My answers in Italics

Eh, heh, first Id like to thank all yall for the replies to my last post...didnt really expect that many different answers... Also, sorry for taking so long in replying, but school and work have been interfering in my education yet again ;) okay, on with the new Qs...

1. Again with the bible...I still cant see how or why Im supposed to take a collection of stories written with at best 3rd hand information the authority to govern my spiritual life... What Im saying is, where does this, pardon the pun, "bible truth" bible get is truth? And plz...if im in doubt of the document, you arent going to pursuade me by saying, "The bible is true because the bible says so...".

How do you kow they are all Third Hand? The Gopsles where traditionall undertsood to be first hand. Modern Scolarship doubts htis,but has no proof. ( Its based on a Bias agaisnt proephecy. Mark had ot be post 70 AD because itmentions the destuction of Jerusalem in the form of a Porphecy Jesus gave. Since no one can se the future, it had to post date the event. Ir so we are told.) Much of he Old Testement is first hand information, the Chronicles and books of the Kings wherre written by scribes who recorded the past.

The Psalms ar worship hymns, no need for "First hand" information for those.Just inspiration. ( Have never heard of a third hand song.) Proverbs is a cllectionof wise sayings.

Ect...

Do a little more researhc in this area, the Bible sint so unreliable as its attackers make it out to be.

2. Why do most christians put more value on God's worship than on good deeds? I wouldnt think God vain enouph to hold his ego over the good of mankind...

Ever hear of thought becomign deed? You cannot simpley fo good deeds constantly with a corrupt mind. You will inevetabley do as you think. By worshippign God we keep our thoughts n righteouness and purity, and then can do Good deeds legitimately, for the right rasons, and will be compellesd by compassion to do good more often.

I have seen it a number of times. Those who are less spiritual are also less caring, and htose who primaruly worshop God will find it easier to generate true compassion.

It isnt about God's vanity, but mans, and by prostrating ourselves before him, and givign him homage, we also tend to be less selfish and self centred.

3. With the bible contradicting itself in so many instances, how can one know which verse to hold over the other?

This is one I hear often. And most Binle contradictions I have ever seen are resolvable by simpley reading the text.

I have yet to see a real Bile contradiction. If you cvisit a website dedicated to showing them off, like Skeptics Annotated Bible, or one of the other mirade web pages desigend to attack the faith, you will probeably be convnced that its an irrefutable fact that the Bible contraicts, and that ther eis no way to rationally resolve these. But often the quotes they use are out of context, and sometimes they outfight Lie.

One of my favourite contradictiosn is this one

In Mathew 19:26 it says "With God all things are possible."

In Judges 1:19 it says this.

"And the Lord was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron."

Obviously a contradiction,. The Lord courl not dirve outhe Iron chariots and therefore cnaot do all things.

Ecept htis is misleading. The verse taken in Isolation form Judges mentiosn two people. The Lord and Judah, and could be refrign to wither. when toyu read it off a contradictiosn sight, you assume it is refrigng to the Lord. In acutality however, its referign to Judah, and HIS incapacity to subdue the Iron Chariots. Can I prove this? Yes, all one need to do is read a few verses up.

17. And Judah went with Simeon his brother, and they slew the Canaanites that inhabited Zephath, and utterly destroyed it. And the name of the city was called Hormah. 18. Also Judah took Gaza with the coast thereof, and Askelon with the coast thereof, and Ekron with the coast thereof. 19. And the Lord was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron. 20. And they gave Hebron unto Caleb, as Moses said: and he expelled thence the three sons of Anak. 21. And the children of Benjamin did not drive out the Jebusites that inhabited Jerusalem; but the Jebusites dwell with the children of Benjamin in Jerusalem unto this day.

The context of the opassage is clear, and not referign tot he Lord not being abole to defeat the Iron CHariots, but rathe rto Judah and his forces. Other contradictiosn disapear if you acutallyr ead them in context as well.

As I said before, what contradictions?

4. Umm...and this is mostle nitpicking...but where and why did Lilith get removed from the christian bible?

she isnt in the Tanahk, the Hebrew scriptures, either. Shes in the Legends of the JEws, not the Bible, and was never removed.

again, thx in advance to all who answer...yes, even you Jeanie...at least you make it interesting :)

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), December 17, 2003.

-- (@@@.@), December 17, 2003.

Jmj

This surely is strange. It's the third time an extremely obscure subject -- "lilith" -- has come up at the forum in the last six months or so. Is "lilith" something prominent in a recent movie or TV show? Or is it something that is being popularized in radical feminist literature?

Well, anyway ... M0kkz, you asked, "where and why did Lilith get removed from the christian bible."

This is not really a valid question. Just because the Hebrew word that could be transliterated as "lilith" (pronounced "lee-LEETH") doesn't itself appear in some Bible versions doesn't mean that it was "removed." Instead, what you'll find is attempts to translate "lilith" into something that may be more meaningful to readers. Thus, in the King James Version (of 1611), you'll find "screech owl" for "lilith."

One online dictionary of biblical words in Greek and Hebrew defines "lilith" as follows:
"name of a goddess known as a night demon who haunts the desolate places of Edom ... might be a nocturnal animal that inhabits desolate places"
A footnote in a Catholic Bible says: "Lilith: a female demon thought to roam about the desert."

While the Revised Standard Version has "night hag" as its translation, the [Catholic] New American Bible (1970) reproduces the word "lilith" itself, making your question inaccurate. (That is, the word itself still appears in at least one Christian Bible version. You can see it here.)

God bless you.
John

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

I forgot to mention ... Isaiah 34:14

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), December 17, 2003.

If you're motivated, there's quite a long discussion about Lilith in this forum in "Uncatagorized Topics," the very last section under "Older Topics." When you get there its about 280 topics down from the top and its called "Lilith."

-- Jim Furst (furst@flash.net), December 17, 2003.

EWTN has an excellent article on Lillith here.

In Christ, Bill

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45@hotmail.com), December 17, 2003.

Lets try again...

My answers in Italics Eh, heh, first Id like to thank all yall for the replies to my last post...didnt really expect that many different answers... Also, sorry for taking so long in replying, but school and work have been interfering in my education yet again ;) okay, on with the new Qs... 1. Again with the bible...I still cant see how or why Im supposed to take a collection of stories written with at best 3rd hand information the authority to govern my spiritual life... What Im saying is, where does this, pardon the pun, "bible truth" bible get is truth? And plz...if im in doubt of the document, you arent going to pursuade me by saying, "The bible is true because the bible says so...". How do you kow they are all Third Hand? The Gopsles where traditionall undertsood to be first hand. Modern Scolarship doubts htis,but has no proof. ( Its based on a Bias agaisnt proephecy. Mark had ot be post 70 AD because itmentions the destuction of Jerusalem in the form of a Porphecy Jesus gave. Since no one can se the future, it had to post date the event. Ir so we are told.) Much of he Old Testement is first hand information, the Chronicles and books of the Kings wherre written by scribes who recorded the past. The Psalms ar worship hymns, no need for "First hand" information for those.Just inspiration. ( Have never heard of a third hand song.) Proverbs is a cllectionof wise sayings. Ect... Do a little more researhc in this area, the Bible sint so unreliable as its attackers make it out to be. 2. Why do most christians put more value on God's worship than on good deeds? I wouldnt think God vain enouph to hold his ego over the good of mankind... Ever hear of thought becomign deed? You cannot simpley fo good deeds constantly with a corrupt mind. You will inevetabley do as you think. By worshippign God we keep our thoughts n righteouness and purity, and then can do Good deeds legitimately, for the right rasons, and will be compellesd by compassion to do good more often. I have seen it a number of times. Those who are less spiritual are also less caring, and htose who primaruly worshop God will find it easier to generate true compassion. It isnt about God's vanity, but mans, and by prostrating ourselves before him, and givign him homage, we also tend to be less selfish and self centred. 3. With the bible contradicting itself in so many instances, how can one know which verse to hold over the other? This is one I hear often. And most Binle contradictions I have ever seen are resolvable by simpley reading the text. I have yet to see a real Bile contradiction. If you cvisit a website dedicated to showing them off, like Skeptics Annotated Bible, or one of the other mirade web pages desigend to attack the faith, you will probeably be convnced that its an irrefutable fact that the Bible contraicts, and that ther eis no way to rationally resolve these. But often the quotes they use are out of context, and sometimes they outfight Lie. One of my favourite contradictiosn is this one In Mathew 19:26 it says "With God all things are possible." In Judges 1:19 it says this. "And the Lord was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron." Obviously a contradiction,. The Lord courl not dirve outhe Iron chariots and therefore cnaot do all things. Ecept htis is misleading. The verse taken in Isolation form Judges mentiosn two people. The Lord and Judah, and could be refrign to wither. when toyu read it off a contradictiosn sight, you assume it is refrigng to the Lord. In acutality however, its referign to Judah, and HIS incapacity to subdue the Iron Chariots. Can I prove this? Yes, all one need to do is read a few verses up. 17. And Judah went with Simeon his brother, and they slew the Canaanites that inhabited Zephath, and utterly destroyed it. And the name of the city was called Hormah. 18. Also Judah took Gaza with the coast thereof, and Askelon with the coast thereof, and Ekron with the coast thereof. 19. And the Lord was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron. 20. And they gave Hebron unto Caleb, as Moses said: and he expelled thence the three sons of Anak. 21. And the children of Benjamin did not drive out the Jebusites that inhabited Jerusalem; but the Jebusites dwell with the children of Benjamin in Jerusalem unto this day. The context of the opassage is clear, and not referign tot he Lord not being abole to defeat the Iron CHariots, but rathe rto Judah and his forces. Other contradictiosn disapear if you acutallyr ead them in context as well. As I said before, what contradictions? 4. Umm...and this is mostle nitpicking...but where and why did Lilith get removed from the christian bible? she isnt in the Tanahk, the Hebrew scriptures, either. Shes in the Legends of the JEws, not the Bible, and was never removed. again, thx in advance to all who answer...yes, even you Jeanie...at least you make it interesting :)

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), December 17, 2003.

Zarove,
PLEASE break up your messages into paragraphs. I could not make a bit of sense out of what you just posted.

If you are writing your own original material, hit your "Enter" key twice (not once) to cause a blank line to appear.

But if you are copying-and-pasting text from another site or an earlier post -- and if that text is broken into paragraphs, they will automatically be jammed together as one big paragraph, unless you take special pains to insert HTML new-paragraph commands. These commands consist of three characters: "<" "p" and ">". Put those three together (dropping the quotation marks), and you will cause a break to a new paragraph (after a blank line).

God bless you.
John

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), December 17, 2003.

I have been researching Lilith for some weeks, the most probable (of many printed) reasons for her removal from the bible was that at some point in the 15th century (correct me if my dates are wrong,) the bible was re-read and all stories that were improbable, fable, contained no evidence or were bad propoganda were removed. The story of Lilith, though no more or less believable then that of Eve, was one of the stories removed, most logically because of the femminist message it contained at a time when women were expected to be submissive. Apparantly it is still possible to obtain copies of the bible includig Lilith and other removed stories, although I am having trouble with this, still, there are some references to Lilith remaining in the bible where her name has been tranlated to "screeching owl," "night owl," "wild beast" and quite a few others, apparently because Lilith was a demoness, (though the refs to angels were considered believable.) Hope this helps, Nancy x

-- Nancy Brown (ipg@btinternet.com), January 26, 2004.

Nancy, the Catholic Church has not removed anything from the Bible.

-- (@@@.@), January 26, 2004.

Nancy, I'm afraid someone has misinformed you concerning the canon of scripture.

Furthermore, if the Church was unwilling for its members to read anything of "strong" women, it surely would have removed the stories of Judith, Miriam, Rahab, Sarah, Rebekah, and most assuredly the story of Deborah who was a military leader, MARCHING her men to war!

Gail

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), January 26, 2004.