B
BrooklynBoy200
Guest
I read that Adam had a wife named Lilith before Eve, and that it was Lilith that tempted Eve to eat from the tree in Eden. Is this true? How could this be if God made Adam, then Eve immediatly after?
- Status
C
Church_Militant
Guest
It’s not true, it’s bunk! You need to get a Catechism and a Bible and read them and stop feeding your head all this garbage.
This is Gnostic junk…they weren’t even Christian or Jewish.
(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.
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](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]Get a grip, and peace be with you.
R
ribozyme
Guest
Nope, Adam and Eve never existed because we evolved!
J
JimG
Guest
Despite appearances, these two things are not necessarily contradictory.
C
cienwen
Guest
Even though the Lilith Myth is just bunk I have read accounts of it being a Jewish old-wives tale. Nonetheless it has as much Biblical baking as Bigfoot. The funniest thing is, traditionally the mythical Lilith has been a demon that strangles infants in their cribs right? Yet this is who Lilith Fest is named after. They like that part of her rejecting Adam and skip all that demon baby killer stuff. :ehh:
Nonetheless it is bunk. Not supported.
Nonetheless it is bunk. Not supported.
D
Damascus
Guest
Mary is the New Eve -
NOT the New Lilith.
That was Frasier’s wife (ex-wife) on Cheers and Frasier.
I saw her in NYC. She was not married to Adam, she is not that old.
NOT the New Lilith.
That was Frasier’s wife (ex-wife) on Cheers and Frasier.
I saw her in NYC. She was not married to Adam, she is not that old.
V
VociMike
Guest
Exactly.
C
Church_Militant
Guest
More bunk…
S
Saint_Augustin
Guest
Lilith or “liyliyth” is a demon. Satyrs are demons also.
Isa 34:14 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 (liyliyth) **also shall rest there, and find for herself a place of rest.
Isa 34:14 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 (liyliyth) **also shall rest there, and find for herself a place of rest.
R
ribozyme
Guest
Care to dismiss all the evidence of human evolution. It is unlikely that two humans are the parents of all humanity; it is more like a population (a small band) of archaic Homo sapiens that could be traced as the common ancestors of all humans.More bunk…
S
Saint_Augustin
Guest
Scientists extracted DNA from Neanderthal bones and said it showed they could not have been ancestors of modern humans. The two were separate species.
Neanderthal bones yield secrets
seattlepi.nwsource.com/health/292541_neanderthal16.html?source=rss
E
elvisman
Guest
Like I tell all of my Bigfoot-believing, UFO-enthusiant acquantances - PROVE IT. The burden of proof is ALWAYS on the antagonist/accuser
I’m always amazed by the fact that athiests like yourself would waste so much time on Catholic forums - or any religious forum, for that matter. I realize that your sole purpose on this forum is to antagonize, which is incredibly non-productive - and childish.
Maybe after you’ve had a chance to grow up (your profile lists you as being 17), you’ll see things differently.
Wisdom comes with age and experience . . .
M
mercygate
Guest
Care to take this to a thread where it belongs?
R
ribozyme
Guest
All I am pointing out is that there is no evidence of monogenism, and that is a relevant point in a thread about Adam and Eve.
As for proving common ancestory:
ruccs.rutgers.edu/~karin/550.READINGS/EVOLUTION/Enard2002.pdf
Tell me how creationism provides a better explanation for the homology observed in the transcription factor FOXP2 than evolution. This is exactly what evolution predicts; creationism does not make that prediction.
M
mercygate
Guest
It is a thread about “Lillith,.” not monogenism.
R
ribozyme
Guest
Ok, fine, I’ll leaven this thread and start a threat about it
To St. Augustine, I never said that Neanderthals and humans are related. They do indeed share a recent ancestor, but modern humans are not related to Neanderthals. But evolutionary theory does not require that.
- Status