Feminist translation

"Lilith and Eve"

God formed Adam and Lilith from the dust of the ground and breathed into their nostrils the breath of life. Created from the same source, both having been formed from the ground, they were equal in all ways. Adam, being a man, didn’t like this situation, and he looked for ways to change it. He said, "I'll have my figs now, Lilith,” ordering her to wait on him, and he tried to leave to her the daily tasks of life in the garden. But Lilith wasn't one to take any nonsense; she picked herself up, uttered God's holy name, and flew away. "Well now, Lord,” complained Adam, "that uppity woman you sent me has gone and deserted me.” The Lord, inclined to be sympathetic, sent his messengers after Lilith, telling her to shape up and return to Adam or face dire punishment. She, however, preferring anything to living with Adam, decided to stay where she was. And so God, after more careful consideration this time, caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam and out of one of his ribs created for him a second companion, Eve.

For a time, Eve and Adam had a good thing going. Adam was happy now, and Eve, though she occasionally sensed capacities within herself that remained undeveloped, was basically satisfied with the role of Adam's wife and helper. The only thing that really disturbed her was the excluding closeness of the relationship between Adam and God. Adam and God just seemed to have more in common, both being men, and Adam came to identify with God more and more. After a while, that made God a bit uncomfortable too, and he started going over in his mind whether he may not have made a mistake letting Adam talk him into banishing Lilith and creating Eve, seeing the power that gave Adam.

Meanwhile Lilith, all alone, attempted from time to time to rejoin the human community in the garden. After her first fruitless attempt to breach its walls, Adam worked hard to build them stronger, even getting Eve to help him. He told her fearsome stories of the demon Lilith who threatens women in childbirth and steals children from their cradles in the middle of the night. The second time Lilith came, she stormed the garden's main gate, and a great battle ensued between her and Adam in which she was finally defeated. This time, however, before Lilith got away, Eve got a glimpse of her and saw she was a woman like herself.

After this encounter, seeds of curiosity and doubt began to grow in Eve's mind. Was Lilith indeed just another woman? Adam had said she was a demon. Another woman! The very idea attracted Eve. She had never seen another creature like herself before. And how beautiful and strong Lilith looked! How bravely she had fought! Slowly, slowly, Eve began to think about the limits of her own life within the garden.

One day, after many months of strange and disturbing thoughts, Eve, wandering around the edge of the garden, noticed a young apple tree she and Adam had planted, and saw that one of its branches stretched over the garden wall. Spontaneously, she tried to climb it, and struggling to the top, swung herself over the wall.

She did not wander long on the other side before she met the one she had come to find, for Lilith was waiting. At first sight of her, Eve remembered the tales of Adam and was frightened, but Lilith understood and greeted her kindly. "Who are you?” they asked each other, "What is your story?” And they sat and spoke together of the past and then of the future. They talked for many hours, not once, but many times. They taught each other many things, and told each other stories, and laughed together, and cried, over and over, till the bond of sisterhood grew between them.

Meanwhile, back in the garden, Adam was puzzled by Eve's comings and goings, and disturbed by what he sensed to be her new attitude toward him. He talked to God about it, and God, having his own problems with Adam and a somewhat broader perspective, was able to help out a little””but he was confused, too. Something had failed to go according to plan. As in the days of Abraham, he needed counsel from his children. "I am who I am,” thought God, "but I must become who I will become.”

And God and Adam were expectant and afraid the day Eve and Lilith returned to the garden, bursting with possibilities, ready to rebuild it together.
by Judith Plaskow

Any thoughts on this translation of the Genesis account?

If it wasn't so serious I would laugh...How sad!

Yeah. It is not a translation. It IS though a fairy tale.

Where did Lilith come from? I know Eve and where she came form. I know who came from the seed of Eve, The Son of God by the Holy Spirit through the seed of Eve, Mary.

I wonder who came through Lilith? Maybe she turned into a serpent, you think?

What does a Christian woman think about this Lilith?

In Christ: Phillip

TMK

You ought to remove that link immediately and find another one with text only, no pictures.

Please do so NOW!

I do not want this thread locked.

Thanks

Ok savanah I removed it. Make sure you stay away from any art museum with Renaissance paintings.

Does anyone know were SI went? I'm still looking for it.

This post is void of any edification. Not even funny.

Feminists adopt a variety of hermeneutical techniques, applying them to the Biblical text. 

For example, one feminist theologian insists that four structural elements are essential for a correct interpretation of the Bible:

1) A hermeneutic of suspicion:
readers can and must question the Biblical writers’ interpretation, as the texts are androcentric and reinforce patriarchy. Since the Bible was written by men and was most often interpreted by male theologians, it could not be trusted. This hermeneutic of suspicion allowed the reader to raise questions regarding the validity of the Biblical authors' interpretation. They raise suspicion of the church "fathers" as being sexist and biased to do away with traditional beliefs, opening the door to re-interpretation.

2) A hermeneutic of proclamation: 
those parts of the Bible which affirm liberation should be proclaimed, the rest rejected. Namely, those portions of the Bible that proclaim liberation for oppressed women should be accepted, and those that don't should be rejected, attributing them to historical patriarchal structure.

3) A hermeneutic of remembrance: 
reclaim and honour the suffering of all women who were victims of patriarchy. This hermeneutic of remembrance focuses on abused and disparaged women. It's work is to remember and emphasize the misogynistic attitudes and behavior of the past in order not to repeat it.

4) A hermeneutic of creative actualisation: 

rewrite the biblical text to ‘put back’ the forgotten women into their rightful place. This allows you to embellish or augment the Biblical text by entering the Biblical story and retelling it from a feminist perspective.

I'll elaborate more on these in my next post.

Feminist theologians encourage all Christian women to become involved in theology. Theology being the basis of liberation is an act of freedom! One should search out the right questions about the Bible and Ecclesial tradition, and rather than accept a certain text as being inspired, question everything because it was written by men and no women.

If a doctrine or text does not agree with a woman's experience of oppression and quest for liberation, then you are free to revise it. Since the message of the Bible is liberation to all, specifically to women from the rule of men, then this evil spirit of misogynism that is ostracizing women is the sin that must be exposed.

These feminist theologians believe that the Bible is male-biased, and in its traditional translation can be used by men for the self perpetuation of patriarchy. According to these feminist theologians, the Bible itself needs liberation from the human fetters of misogyny which have shackled it. Therefore it must be re-translated.

So to excise the root of patriarchy from the church and society, two major theological mistakes must be corrected, feminist theologians say. A wrong view of God, and His Word the Bible. This theology of their's they say, will heal the built-in misogynism on many levels and liberate women. They say that the effects of the fall must be reversed. For it is in the beginning, the fall of Adam that this patriarchy began.

Is this what you believe Savannah? What do they do with Jesus Christ a man who saves them?

In Christ: Phillip

Phillip,

You ask,

Is this what you believe Savannah?

I answer, No! I'm not a feminist nor do I believe their false feminist theology. It is satanic, as it attempts to dethrone the LORD God Almighty, and devilish as it slanders God's Holy Name and His Holy Word.

I believe what God hath said, not the fables, myths and lies made up by these deceivers.

Here, for example is what God hath said;

". . .yet your desire shall be for your husband,and he shall rule over you" Gen 3:16b

". . .its [sin's] desire is for you,
but you [Cain] must master it." Gen 4:7b

". . .and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. Gen 3:16b

". . .and unto thee shall be its desire;but do thou rule over it. Gen 4:7b

In regard to these verses in Genesis I believe;

In Genesis 4:7 sin's desire is to enslave Cain, to possess or control him, but the Lord commands, urges Cain to overpower sin, to master it. An active struggle between Cain and sin is implied.

The woman has the same sort of desire for her husband that sin has for Cain,
a desire to possess or control him. This desire disputes the head-ship of the husband. As the Lord tells Cain what he should do,i.e., master or rule sin, the Lord also states what the husband should do, rule over his wife.

The words of the Lord in Genesis 3:16b, as in the case of the battle between sin and Cain, do not
determine the victor of the conflict between husband and wife, but merely mark the beginning of the battle of the sexes.

As a result of the fall, man no longer rules easily; he must fight for his headship. Sin has corrupted both the willing submission of the wife and the loving headship of the husband. The woman's desire is to control her husband (to usurp his divinely appointed headship, and he must master her, if he can. So the rule of love
founded in paradise is replaced by struggle, tyranny and domination. Experience also corroborates this interpretation of God's judgment on the woman.

The desire of the woman in Genesis 3:16b does not make the wife
(more) submissive to her husband so that he may rule over her. Her desire is to contend with him for leadership in their relationship. This desire is a result of and a just punishment for sin.

Consequently, the man must actively seek to rule his wife. This interpretation is true because:

(1) It is consistent with the context, i.e., it is judgment for sin that the relation between man and woman is made difficult. God's words in Genesis 3:16b destroy the harmony of marriage, for the rule of the husband, part of God's original intent for marriage, is not made more tolerable by the wife's desire for her husband, but less tolerable, because she rebels against his leader-ship and tries to usurp it.

(2) It permits a consistent understanding of the Hebrew word translated desire in the Old Testament also consistent with its etymology.

(3) It recognizes the parallel between Genesis 3:16b and 4:7b. The interpretation of 4:7b is clearer; we know from the context that sin's desire to Cain involves mastery or enslave-ment and that Cain did not win the battle to rule sin.

(4) It explains the fact that husbands do not rule their wives as a result of God's proclamation in Genesis 3:16b. (Further support is implied by the New Testament commands for wives to be submissive to their husbands and the requirements for elders to rule their families.) "Shall rule" is not an indicative statement in the Hebrew, if God states that something will come to pass, it will. A.F.

How refreshing is your answer. So also the rest of your answer.

In Christ: Phillip

Ok savanah I removed it.

Thank you for in love and the fear of God being mindful of your brothers conscience.

(Probably could have done without the "teasing" afterward though. It may surprise you that some of us likely wouldn't attend an "art" museum that displays nudes.)

Does anyone know were SI went? I'm still looking for it.

What purpose does such commenting serve? Couldn't this be seen as "trolling"? If you have nothing to add, why comment at all?

And more importantly, do you have a biblical basis for posting such comments? Is this in accordance with the Law of Christ?

I find matters such as the one this brother is seeking to discuss and bring attention to, be as politically incorrect as they may, deserve our consideration in this hour.

Thus says the LORD, "Stand by the ways and see and ask for the ancient paths, Where the good way is, and walk in it; And you will find rest for your souls. But they said, 'We will not walk in it.'"
~ Jeremiah 6:16