stef6450@snet.net), May 11, 2003.


Hello, I do remember from one of my high school classes that there is a book out on the parts that were taken out of the bible, before the King James version, way before that, and it had all of the horrorfic stuff that people said was too much for children to read. I've been looking for it for a while now. It's supposed to have all the stuff on Lilith and why she was sent away, not just because she wasn't submissive either. It was something like the Forgotten Books of the Bible. From what I was told about it, it's kinda like the Brother's Grimms Grimmest stories. I've heard of it before that one class too, so I know it's out there. If I ever find it, I will let ya know!!

-- Jenn Freeman (nadinastarr@hotmail.com), May 12, 2003.

Dear Jenn,

There have been things written on the so-called "forgotten books" of the Bible. However, the Holy Spirit didn't forget anything when He inspired the writers and guided the compilers of the Holy Bible. Everything He wanted in the Bible is there, and nothing was removed from the Bible between the time it was compiled at the end of the 4th century, and the time Luther removed seven books in the 16th century. And of course Luther's changes did not affect the original Bible, only the Protestant version. So the Bible in the hands of the Church God gave it to is still complete and entire. Nothing has been removed, added, or altered. The "forgotten books" were never part of the Bible in the first place.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), May 13, 2003.


Then.....

Why do some Catholic Bibles contain "Lilith"?

And, Why is the Book of Jonah considered a parable in the Jerusalem Bible?

Am I to believe that some Catholic Bibles are not in accordance with the Church?

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 13, 2003.


I am guessing that the Church has one source from which all other contemporary Bibles are translated or compiled. The different versions are a result of doctrinal interpretations. Or, the translations are different because of the translator's interpretations. But, to leave "Lilith" in seems like somebody either made a mistake or it was once acceptable in the Church. Can such a problem exist again, as we speak? Yes? So, what is the solution?

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 13, 2003.

[This is a test: ]

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), May 13, 2003.

[Sorry. This is a second test: ]

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), May 13, 2003.

Jmj

I'll guess that some of you are wondering why in the world I am posting Hebrew characters here. There's a good reason.

The reason that the word/name "Lilith" can be found in some translations of the Bible is that the prophet Isaiah himself wrote the word!!!
Yes, the Hebrew word that I reproduced above is transliterated into English as "lilith." Notice, reading from right to left, that the first and third characters are the same (equivalent to our letter "l"). This word is from Isaiah 34:14, and the Hebrew is reproduced at the "Blue-Letter Bible" site. The online lexicon there says this:


[transliterated] liyliyth, [pronounced] lee-LEETH'
[defined as:] 'Lilith,' name of a female goddess known as a night demon who haunts the desolate places of Edom; might be a nocturnal animal that inhabits desolate places".

My guess is that most translators of the Bible have been reluctant to use the name/word, "Lilith," because of the association with the myth. The prophet used it in a poetic, symbolic passage. Here are some of the ways it has been rendered:

Douay-Rheims Bible [Catholic, 1609]
"And demons and monsters shall meet, and the hairy ones shall cry out one to another, there hath the lamia [untranslated from the Vulgate] lain down, and found rest for herself"

King James (partial) Version [1611]
The wild beasts of the desert shall also meet with the wild beasts of the island, and the satyr shall cry to his fellow; the screech owl also shall rest there, and find for herself a place of rest.

Revised Standard Version [1952]
And wild beasts shall meet with hyenas, the satyr shall cry to his fellow; yea, there shall the night hag alight, and find for herself a resting place.

New International Version [1978]
Desert creatures will meet with hyenas, and wild goats will bleat to each other; here the night creatures will also repose and find for themselves places of rest.

New American Standard Version [1977]
The desert creatures will meet with the wolves, the hairy goat also will cry to its kind; yes, the night monster will settle there and will find herself a resting place.

New American Bible [Catholic, 1970]
Wildcats shall meet with desert beasts, satyrs shall call to one another; There shall the lilith repose, and find for herself a place to rest. [Footnote: Lilith: a female demon thought to roam about the desert.]

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), May 13, 2003.


John, you amaze me! What an awesome compilation!

Thanks,

gail

-- gail (rothfarms@socket.net), May 16, 2003.


The New Jerusalem Bible (Study Edition) - 1985 says: 'Wild cats will meet hyenas there, satyr will call to satyr, there Lilith too will lurk and find somewhere to rest'

The footnotes in this version say:

'Lilith was a female demon who haunted ruins.'

-- Sara (sara_catholic_forum@yahoo.co.uk), May 16, 2003.


Thanks, Gail and Sara!
JFG

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), May 16, 2003.

I am impressed Rod for your tenacity to clarify a term.

John G. actually produced a great compilation of translations to show lillith is in the hebrew Bible, even if it doesn't appear in most translations.

May be Frank is now satisfied about the term. Probably Mike H. gets it that sometimes is good to get into conversations of stuff that is/ appears/ and is not in the Bible.

Shane, you brought a good discussion topic. May not be necessary for salvation, but in essence is a good discussion topic.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), May 16, 2003.


Jenny, I commend you for not getting too upset when told to not post informational stuff.

I believe the more we discuss things we begin to appreciate more each other as Christians first, even though this is a Roman catholic Forum.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@sla.org), May 16, 2003.


Corrections are in order, Elpidio:
(1) This is a "Catholic" forum.
(2) Catholic = Christian.
(3) We want you to be Catholic and Christian again, ASAP.
JFG

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), May 17, 2003.

Sorry. I should clarify #2.
I didn't mean to say that only Catholics are Christians. I meant to say:
"Catholics are Christians. But 'unitarians' (e.g., Elpidio) are not Christians."

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), May 17, 2003.

Unitarians?

Uh.....Apostolics? As in those who preach only Jesus?

.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 17, 2003.


Uh....sorry.

"...who preach 'Jesus Only' doctrine?"

.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 17, 2003.


Probably Mike H. gets it that sometimes is good to get into conversations of stuff that is/ appears/ and is not in the Bible

What do we as Catholics learn from this passage, Isaiah 34:14, of the bible? What is Shane X's real intention in having this "enjoyable" discussion, as he called it.

-- Mike H. (michael.hitzelberger@vscc.cc.tn.us), May 17, 2003.


What do we as Catholics learn from this passage, Isaiah 34:14, of the bible?

The only thing that existes about superstitions is that some people still believe in them. And, the Lilith is a myth and the name is not used anymore in the Bible.

What is Shane X's real intention in having this "enjoyable" discussion, as he called it[?]

Shane is trying to say that Christianity is built upon pagan myths. Evidently, his tactics are not strong enough to convince even himself.

Shane- Do you believe in Lilith the Demon or Lilith the Myth?

rod.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 17, 2003.


Jmj

Hi, Rod.
In my last message, I wrote: "But 'unitarians' (e.g., Elpidio) are not Christians."
To this, you replied: "Unitarians? Uh.....Apostolics? As in ... those ... who preach 'Jesus Only' doctrine?"

I put the word in lower case and quotation marks -- "unitarians" -- to indicate that I was not referring to the official religion known as "Unitarian/Universalism." I was trying to distinguish between ...
(1) "UNItarian" people (like Elpidio) who believe that God is a supreme Being who is only ONE divine Person [the Father] and ... (2) "TRINItarian" people (Catholics and all other Christians) who believe that God is a supreme Being who is THREE divine Persons [Father, Son, and Holy Spirit].

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), May 18, 2003.


Hi John.

Sorry about my confusion, it's just that I can't figure out exactly where Elpidio is coming from. He told me, but I still don't get it.

To me, Elpidio may have affiliations with the Apostolic Church doctrine. This is probably why he views Jesus the way he does.

rod.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 18, 2003.


Sorry, Rod, but I don't know what you mean by "Apostolic Church." There are various denominations and sects that call themselves "Apostolic." Can you give me a URL to the Internet site of the organization to which you think Elpidio may be tied? [As I once mentioned, I suspect that he belongs to a religion that has just one member -- himself. Maybe he calls it Theo-Eclecticism.]
JFG

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), May 19, 2003.

You will get your answer in 5 months, John G.

You may not consider me a Catholic, but I am a Christian. This is something you cannot take away from me. I am not ashamed to carry on the name of the one who showed me the way to salvation. Even like saint Paul was a Jew even after his people had rejected him as one.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), May 20, 2003.


Jmj

Elpidio, you are not a Catholic, and you are not a Christian. You insult true Catholics, true Christians by pretending to be anything by a "unitarian" or "arian."

The original Christians were Catholics. As a Catholic, I am a spiritual descendant of theirs. The original Christians knew and taught the same thing that I know today -- that Jesus's father was not St. Joseph, but God himself, that Jesus is divine. If a person (e.g., you) does not believe this key fact, he CANNOT be called a "Christian." One must believe that Jesus was the Messiah AND that he is God, if one wants to be a Christian. If you want to lie and call yourself a Christian, then get the hell out of here and lie to people somewhere else. I am sick of your filth.

It's obvious, Elpidio, that you have outstayed your welcome here. For months, you have been causing trouble, anger, and irritation. You are not helping anyone, and you are refusing to learn. You are here to proselytize with your heresies galore, to insult Mary the Mother of God, and to call attention to your phony claims of private revelations.

Elpidio, please leave this forum immediately. Please study the Catechism and Bible until you are ready to become Catholic again. (Maybe that's what you will do in your "five months" time.)

May God help you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), May 20, 2003.


[Correction:] You insult true Catholics, true Christians by pretending to be anything but a "unitarian" or "arian."

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), May 20, 2003.

Elpidio-

You mentioned St. Paul. You must then know quite a bit about his devotion and teachings. Is there anyway for you to press the reset button on your beliefs and reinitialize your thinking, sort of like what happened to Saul. I have listened to your thoughts so as I could get a sense of where you're at in the Gospel. It does seem that you are more tilted towards Saul than Paul. Would you consider just closing off and opening up to be like St. Paul? Hey, Saul was hit hard and he changed, maybe that is God's true sign for you?

rod. .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 21, 2003.


Can somebody elaborate on this?

Starter of The Way, The Church of Yahweh in Christ Jesus.

Is this an Apostolic Church(Unitarian) ?

The name doesn't seem to imply such an ideology.

rod. .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 21, 2003.


rod,

it is, what theyre saying is a fancy hoity toity come to our church we can be fancy too way of saying

we'll (try) to start you down the path of Christ, we're the church of God in the name of the Christ, Jesus.

-- paul (dontsendmemail@notanaddress.com), May 21, 2003.


Then it seems that my hunch may have some validity to it.

I'll just wait until all the cards are shown.

rod

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 21, 2003.


Jmj
Hello, Rod.

You asked: "Can somebody elaborate on this? Starter of The Way, The Church of Yahweh in Christ Jesus. Is this an Apostolic Church (Unitarian)?"

I know why you asked about this. In January of 2002, Elpidio posted a message in another discussion forum, wherein he identified his "parish" as "start of The Way, The Church of Yahweh in Christ Jesus."

I am unable to find any other reference to "Church of Yahweh in Christ Jesus" [or "Jesus Christ"] on the Internet, so there is no way to read about the doctrines of this "church," etc.. Elpidio's use of the word, "starter," seems to indicate that I was not exaggerating when I said that he is the founder and lone member of his own non-Christian religion [some kind of Messianic Judaism].

Please come back to the Catholic Church, Elpidio!
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), May 21, 2003.


Hi John.

Yes. I came across it about a month ago and I have been making all attempts to trace the doctrine. It kind of hints of the 7th Day Adventist group. Elpidio has also made references to the Apostolic Church on a previous thread. I am familiar with this sect down here in my area. Uh, I'll be nice and only say that they tend to be "unitarian".

I was hoping that Elpidio would have clarified this for us. But, I don't want to stir things up.....too much.

rod. .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 21, 2003.


Elpidio!

Are you starting your own church?

Come on guy! You can tell us!

(Remember, I have this uncanny way of knowing stuff, sometimes.)

rod. .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 21, 2003.


Be patient , Rod.

I always liked John Paul II since he came to Mexico in 1979, Rod.

Since 1991 I have been attached to him more personally by God by revealing to me when his life was in danger (1998), about the condition which may him tremble (since December 1993), and so on.

It was not my own choice, Rod. My God Yahweh wanted me to stick with this man until the end. I was forced to be loyal to him as long as he was alive. If I had my own choice, then I could have left log ago in the 1990s.When the end comes, then I will answer your question.

That is why my situation is different from everybody else you have met before. I never intended to leave the Church, start a new Church and so on. My focus was Mexican politics. God has refocused my life about religion.

For me The Way ( the Church's original name see Acts 19:9, 22:4,24:14 ) is like rediscovering the roots of my religion. Act 24:14 But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets .

Paul summarizes his new experience as a Christian in < a href=" http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Act/Act026.html"> Acts 26

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), May 23, 2003.


Paul summarizes his new experience as a Christian in < a href="http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Act/Act026.html"> Acts 26

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), May 23, 2003.

i must say in recent months i have witnessed some very scary and real things are humans angels no are they demons no and yes if we look to revelations you will see the anti christ is a man before he submits himself to a greater evil and becomes willingly imprisoned by demons to that point that he himself changes into a demon and if you read genesis it talks of how lillith was indeed there and mated with restless Pre flood humans creating the race of giants to which goliath belonged 1/2 human 1/2 demon this is my belief thru my interpatation of what i read not to be taken to others as belief find your own answer READ the scripture and find out first hand

-- shrek (shrek18@cox.net), February 08, 2005.

Hi Shrek. You might consider using punctuation next time. And, say "hi" to Donkey for me.

.................

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), February 08, 2005.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ