Eve Evil

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

kennethamy
 
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 12:20 am
@Deckard,
Deckard;142457 wrote:
Actually I'm being very facetious. Lilith was a legend made up by scared old men who demonized female sexuality. Eve and the serpent less so but still very much so.



How would you know such a thing?
 
Marat phil
 
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 12:35 am
@sometime sun,
The tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Not only evil. Good knowledge. Fall of Man - is a division of people on good and evil. Niezche it was right denying good and evil. But it is not right, denying God.

---------- Post added 03-24-2010 at 01:40 AM ----------

Eve was innocent. But as innocence is weakness, it has given in to a temptation. Then there was a first EXPERIENCE which becomes powerful force of a civilisation and the weapon against the Devil.
 
Deckard
 
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 12:48 am
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;142832 wrote:
How would you know such a thing?

That's the only reason I would make up such a thing. I suppose they wouldn't have to be old, but the fear is more probable. Assuming Lilith is a myth, what other reason would you give? If you believe the story of Lilith is infallible truth well I suppose the discussion ends there.
 
kennethamy
 
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 12:50 am
@Deckard,
Deckard;142841 wrote:
That's the only reason I would make up such a thing. I suppose they wouldn't have to be old, but the fear is more probable.


I wonder how you would know even that. It doesn't even strike me as the most probable speculation, even if it makes sense to speculate here.
 
Pepijn Sweep
 
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 12:52 am
@HexHammer,
HexHammer;142501 wrote:
You misunderstand the term "group think" it's a psycology term which makes us react upon thing which a group of people will subconsiously decide for you, read up upon it, it will help you understand alot of things. It will deliver you from ignorence.


[CENTER]:bigsmile:
I do not like groep think. Are we not differt from birds or fish Hex ? I am proud 'bout my ID of self, even the flaws are part of my personality.

I see groups as good, but want little part of it. I have been a group-y; clubs, DJ's, fashion and a Yuppie too... Lost of fun / not constructing. Secretly I kept my Eye 3 Open.

Kindness to Welff's
Pepijn Sweep
:detective:
[/CENTER]
 
Deckard
 
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 12:53 am
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;142842 wrote:
I wonder how you would know even that. It doesn't even strike me as the most probable speculation, even if it makes sense to speculate here.

What's a more acceptable speculation then? What are you getting at? What are you trying to say?
 
Pepijn Sweep
 
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 01:03 am
@Pepijn Sweep,
[CENTER]:bigsmile:
I-gnorance is becoming a luxery item any-time. It's hard to be not in*normed.
My problem is simple: I can not distinguish between true and false information received or send by me. We all make mistakes. Would a group correct it's Leader ? Would SHe loose it's Position ?

I saw groups work. Efficient but not creative. It is like LAN-connecting PC's and a Mac and expecting a QuantuCo to appear, as by fuzzy Magic.

I do not think we need Computers making mistakes; un-certainties are not failures in Calculus, but in the limited parameters we use. I do not see the need 4 a NewQracle. Not as a computer any-way !

Pepijn Sweep's Awake:lol:
[/CENTER]
 
HexHammer
 
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 01:09 am
@Deckard,
Deckard;142478 wrote:
Wasn't much of a group at that moment; it was either Adam and Eve or Sepent and Eve.


Deckard;142817 wrote:
I did not misunderstand. I know what group think is. I guess you were using the term to refer to people who assume that Adam was good and the serpent was evil rather than as something that influenced Eve's decision. I was interpreting while you were meta-interpreting. Personally, I think my interpretation of the Garden of Eden story is quite nuanced and creative and hardly the product of group think. In any case, I am not ignorant, at least not on that count.

It seems like you've gone on the attack or maybe that's just the way you always post. Did I offend you somehow?
Just thought that your former statemen didn't reflect the knowledge of "group think" and I was clumbsy in my way of trying to help you gaining that knowledge, I will be more careful how I put it in the future.
 
kennethamy
 
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 01:12 am
@Deckard,
Deckard;142844 wrote:
What's a more acceptable speculation then? What are you getting at? What are you trying to say?


Only that this is exceedingly speculative (psychoanalysis from a distance of many centuries). It does not seem to me to be something anyone should pronounce on with much (or any) confidence.
 
Deckard
 
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 01:45 am
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;142856 wrote:
Only that this is exceedingly speculative (psychoanalysis from a distance of many centuries). It does not seem to me to be something anyone should pronounce on with much (or any) confidence.

Well, yes, I question psychoanalysis regardless of distance. The author is dead and I speak as a reader but the reader, if he dares say anything at all, cannot help but speculate as to the author's motives. Perhaps it is best to not speak ill, or for that matter good, of the dead. If we speak at all about these fables we must reconstruct the fables and also their authors (with some bracketing) in our own time and in our own terms as if they were written today. Why would the story of Lilith be told if it were told today? It is this question that I was actually proposing an answer to. As for the long dead inventors of the Lilith story I can speak with even less certainty but what does the story mean to us today and what sort of reader would consider it to hold some kernel of truth? These readers who take the story to hold some kernel of truth: they are the authors I really speak of for to repeat in that voice, the voice that claims the text has authority, is also to be an author and thus to die (so to speak) so that one may be read. I was responding to hypothetical living modern authors restating the story of the real ancient and dead authors.

Towards a bridge, perhaps a corpus callosum: I find this sort of analysis of a fable terribly interesting; perhaps to the same degree as you find the analyzing a particular linguistic anomalie interesting. And after I write, I can only look back on the words of my now dead hand with living eyes and wonder what I meant though in this case I have infinitely more knowledge than I have of those ancient authors of the fable of Lilith.
 
Pepijn Sweep
 
Reply Wed 24 Mar, 2010 01:46 am
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;142856 wrote:
Only that this is exceedingly speculative (psychoanalysis from a distance of many centuries). It does not seem to me to be something anyone should pronounce on with much (or any) confidence.


[CENTER]:bigsmile:[/CENTER]
 
sometime sun
 
Reply Sat 17 Apr, 2010 02:26 pm
@Deckard,
I completely forgot about this thread
I thought i heard somewhere eve was adams third wife.
The second if i remember correctly was made of the wind,
and she had no name?
And she became so depressed she disapeared for ever or rejoined the wind.
Not sure but will look for it.
 
 

 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/20/2019 at 11:26:44