| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Michael
Guest
|
 Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2003 6:31 pm Post subject: Re: Adam and Eve |
 |
|
In article <znL_a.33957$bo1.23581@news-server.bigpond.net.au>, "Rick"
<hoganrj@bigpond.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Yes, Genisis was written penned by Moses' hand. Moses wrote, the Torah, and
Job. Those books wern't written in the order that they are placed in the
bible. Exodus, the second book in the bible documents events leading up to
Moses' death so that would be his sixth book. The ancient Israelites may
have known an Adam and Eve from Ur, but they would not have been the
original Adam and Eve.
|
How so?
| Quote: |
"zayton" <zayton@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:VDA_a.7997$_3.5768@fe02.atl2.webusenet.com...
"Michael" <mikeburt@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:mikeburt-1308031733450001@192.168.1.100...
In article <Xns93D69C7717640jefscrrcom@24.25.9.42>, Tiger
jef@yahoo.com
wrote:
Genesis was written by Moses,
No, It wasn't. In New Testament times the tradition of the Law given by
God
through Moses is popularly interpreted by some groups as Mosew having
"written the Torah", But internal evidence is to the contrary.
but the children of Israel weren't waiting
around for Moses to write it in the form that we know it today, they
already knew everything there from earlier manuscripts.
They probably knew oral traditions before the materials were first
written,
and long before they were redacted into their present form, but there is
no
evidence of Earlier manuscripts than those incorporated into the present
writings. There may be quotations from things written by Moses in the
current forms or the writings, but Mosis didn't write them.
They knew of Adam
and YHVH long before Egypt.
If the legend preserved in the current form of the writings is to be
believed, they knew them from Ur of the Caldees, AKA Babylon.
Joe
--
Michael
People who donšt read newspapers are better off than those
who do because it is better to be uninformed than misinformed.
-- Thomas Jefferson
|
--
Michael
People who donšt read newspapers are better off than those
who do because it is better to be uninformed than misinformed.
-- Thomas Jefferson |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
Michael
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2003 12:37 am Post subject: Re: Adam and Eve |
|
|
In article <Xns93D69C7717640jefscrrcom@24.25.9.42>, Tiger <jef@yahoo.com> wrote:
| Quote: | mikeburt@ix.netcom.com (Michael) wrote in news:mikeburt-
1308031404370001@192.168.1.100:
legends are not fact, nor is there anything in Scripture that would
document the legend as a fact.
Then why do you insist that they are?
|
Who said Scripture was a legend? That is usually the position of
religious radical fundie atheists promoting legends.
--
Michael
People who donšt read newspapers are better off than those
who do because it is better to be uninformed than misinformed.
-- Thomas Jefferson |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Libertarius
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2003 9:31 pm Post subject: Re: Adam and Eve |
|
|
Michael wrote:
| Quote: | In article <3F395650.ADBDABC8@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>, Libertarius
Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
Michael wrote:
In article <3F390C24.588BD8AC@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>, Libertarius
Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
Michael wrote:
In article <3F384ED8.F78A9D88@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>, Libertarius
Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
"Jessica L. Price" wrote:
"Libertarius" <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote in
message
news:3F3813F8.8877329B@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net...
|
|
| Michael wrote:
|
| > In article <ulv9jvglj600ihabojrdklhkack6rp6b39@4ax.com>, Don
| > <calldonREMOVE@earthlink.net> wrote:
|
| > > On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 01:50:16 -0500, "Robert Gau"
robertgau@ev1.net
| > > wrote:
|
| > > >I think the idea (and I might be acting quite
idealistic here) is
that
| > > >sex is SO amazing and beautiful that it should only be shared
between
| > > >two people who share insurmountable love.
|
| > > BUZZ! WRONG!
|
| > > The BIBLICAL MARRIAGE was an arranged marriage and had
nothing to do
| > > with "insurmountable love." In fact, it had nothing to do
with love
| > > at all. It was a contract between two families. Women were
treated
| > > as chattel, as property.
|
| > BUZZ! WRONG! Sounds like the religiou feminist mythology
of Gloria
| > Steinman.
|
| ===>Who on earth is "Gloria Steinman"???
I think, that since this man has proven he knows nothing about
either
feminism or Israelite marriage practices, we shouldn't expect
him to be
able to spell "Steinem" correctly.
===>You are so correct!
Thanks, coming from you, for the nice compliment. You can spell
Steinem,
I can read Isaiah 34:14 without inventing Lillith out of thin air.
===>No, you cant.
It is your head that is full of "thin air".
Reading the KJV is NOT reading Isaiah.
Never said it was, that is why I asked what Hebrew word are you
translating as Lillith?
Not even reading the best translation.
E.g., here is a more accyrate translation of
Isaiah 34:14
"And there shall the beasts of the desert meet with the jackals,
and the wild goat shall cry to his fellow;
the lilith also shall settle there,
and find for herself a place of rest."
(Darby Version).
Good. BTW, reading Darby is NOT reading Isaiah. But good old Darby
doesn't say that lilith is another name for Eve.
===>NO ONE has ever said that.
Where do you come up with those doozies?
Adam called her woman,
God changed her name to Eve. No where is there an indication that the
lilith is a reference to Eve.
===>And no one ever said there was or it is.
You brought lillith up, not me. Jessica affirmed what you said about
Lillith as a reference to Eve, but not from Scripture.
the subject of Isaiah is the day of the
Lord's vengeance for the controversy of Zion, it is not the Garden of
Eden.
===>Your mind is narrower than the famous camel gate of Jesus.
One always knows that he has found something when his adversary stops
discussing the issues and begins to make false witnesses against the
person.
Lillith is regarded as a name of a female goddess known as a night demon
who haunts the desolate places of Edom or possibly a a nocturnal animal
that inhabits desolate places such as, butnot limited to, a screech owl.
The invention of a reference to Eve came about in Germany, many centuries
later than any previous rendering. Are you saying that Eve is a night
demon who haunts the desolate places of Edom?
===>NO ONE has ever said that.
Hmmmm, actually a lot of people have.
Edom and Eden are not the
same place, nor is there any reference to Eve in Edom.
===>Irrelevant nonsense. -- L.
So is the subject of Lillith you raised.
|
===>You lie or are mistaken.
I did not raise the subject, only confirmed the existence of
Lilith in the canonical Bible. -- L. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Libertarius
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2003 9:34 pm Post subject: Re: Adam and Eve |
|
|
Michael wrote:
| Quote: | In article <Xns93D69C7717640jefscrrcom@24.25.9.42>, Tiger <jef@yahoo.com> wrote:
mikeburt@ix.netcom.com (Michael) wrote in news:mikeburt-
1308031404370001@192.168.1.100:
legends are not fact, nor is there anything in Scripture that would
document the legend as a fact.
Then why do you insist that they are?
Never do, many legends do contain truth, there is no evidence to ascribe
Scripture to legend; however. In fact, many legends have a basis of truth
in Scripture such as the Code of Hammaradi, for it is merely a corrupted
later version of the original truth.
Genesis was written by Moses,
|
===>Nonsense.
Genesis was written by several people, probably compiled by one,
but not Moses, who, like "Daniel", most likely never existed. -- L. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Libertarius
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2003 9:36 pm Post subject: Re: Adam and Eve |
|
|
Rick wrote:
| Quote: | Yes, Genisis was written penned by Moses' hand.
|
===>Utterly false.
It was penned by several people, not by the mythical "Moses".
| Quote: | Moses wrote, the Torah, and
Job. Those books wern't written in the order that they are placed in the
bible. Exodus, the second book in the bible documents events leading up to
Moses' death so that would be his sixth book. The ancient Israelites may
have known an Adam and Eve from Ur, but they would not have been the
original Adam and Eve.
|
===>But you are an original promoter of humbug! -- L. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Libertarius
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2003 9:37 pm Post subject: Re: Adam and Eve |
|
|
Michael wrote:
| Quote: | In article <VDA_a.7997$_3.5768@fe02.atl2.webusenet.com>, "zayton"
zayton@bellsouth.net> wrote:
"Michael" <mikeburt@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:mikeburt-1308031733450001@192.168.1.100...
In article <Xns93D69C7717640jefscrrcom@24.25.9.42>, Tiger <jef@yahoo.com
wrote:
mikeburt@ix.netcom.com (Michael) wrote in news:mikeburt-
1308031404370001@192.168.1.100:
legends are not fact, nor is there anything in Scripture that would
document the legend as a fact.
Then why do you insist that they are?
Never do, many legends do contain truth, there is no evidence to ascribe
Scripture to legend; however. In fact, many legends have a basis of truth
in Scripture such as the Code of Hammaradi, for it is merely a corrupted
later version of the original truth.
The code of Hammurabi is a description of a Babylonian social order,
including a whole complex system of courts and Judges; not a list or summary
of laws. It is a handy monument for debunking idiots who have gotten it in
their minds, somehow, that the 10 commandments were, "the forst laws among
human beings", but there is no particular similarity between any of the code
and either the 10 commandments or the whole set of "laws of Moses.
So some say, the state of Babel ended the dispensation of Human
Government. It was a failure.
Genesis was written by Moses,
No, It wasn't. In New Testament times the tradition of the Law given by God
through Moses is popularly interpreted by some groups as Mosew having
"written the Torah", But internal evidence is to the contrary.
They would be right, it was written by God and given to Moses.
but the children of Israel weren't waiting
around for Moses to write it in the form that we know it today, they
already knew everything there from earlier manuscripts.
They probably knew oral traditions before the materials were first written,
and long before they were redacted into their present form, but there is no
evidence of Earlier manuscripts than those incorporated into the present
writings. There may be quotations from things written by Moses in the
current forms or the writings, but Mosis didn't write them.
In that we agree.
They knew of Adam
and YHVH long before Egypt.
If the legend preserved in the current form of the writings is to be
believed, they knew them from Ur of the Caldees, AKA Babylon.
You are correct although it is not a legend, and they knew Him even
previous to that.
|
===>And you know that from what evidence???? |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Libertarius
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2003 9:40 pm Post subject: Re: Adam and Eve |
|
|
Michael wrote:
| Quote: | In article <Xns93D69C7717640jefscrrcom@24.25.9.42>, Tiger <jef@yahoo.com> wrote:
mikeburt@ix.netcom.com (Michael) wrote in news:mikeburt-
1308031404370001@192.168.1.100:
legends are not fact, nor is there anything in Scripture that would
document the legend as a fact.
Then why do you insist that they are?
Who said Scripture was a legend? That is usually the position of
religious radical fundie atheists promoting legends.
|
===>Silly comment!
NO ONE said "Scripture was a legend".
It obviously is NOT "A" legend, nor is it ALL legend.
But it is full of myths, legends and fables collected by diverse authors,
compiled into one book by Church authorities -- i.e. MEN. -- L. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Michael Burt
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2003 2:06 am Post subject: Re: Adam and Eve |
|
|
In article <bhb4gn$fap$3@news.doit.wisc.edu>,
"Jessica L. Price" <jessicaprice@wisc.edu> wrote:
| Quote: | "Libertarius" <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote in message
news:3F390C6D.1D44410D@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net...
| > >> >> >Another radical feminist myhthology?
|
| > >> >> As I said, you are not really reading this thread, are you?
|
| > >> >Yes, perhaps you are not really reading this thread. Repeating
the same
| > >> >assertion doesn't make the assertion any more valid.
|
| > >> Then why do you keep doing it?
|
| > >Truth is hard to bury.
|
| > Perhaps you should study history.
|
| ===>A course in thinking might help him to begin with. -- L.
And now for some modern, rather than Biblical, Hebrew...
To steal an Israeli saying: Yesh g'vul l'chol ta'alul. (Okay, I didn't
really need to put it in Hebrew, but it rhymes! I'm a sucker for these
things.) Enough is enough; there are limits; this guy's out of control;
give up; don't waste your time, etc.
He's not going to let any scholarship or facts interfere with his splendid
convictions of what *really* constitutes Truth. So why waste your time?
With him or the other Mike. I think both of them have made their
intentions clear.
|
Hmmmm, sounds like good advice. If you are not going to let any
scholarship or facts interfere with a splendid conviction of what you
think *really* constitutes Truth. So why waste your time? I think that
you them have your intentions clear. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Michael Burt
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2003 5:58 pm Post subject: Re: Adam and Eve |
|
|
In article <3F44F3C8.58AA3E31@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
| Quote: | Michael wrote:
In article <3F395650.ADBDABC8@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>, Libertarius
Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
Michael wrote:
In article <3F390C24.588BD8AC@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>, Libertarius
Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
Michael wrote:
In article <3F384ED8.F78A9D88@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius
Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
"Jessica L. Price" wrote:
"Libertarius" <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote in
message
news:3F3813F8.8877329B@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net...
|
|
| Michael wrote:
|
| > In article <ulv9jvglj600ihabojrdklhkack6rp6b39@4ax.com>,
| > Don
| > <calldonREMOVE@earthlink.net> wrote:
|
| > > On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 01:50:16 -0500, "Robert Gau"
robertgau@ev1.net
| > > wrote:
|
| > > >I think the idea (and I might be acting quite
idealistic here) is
that
| > > >sex is SO amazing and beautiful that it should only be
| > > >shared
between
| > > >two people who share insurmountable love.
|
| > > BUZZ! WRONG!
|
| > > The BIBLICAL MARRIAGE was an arranged marriage and had
nothing to do
| > > with "insurmountable love." In fact, it had nothing to
| > > do
with love
| > > at all. It was a contract between two families. Women
| > > were
treated
| > > as chattel, as property.
|
| > BUZZ! WRONG! Sounds like the religiou feminist mythology
of Gloria
| > Steinman.
|
| ===>Who on earth is "Gloria Steinman"???
I think, that since this man has proven he knows nothing about
either
feminism or Israelite marriage practices, we shouldn't expect
him to be
able to spell "Steinem" correctly.
===>You are so correct!
Thanks, coming from you, for the nice compliment. You can spell
Steinem,
I can read Isaiah 34:14 without inventing Lillith out of thin air.
===>No, you cant.
It is your head that is full of "thin air".
Reading the KJV is NOT reading Isaiah.
Never said it was, that is why I asked what Hebrew word are you
translating as Lillith?
Not even reading the best translation.
E.g., here is a more accyrate translation of
Isaiah 34:14
"And there shall the beasts of the desert meet with the jackals,
and the wild goat shall cry to his fellow;
the lilith also shall settle there,
and find for herself a place of rest."
(Darby Version).
Good. BTW, reading Darby is NOT reading Isaiah. But good old Darby
doesn't say that lilith is another name for Eve.
===>NO ONE has ever said that.
Where do you come up with those doozies?
Adam called her woman,
God changed her name to Eve. No where is there an indication that the
lilith is a reference to Eve.
===>And no one ever said there was or it is.
You brought lillith up, not me. Jessica affirmed what you said about
Lillith as a reference to Eve, but not from Scripture.
the subject of Isaiah is the day of the
Lord's vengeance for the controversy of Zion, it is not the Garden of
Eden.
===>Your mind is narrower than the famous camel gate of Jesus.
One always knows that he has found something when his adversary stops
discussing the issues and begins to make false witnesses against the
person.
Lillith is regarded as a name of a female goddess known as a night
demon
who haunts the desolate places of Edom or possibly a a nocturnal animal
that inhabits desolate places such as, butnot limited to, a screech
owl.
The invention of a reference to Eve came about in Germany, many
centuries
later than any previous rendering. Are you saying that Eve is a night
demon who haunts the desolate places of Edom?
===>NO ONE has ever said that.
Hmmmm, actually a lot of people have.
Edom and Eden are not the
same place, nor is there any reference to Eve in Edom.
===>Irrelevant nonsense. -- L.
So is the subject of Lillith you raised.
===>You lie or are mistaken.
I did not raise the subject, only confirmed the existence of
Lilith in the canonical Bible. -- L.
|
WE thank you for confirming the existence, we disagree as to your
representations. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Libertarius
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2003 10:17 pm Post subject: Re: Adam and Eve |
|
|
Michael Burt wrote:
| Quote: | In article <3F44F3C8.58AA3E31@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
Michael wrote:
In article <3F395650.ADBDABC8@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>, Libertarius
Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
Michael wrote:
In article <3F390C24.588BD8AC@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>, Libertarius
Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
Michael wrote:
In article <3F384ED8.F78A9D88@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius
Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
"Jessica L. Price" wrote:
"Libertarius" <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote in
message
news:3F3813F8.8877329B@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net...
|
|
| Michael wrote:
|
| > In article <ulv9jvglj600ihabojrdklhkack6rp6b39@4ax.com>,
| > Don
| > <calldonREMOVE@earthlink.net> wrote:
|
| > > On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 01:50:16 -0500, "Robert Gau"
robertgau@ev1.net
| > > wrote:
|
| > > >I think the idea (and I might be acting quite
idealistic here) is
that
| > > >sex is SO amazing and beautiful that it should only be
| > > >shared
between
| > > >two people who share insurmountable love.
|
| > > BUZZ! WRONG!
|
| > > The BIBLICAL MARRIAGE was an arranged marriage and had
nothing to do
| > > with "insurmountable love." In fact, it had nothing to
| > > do
with love
| > > at all. It was a contract between two families. Women
| > > were
treated
| > > as chattel, as property.
|
| > BUZZ! WRONG! Sounds like the religiou feminist mythology
of Gloria
| > Steinman.
|
| ===>Who on earth is "Gloria Steinman"???
I think, that since this man has proven he knows nothing about
either
feminism or Israelite marriage practices, we shouldn't expect
him to be
able to spell "Steinem" correctly.
===>You are so correct!
Thanks, coming from you, for the nice compliment. You can spell
Steinem,
I can read Isaiah 34:14 without inventing Lillith out of thin air.
===>No, you cant.
It is your head that is full of "thin air".
Reading the KJV is NOT reading Isaiah.
Never said it was, that is why I asked what Hebrew word are you
translating as Lillith?
Not even reading the best translation.
E.g., here is a more accyrate translation of
Isaiah 34:14
"And there shall the beasts of the desert meet with the jackals,
and the wild goat shall cry to his fellow;
the lilith also shall settle there,
and find for herself a place of rest."
(Darby Version).
Good. BTW, reading Darby is NOT reading Isaiah. But good old Darby
doesn't say that lilith is another name for Eve.
===>NO ONE has ever said that.
Where do you come up with those doozies?
Adam called her woman,
God changed her name to Eve. No where is there an indication that the
lilith is a reference to Eve.
===>And no one ever said there was or it is.
You brought lillith up, not me. Jessica affirmed what you said about
Lillith as a reference to Eve, but not from Scripture.
the subject of Isaiah is the day of the
Lord's vengeance for the controversy of Zion, it is not the Garden of
Eden.
===>Your mind is narrower than the famous camel gate of Jesus.
One always knows that he has found something when his adversary stops
discussing the issues and begins to make false witnesses against the
person.
Lillith is regarded as a name of a female goddess known as a night
demon
who haunts the desolate places of Edom or possibly a a nocturnal animal
that inhabits desolate places such as, butnot limited to, a screech
owl.
The invention of a reference to Eve came about in Germany, many
centuries
later than any previous rendering. Are you saying that Eve is a night
demon who haunts the desolate places of Edom?
===>NO ONE has ever said that.
Hmmmm, actually a lot of people have.
|
===>WRONG!
Some say that about LILITH,
but no one says that about EVE!
| Quote: |
Edom and Eden are not the
same place, nor is there any reference to Eve in Edom.
===>Irrelevant nonsense. -- L.
So is the subject of Lillith you raised.
===>You lie or are mistaken.
I did not raise the subject, only confirmed the existence of
Lilith in the canonical Bible. -- L.
WE thank you for confirming the existence, we disagree as to your
representations.
|
===>More lies/erroneous statements.
I made no "representations" re. Lilith.
But YOU did make FALSE representations about some people's
ideas re. EVE. -- L. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Michael Burt
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2003 2:37 am Post subject: Re: Adam and Eve |
|
|
In article <3F56221A.E9A365DC@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
| Quote: | Michael Burt wrote:
In article <3F44F3C8.58AA3E31@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
Michael wrote:
In article <3F395650.ADBDABC8@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>, Libertarius
Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
Michael wrote:
In article <3F390C24.588BD8AC@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius
Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
Michael wrote:
In article <3F384ED8.F78A9D88@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius
Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
"Jessica L. Price" wrote:
"Libertarius" <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote
in
message
news:3F3813F8.8877329B@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net...
|
|
| Michael wrote:
|
| > In article
| > <ulv9jvglj600ihabojrdklhkack6rp6b39@4ax.com>,
| > Don
| > <calldonREMOVE@earthlink.net> wrote:
|
| > > On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 01:50:16 -0500, "Robert Gau"
robertgau@ev1.net
| > > wrote:
|
| > > >I think the idea (and I might be acting quite
idealistic here) is
that
| > > >sex is SO amazing and beautiful that it should only
| > > >be
| > > >shared
between
| > > >two people who share insurmountable love.
|
| > > BUZZ! WRONG!
|
| > > The BIBLICAL MARRIAGE was an arranged marriage and
| > > had
nothing to do
| > > with "insurmountable love." In fact, it had nothing
| > > to
| > > do
with love
| > > at all. It was a contract between two families.
| > > Women
| > > were
treated
| > > as chattel, as property.
|
| > BUZZ! WRONG! Sounds like the religiou feminist
| > mythology
of Gloria
| > Steinman.
|
| ===>Who on earth is "Gloria Steinman"???
I think, that since this man has proven he knows nothing
about
either
feminism or Israelite marriage practices, we shouldn't
expect
him to be
able to spell "Steinem" correctly.
===>You are so correct!
Thanks, coming from you, for the nice compliment. You can
spell
Steinem,
I can read Isaiah 34:14 without inventing Lillith out of thin
air.
===>No, you cant.
It is your head that is full of "thin air".
Reading the KJV is NOT reading Isaiah.
Never said it was, that is why I asked what Hebrew word are you
translating as Lillith?
Not even reading the best translation.
E.g., here is a more accyrate translation of
Isaiah 34:14
"And there shall the beasts of the desert meet with the jackals,
and the wild goat shall cry to his fellow;
the lilith also shall settle there,
and find for herself a place of rest."
(Darby Version).
Good. BTW, reading Darby is NOT reading Isaiah. But good old
Darby
doesn't say that lilith is another name for Eve.
===>NO ONE has ever said that.
Where do you come up with those doozies?
Adam called her woman,
God changed her name to Eve. No where is there an indication that
the
lilith is a reference to Eve.
===>And no one ever said there was or it is.
You brought lillith up, not me. Jessica affirmed what you said about
Lillith as a reference to Eve, but not from Scripture.
the subject of Isaiah is the day of the
Lord's vengeance for the controversy of Zion, it is not the Garden
of
Eden.
===>Your mind is narrower than the famous camel gate of Jesus.
One always knows that he has found something when his adversary stops
discussing the issues and begins to make false witnesses against the
person.
Lillith is regarded as a name of a female goddess known as a night
demon
who haunts the desolate places of Edom or possibly a a nocturnal
animal
that inhabits desolate places such as, butnot limited to, a screech
owl.
The invention of a reference to Eve came about in Germany, many
centuries
later than any previous rendering. Are you saying that Eve is a
night
demon who haunts the desolate places of Edom?
===>NO ONE has ever said that.
Hmmmm, actually a lot of people have.
===>WRONG!
Some say that about LILITH,
but no one says that about EVE!
|
IOW, the whole Lilith thing was irrelevant to Eve, so why was it ever
brought up? BTW Reading Darby is still not reading Isaiah.
| Quote: |
Edom and Eden are not the
same place, nor is there any reference to Eve in Edom.
===>Irrelevant nonsense. -- L.
So is the subject of Lillith you raised.
===>You lie or are mistaken.
I did not raise the subject, only confirmed the existence of
Lilith in the canonical Bible. -- L.
WE thank you for confirming the existence, we disagree as to your
representations.
===>More lies/erroneous statements.
I made no "representations" re. Lilith.
But YOU did make FALSE representations about some people's
ideas re. EVE. -- L.
|
MOre lies/erroneous statements? Exactly what FALSE representations
about some people's ideas re. EVE did I make? |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Libertarius
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2003 2:43 am Post subject: Re: Adam and Eve |
|
|
Michael Burt wrote:
| Quote: | In article <3F56221A.E9A365DC@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
Michael Burt wrote:
In article <3F44F3C8.58AA3E31@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
Michael wrote:
In article <3F395650.ADBDABC8@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>, Libertarius
Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
Michael wrote:
In article <3F390C24.588BD8AC@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius
Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
Michael wrote:
In article <3F384ED8.F78A9D88@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius
Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
"Jessica L. Price" wrote:
"Libertarius" <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote
in
message
news:3F3813F8.8877329B@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net...
|
|
| Michael wrote:
|
| > In article
| > <ulv9jvglj600ihabojrdklhkack6rp6b39@4ax.com>,
| > Don
| > <calldonREMOVE@earthlink.net> wrote:
|
| > > On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 01:50:16 -0500, "Robert Gau"
robertgau@ev1.net
| > > wrote:
|
| > > >I think the idea (and I might be acting quite
idealistic here) is
that
| > > >sex is SO amazing and beautiful that it should only
| > > >be
| > > >shared
between
| > > >two people who share insurmountable love.
|
| > > BUZZ! WRONG!
|
| > > The BIBLICAL MARRIAGE was an arranged marriage and
| > > had
nothing to do
| > > with "insurmountable love." In fact, it had nothing
| > > to
| > > do
with love
| > > at all. It was a contract between two families.
| > > Women
| > > were
treated
| > > as chattel, as property.
|
| > BUZZ! WRONG! Sounds like the religiou feminist
| > mythology
of Gloria
| > Steinman.
|
| ===>Who on earth is "Gloria Steinman"???
I think, that since this man has proven he knows nothing
about
either
feminism or Israelite marriage practices, we shouldn't
expect
him to be
able to spell "Steinem" correctly.
===>You are so correct!
Thanks, coming from you, for the nice compliment. You can
spell
Steinem,
I can read Isaiah 34:14 without inventing Lillith out of thin
air.
===>No, you cant.
It is your head that is full of "thin air".
Reading the KJV is NOT reading Isaiah.
Never said it was, that is why I asked what Hebrew word are you
translating as Lillith?
Not even reading the best translation.
E.g., here is a more accyrate translation of
Isaiah 34:14
"And there shall the beasts of the desert meet with the jackals,
and the wild goat shall cry to his fellow;
the lilith also shall settle there,
and find for herself a place of rest."
(Darby Version).
Good. BTW, reading Darby is NOT reading Isaiah. But good old
Darby
doesn't say that lilith is another name for Eve.
===>NO ONE has ever said that.
Where do you come up with those doozies?
Adam called her woman,
God changed her name to Eve. No where is there an indication that
the
lilith is a reference to Eve.
===>And no one ever said there was or it is.
You brought lillith up, not me. Jessica affirmed what you said about
Lillith as a reference to Eve, but not from Scripture.
the subject of Isaiah is the day of the
Lord's vengeance for the controversy of Zion, it is not the Garden
of
Eden.
===>Your mind is narrower than the famous camel gate of Jesus.
One always knows that he has found something when his adversary stops
discussing the issues and begins to make false witnesses against the
person.
Lillith is regarded as a name of a female goddess known as a night
demon
who haunts the desolate places of Edom or possibly a a nocturnal
animal
that inhabits desolate places such as, butnot limited to, a screech
owl.
The invention of a reference to Eve came about in Germany, many
centuries
later than any previous rendering. Are you saying that Eve is a
night
demon who haunts the desolate places of Edom?
===>NO ONE has ever said that.
Hmmmm, actually a lot of people have.
===>WRONG!
Some say that about LILITH,
but no one says that about EVE!
IOW, the whole Lilith thing was irrelevant to Eve, so why was it ever
brought up? BTW Reading Darby is still not reading Isaiah.
Edom and Eden are not the
same place, nor is there any reference to Eve in Edom.
===>Irrelevant nonsense. -- L.
So is the subject of Lillith you raised.
===>You lie or are mistaken.
I did not raise the subject, only confirmed the existence of
Lilith in the canonical Bible. -- L.
WE thank you for confirming the existence, we disagree as to your
representations.
===>More lies/erroneous statements.
I made no "representations" re. Lilith.
But YOU did make FALSE representations about some people's
ideas re. EVE. -- L.
MOre lies/erroneous statements?
|
===>You said I raised the subject of Lilith and made certain
"representations".
| Quote: | Exactly what FALSE representations
about some people's ideas re. EVE did I make?
|
SEE ABOVE:
* Are you saying that Eve is a night demon who haunts the desolate places of
Edom?
===>NO ONE has ever said that.
* Hmmmm, actually a lot of people have.
So, you see, it is there.
Libertarius
=========== |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Michael Burt
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2003 2:53 am Post subject: Re: Adam and Eve |
|
|
In article <3F56608D.CD8341B2@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
| Quote: | Michael Burt wrote:
In article <3F56221A.E9A365DC@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
Michael Burt wrote:
In article <3F44F3C8.58AA3E31@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
Michael wrote:
In article <3F395650.ADBDABC8@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius
Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
Michael wrote:
In article <3F390C24.588BD8AC@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius
Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
Michael wrote:
In article <3F384ED8.F78A9D88@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius
Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
"Jessica L. Price" wrote:
"Libertarius" <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net
wrote
in
message
news:3F3813F8.8877329B@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net...
|
|
| Michael wrote:
|
| > In article
| > <ulv9jvglj600ihabojrdklhkack6rp6b39@4ax.com>,
| > Don
| > <calldonREMOVE@earthlink.net> wrote:
|
| > > On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 01:50:16 -0500, "Robert Gau"
robertgau@ev1.net
| > > wrote:
|
| > > >I think the idea (and I might be acting quite
idealistic here) is
that
| > > >sex is SO amazing and beautiful that it should
| > > >only
| > > >be
| > > >shared
between
| > > >two people who share insurmountable love.
|
| > > BUZZ! WRONG!
|
| > > The BIBLICAL MARRIAGE was an arranged marriage
| > > and
| > > had
nothing to do
| > > with "insurmountable love." In fact, it had
| > > nothing
| > > to
| > > do
with love
| > > at all. It was a contract between two families.
| > > Women
| > > were
treated
| > > as chattel, as property.
|
| > BUZZ! WRONG! Sounds like the religiou feminist
| > mythology
of Gloria
| > Steinman.
|
| ===>Who on earth is "Gloria Steinman"???
I think, that since this man has proven he knows
nothing
about
either
feminism or Israelite marriage practices, we shouldn't
expect
him to be
able to spell "Steinem" correctly.
===>You are so correct!
Thanks, coming from you, for the nice compliment. You can
spell
Steinem,
I can read Isaiah 34:14 without inventing Lillith out of
thin
air.
===>No, you cant.
It is your head that is full of "thin air".
Reading the KJV is NOT reading Isaiah.
Never said it was, that is why I asked what Hebrew word are you
translating as Lillith?
Not even reading the best translation.
E.g., here is a more accyrate translation of
Isaiah 34:14
"And there shall the beasts of the desert meet with the
jackals,
and the wild goat shall cry to his fellow;
the lilith also shall settle there,
and find for herself a place of rest."
(Darby Version).
Good. BTW, reading Darby is NOT reading Isaiah. But good
old
Darby
doesn't say that lilith is another name for Eve.
===>NO ONE has ever said that.
Where do you come up with those doozies?
Adam called her woman,
God changed her name to Eve. No where is there an indication
that
the
lilith is a reference to Eve.
===>And no one ever said there was or it is.
You brought lillith up, not me. Jessica affirmed what you said
about
Lillith as a reference to Eve, but not from Scripture.
the subject of Isaiah is the day of the
Lord's vengeance for the controversy of Zion, it is not the
Garden
of
Eden.
===>Your mind is narrower than the famous camel gate of Jesus.
One always knows that he has found something when his adversary
stops
discussing the issues and begins to make false witnesses against
the
person.
Lillith is regarded as a name of a female goddess known as a
night
demon
who haunts the desolate places of Edom or possibly a a
nocturnal
animal
that inhabits desolate places such as, butnot limited to, a
screech
owl.
The invention of a reference to Eve came about in Germany, many
centuries
later than any previous rendering. Are you saying that Eve is
a
night
demon who haunts the desolate places of Edom?
===>NO ONE has ever said that.
Hmmmm, actually a lot of people have.
===>WRONG!
Some say that about LILITH,
but no one says that about EVE!
IOW, the whole Lilith thing was irrelevant to Eve, so why was it ever
brought up? BTW Reading Darby is still not reading Isaiah.
Edom and Eden are not the
same place, nor is there any reference to Eve in Edom.
===>Irrelevant nonsense. -- L.
So is the subject of Lillith you raised.
===>You lie or are mistaken.
I did not raise the subject, only confirmed the existence of
Lilith in the canonical Bible. -- L.
WE thank you for confirming the existence, we disagree as to your
representations.
===>More lies/erroneous statements.
I made no "representations" re. Lilith.
But YOU did make FALSE representations about some people's
ideas re. EVE. -- L.
MOre lies/erroneous statements?
===>You said I raised the subject of Lilith and made certain
"representations".
Exactly what FALSE representations
about some people's ideas re. EVE did I make?
SEE ABOVE:
* Are you saying that Eve is a night demon who haunts the desolate
places of
Edom?
===>NO ONE has ever said that.
* Hmmmm, actually a lot of people have.
So, you see, it is there.
Libertarius
|
Hmmm, actually, it was you that said Lilith was Eve, not me. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Libertarius
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2003 3:02 am Post subject: Re: Adam and Eve |
|
|
Michael Burt wrote:
| Quote: | In article <3F56608D.CD8341B2@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
Michael Burt wrote:
In article <3F56221A.E9A365DC@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
Michael Burt wrote:
In article <3F44F3C8.58AA3E31@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
Michael wrote:
In article <3F395650.ADBDABC8@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius
Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
Michael wrote:
In article <3F390C24.588BD8AC@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius
Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
Michael wrote:
In article <3F384ED8.F78A9D88@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius
Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
"Jessica L. Price" wrote:
"Libertarius" <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net
wrote
in
message
news:3F3813F8.8877329B@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net...
|
|
| Michael wrote:
|
| > In article
| > <ulv9jvglj600ihabojrdklhkack6rp6b39@4ax.com>,
| > Don
| > <calldonREMOVE@earthlink.net> wrote:
|
| > > On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 01:50:16 -0500, "Robert Gau"
robertgau@ev1.net
| > > wrote:
|
| > > >I think the idea (and I might be acting quite
idealistic here) is
that
| > > >sex is SO amazing and beautiful that it should
| > > >only
| > > >be
| > > >shared
between
| > > >two people who share insurmountable love.
|
| > > BUZZ! WRONG!
|
| > > The BIBLICAL MARRIAGE was an arranged marriage
| > > and
| > > had
nothing to do
| > > with "insurmountable love." In fact, it had
| > > nothing
| > > to
| > > do
with love
| > > at all. It was a contract between two families.
| > > Women
| > > were
treated
| > > as chattel, as property.
|
| > BUZZ! WRONG! Sounds like the religiou feminist
| > mythology
of Gloria
| > Steinman.
|
| ===>Who on earth is "Gloria Steinman"???
I think, that since this man has proven he knows
nothing
about
either
feminism or Israelite marriage practices, we shouldn't
expect
him to be
able to spell "Steinem" correctly.
===>You are so correct!
Thanks, coming from you, for the nice compliment. You can
spell
Steinem,
I can read Isaiah 34:14 without inventing Lillith out of
thin
air.
===>No, you cant.
It is your head that is full of "thin air".
Reading the KJV is NOT reading Isaiah.
Never said it was, that is why I asked what Hebrew word are you
translating as Lillith?
Not even reading the best translation.
E.g., here is a more accyrate translation of
Isaiah 34:14
"And there shall the beasts of the desert meet with the
jackals,
and the wild goat shall cry to his fellow;
the lilith also shall settle there,
and find for herself a place of rest."
(Darby Version).
Good. BTW, reading Darby is NOT reading Isaiah. But good
old
Darby
doesn't say that lilith is another name for Eve.
===>NO ONE has ever said that.
Where do you come up with those doozies?
Adam called her woman,
God changed her name to Eve. No where is there an indication
that
the
lilith is a reference to Eve.
===>And no one ever said there was or it is.
You brought lillith up, not me. Jessica affirmed what you said
about
Lillith as a reference to Eve, but not from Scripture.
the subject of Isaiah is the day of the
Lord's vengeance for the controversy of Zion, it is not the
Garden
of
Eden.
===>Your mind is narrower than the famous camel gate of Jesus.
One always knows that he has found something when his adversary
stops
discussing the issues and begins to make false witnesses against
the
person.
Lillith is regarded as a name of a female goddess known as a
night
demon
who haunts the desolate places of Edom or possibly a a
nocturnal
animal
that inhabits desolate places such as, butnot limited to, a
screech
owl.
The invention of a reference to Eve came about in Germany, many
centuries
later than any previous rendering. Are you saying that Eve is
a
night
demon who haunts the desolate places of Edom?
===>NO ONE has ever said that.
Hmmmm, actually a lot of people have.
===>WRONG!
Some say that about LILITH,
but no one says that about EVE!
IOW, the whole Lilith thing was irrelevant to Eve, so why was it ever
brought up? BTW Reading Darby is still not reading Isaiah.
Edom and Eden are not the
same place, nor is there any reference to Eve in Edom.
===>Irrelevant nonsense. -- L.
So is the subject of Lillith you raised.
===>You lie or are mistaken.
I did not raise the subject, only confirmed the existence of
Lilith in the canonical Bible. -- L.
WE thank you for confirming the existence, we disagree as to your
representations.
===>More lies/erroneous statements.
I made no "representations" re. Lilith.
But YOU did make FALSE representations about some people's
ideas re. EVE. -- L.
MOre lies/erroneous statements?
===>You said I raised the subject of Lilith and made certain
"representations".
Exactly what FALSE representations
about some people's ideas re. EVE did I make?
SEE ABOVE:
* Are you saying that Eve is a night demon who haunts the desolate
places of
Edom?
===>NO ONE has ever said that.
* Hmmmm, actually a lot of people have.
So, you see, it is there.
Libertarius
Hmmm, actually, it was you that said Lilith was Eve, not me.
|
===>That is asinine.
I never said such a stupid thing.
Stop lying. -- L. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Michael Burt
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2003 6:14 pm Post subject: Re: Adam and Eve |
|
|
In article <3F5664DA.29B3716E@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
| Quote: | Michael Burt wrote:
In article <3F56608D.CD8341B2@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
Michael Burt wrote:
In article <3F56221A.E9A365DC@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
Michael Burt wrote:
In article <3F44F3C8.58AA3E31@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
Michael wrote:
In article <3F395650.ADBDABC8@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius
Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
Michael wrote:
In article <3F390C24.588BD8AC@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius
Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
Michael wrote:
In article
3F384ED8.F78A9D88@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>,
Libertarius
Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote:
"Jessica L. Price" wrote:
"Libertarius"
Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net
wrote
in
message
news:3F3813F8.8877329B@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net...
|
|
| Michael wrote:
|
| > In article
| > <ulv9jvglj600ihabojrdklhkack6rp6b39@4ax.com>,
| > Don
| > <calldonREMOVE@earthlink.net> wrote:
|
| > > On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 01:50:16 -0500, "Robert
| > > Gau"
robertgau@ev1.net
| > > wrote:
|
| > > >I think the idea (and I might be acting
| > > quite
idealistic here) is
that
| > > >sex is SO amazing and beautiful that it
| > > should
| > > >only
| > > >be
| > > >shared
between
| > > >two people who share insurmountable love.
|
| > > BUZZ! WRONG!
|
| > > The BIBLICAL MARRIAGE was an arranged
| > > marriage
| > > and
| > > had
nothing to do
| > > with "insurmountable love." In fact, it had
| > > nothing
| > > to
| > > do
with love
| > > at all. It was a contract between two
| > > families.
| > > Women
| > > were
treated
| > > as chattel, as property.
|
| > BUZZ! WRONG! Sounds like the religiou feminist
| > mythology
of Gloria
| > Steinman.
|
| ===>Who on earth is "Gloria Steinman"???
I think, that since this man has proven he knows
nothing
about
either
feminism or Israelite marriage practices, we
shouldn't
expect
him to be
able to spell "Steinem" correctly.
===>You are so correct!
Thanks, coming from you, for the nice compliment. You
can
spell
Steinem,
I can read Isaiah 34:14 without inventing Lillith out
of
thin
air.
===>No, you cant.
It is your head that is full of "thin air".
Reading the KJV is NOT reading Isaiah.
Never said it was, that is why I asked what Hebrew word are
you
translating as Lillith?
Not even reading the best translation.
E.g., here is a more accyrate translation of
Isaiah 34:14
"And there shall the beasts of the desert meet with the
jackals,
and the wild goat shall cry to his fellow;
the lilith also shall settle there,
and find for herself a place of rest."
(Darby Version).
Good. BTW, reading Darby is NOT reading Isaiah. But
good
old
Darby
doesn't say that lilith is another name for Eve.
===>NO ONE has ever said that.
Where do you come up with those doozies?
Adam called her woman,
God changed her name to Eve. No where is there an
indication
that
the
lilith is a reference to Eve.
===>And no one ever said there was or it is.
You brought lillith up, not me. Jessica affirmed what you said
about
Lillith as a reference to Eve, but not from Scripture.
the subject of Isaiah is the day of the
Lord's vengeance for the controversy of Zion, it is not the
Garden
of
Eden.
===>Your mind is narrower than the famous camel gate of
Jesus.
One always knows that he has found something when his adversary
stops
discussing the issues and begins to make false witnesses
against
the
person.
Lillith is regarded as a name of a female goddess known as
a
night
demon
who haunts the desolate places of Edom or possibly a a
nocturnal
animal
that inhabits desolate places such as, butnot limited to, a
screech
owl.
The invention of a reference to Eve came about in Germany,
many
centuries
later than any previous rendering. Are you saying that Eve
is
a
night
demon who haunts the desolate places of Edom?
===>NO ONE has ever said that.
Hmmmm, actually a lot of people have.
===>WRONG!
Some say that about LILITH,
but no one says that about EVE!
IOW, the whole Lilith thing was irrelevant to Eve, so why was it ever
brought up? BTW Reading Darby is still not reading Isaiah.
Edom and Eden are not the
same place, nor is there any reference to Eve in Edom.
===>Irrelevant nonsense. -- L.
So is the subject of Lillith you raised.
===>You lie or are mistaken.
I did not raise the subject, only confirmed the existence of
Lilith in the canonical Bible. -- L.
WE thank you for confirming the existence, we disagree as to your
representations.
===>More lies/erroneous statements.
I made no "representations" re. Lilith.
But YOU did make FALSE representations about some people's
ideas re. EVE. -- L.
MOre lies/erroneous statements?
===>You said I raised the subject of Lilith and made certain
"representations".
Exactly what FALSE representations
about some people's ideas re. EVE did I make?
SEE ABOVE:
* Are you saying that Eve is a night demon who haunts the desolate
places of
Edom?
===>NO ONE has ever said that.
* Hmmmm, actually a lot of people have.
So, you see, it is there.
Libertarius
Hmmm, actually, it was you that said Lilith was Eve, not me.
===>That is asinine.
I never said such a stupid thing.
Stop lying. -- L.
|
Check your archive. We were talking about Eve, you brought up Lilith. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
