Lilith

[Danik 2016]

Here some more information about this translation:
https://www.biblegateway.com/version...d-NRSVA-Bible/
More important than that, the existence of woman priests in a Christian church shows how things are changing in this domain.
But I have an language question, Jonathan.Is "wisdom" a feminine word in English? Else how could one know that this figure is feminine?
The point I want to make is that there are several traditions and several authors that engendered the myth of creation of man and that most of the earlier traditions were indeed male centred. That has to do IMO with the positions men and women occupied in their communities.

[Jackson Richardson]

In English there is no grammatical gender at all, so wisdom as a word is neuter. * I imagine that in Hebrew wisdom is feminine and in the Proverbs passage is certainly referred to as "she".

The New Revised Standard Version translation was a revision of the Revised Standard Version mainly to take account of inclusive language. "Brothers" in Paul's letters is translated as "brothers and sisters". "Man" in the quote I gave from Genesis 1 is translated as "humankind".

[Jackson Richardson]

A good case could be made that the very first image for God in the Bible is a female one. It comes in the very first verse of that priestly account in Genesis 1.

The usual translation is along the lines of “And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.” (King James, Authorised Version) But there is a suggestion that the words “moved upon” can mean “brooded”. In other words the Spirit of God is compared to a mother bird on her nest.

Here’s two very different takes on that idea.

In The Message, modern street wise Biblical paraphrase we have

First this: God created the Heavens and Earth—all you see, all you don’t see. Earth was a soup of nothingness, a bottomless emptiness, an inky blackness. God’s Spirit brooded like a bird above the watery abyss

And at the start of Paradise Lost, Milton invokes the Holy Spirit

And chiefly thou Oh spirit, that dost prefer
Before all temples the upright heart and pure,
Instruct me, for thou knowest; thou from the first
Wast present, and with mighty wings outspread
Dove-like satst brooding on the vast abyss
And mad'st it pregnant:

[Ecurb]

In many species, male birds brood (sit on the eggs). Gerard Manly Hopkins chips in on God's propensity for brooding:

The world is charged with the grandeur of God.
It will flame out, like shining from shook foil;
It gathers to a greatness, like the ooze of oil
Crushed. Why do men then now not reck his rod?
Generations have trod, have trod, have trod;
And all is seared with trade; bleared, smeared with toil;
And wears man's smudge and shares man's smell: the soil
Is bare now, nor can foot feel, being shod.

And for all this, nature is never spent;
There lives the dearest freshness deep down things;
And though the last lights off the black West went
Oh, morning, at the brown brink eastward, springs —
Because the Holy Ghost over the bent
World broods with warm breast and with ah! bright wings.

[Danik 2016]

In English there is no grammatical gender at all, so wisdom as a word is neuter. * I imagine that in Hebrew wisdom is feminine and in the Proverbs passage is certainly referred to as "she".

The New Revised Standard Version translation was a revision of the Revised Standard Version mainly to take account of inclusive language. "Brothers" in Paul's letters is translated as "brothers and sisters". "Man" in the quote I gave from Genesis 1 is translated as "humankind".

Inclusive language sounds very up to date, Jonathan. One can notice how the interpretation shifts depending on which group it addresses and the respective positions of men and women in that group. Just for comparison, I don´t know anything about a similar inclusive movement in the Catholic Church yet.

[Danik 2016]

Jonathan and Ecurb,
I have still not learnt how to quote more than one text on the same page, so this answer goest to both.
The fact is that English has this interesting possibility of gender concealment represented by the article "the". I call it concealment and not neutrality because the gender lurks behind the article. But it leads to very literary and ideological results this shifting between genders in a way a language where gender is more marked can´t.
A brooding bird fathering/ mothering the world is a powerfull image!

[Jackson Richardson]

I hadn’t noticed the parallel image in Hopkins and Milton. Hopkins must have known Milton, but manages to sound Hopkins-y where Milton sounds Miltonic.

Milton was no proto feminist, given his three wives, and his Spirit manages to be both brooding, (which is a characteristic female activity) and making pregnant (which is a rather male thing to do).

But my point in quoting the verse was to suggest that even if Genesis 1 was written by men, it does not assume male superiority. The Spirit brooding is one possible example (although the translation is ambiguous) but the real clinch is Genesis 1.27 “So God created humankind in his own image, male and female he created them,” where the female is equally formed in God’s image.

[Calidore]

I have still not learnt how to quote more than one text on the same page

See the quote-+ button to the right of the reply with quote buttons? Click on that to check off each response that you want to reply to, and all will be quoted in your reply box.

[Danik 2016]

Thanks a lot Calidore!

[Danik 2016]

But my point in quoting the verse was to suggest that even if Genesis 1 was written by men, it does not assume male superiority. The Spirit brooding is one possible example (although the translation is ambiguous) but the real clinch is Genesis 1.27 “So God created humankind in his own image, male and female he created them,” where the female is equally formed in God’s image.

Yes, you are right. I looked up several on line Bibles in English and one in Portuguese and the texts are sometimes identical. This text is in fact equalitarian. There is a possibility that the text about Adam and Eve was written by a different author.
Take a look at these links:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/jepd_gen.htm
https://www.trueorigin.org/tablet.php

[Jackson Richardson]

That first link gives the standard academic view of the composition of the Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible). The second link looks very dubious fundamentalist protestant special pleading.

Individual authors are not that important in this case - the important thing is the text has been accepted as canonical by a community.

The general non-fundamentalist academic view would be there are two seperate creation accounts, one in Genesis 1 and one in Genesis 2.

Incidentally, when in holiday in Italy I once came across a Bible in my hotel bedroom. In the Italian translation there was a footnote to point out the creation accounts in Genesis were not to be taken as literal history or science. This footnote was with the authority of the Italian Conference of Bishops, whose head would be the Pope himself.

[Danik 2016]

I have read the Bible mostly in the catholical and the Lutheran version (my mother is Lutheran) but I never studied it from a religious point of view. I was not aware of these theories on authorship until I looked for it in internet.
You are right: more important than the issue of the authorship is what is accepted as canonical. As both narratives from Genesis are accepted one might say that the account shifts between an equalitarian and a more sexist version. As for the brooding bird maybe it is above gender diversity, as it is a primal, unified entity that engenders the more diferentiated and divided beings and forms of the universe.
I never studied the verses of the Bible but, when still at the university, I enroled in a course about the Old Testament offered by the Department of Hebrew.It verified the historical veracity of the facts stated in the OT. For example, was Abraham a historical character, where or how long did he live. What me impressed mostly was to learn that the prophecies where written down after they had been fulfilled. For me this was a revelation, Until then I had taken the Bible absolutely literally.

[mona amon]

I don't find the Old Testament all that misogynistic - well, except for the whole woman being a man's property to do with as he chooses thing, which pervades and transcends the Bible, and is the reflection of the attitudes of the time, and spills over into our own time (for me) every first Sunday of the month when we solemnly repeat in church the full ox and *** version of the ten commandments (the tenth commandment -"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ***, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.) I feel most of the modern sexist (and homophobic) attitudes of the Christian church come from the letters of Paul, so definitely a male author there. In all this Jesus stands out as a brightly shining contrast to the rest, treating women with perfect equality, never saying anything that could be construed as misogynistic, sexist, homophobic, or in any way intolerant, healing a woman of a gynecological ailment which would have made her perpetually unclean, and even fudging misogynistic Old Testament laws to benefit women.

Genesis 1 to 3 - I believe the theory that these stories evolved over the centuries and were passed on orally, so regardless of whether they were written down in their present form by a male author/authors, women surely had their say, and Adam and Eve turn out different, but pretty equal. Who was formed first seems an unimportant quibble as long as they were both formed in God's own image. After the fall they are given different dispensations - Eve is doomed to bear children with labour pains, and Adam to labour in the field and bring forth the fruit of the earth by the sweat of his brow - neither of them has it easy, neither is cursed more than the other. There's no getting away from the fact that God tells Eve that "your desire shall be to your husband, and he shall rule over you" - surely male author, but this is also softened by the fact that God is addressing Eve and not Adam, so it's more like a prediction ("that's what's gonna happen") rather than an order or permission to Adam to rule over his wife. Also, I see that God does not say anything about the woman's sin being greater because she sinned first. That too seems to come from Paul.

[Jackson Richardson]

That’s nice to hear, Mona. At least the ten commandments don’t stop you coveting another woman’s husband. (Sexist joke.)

Poor old Paul. He seems totally lacking in charm or any sense of humour, although his letters show us him trying to be diplomatic with congregations in difficult circumstances.

His regrettable comments on women were certainly not unique to him and are completely incidental to the most important part of his message, that God’s love, forgiveness and acceptance are irrespective of anything we have done to deserve them and are given as a free gift – grace.

And give Paul his due. He provides the verse that was cited over again in support of the ordination of women, Galatians 3.28 “There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus”. That is from the New International Version, the preferred translation for fundamentalist protestants.

[mona amon]

Oh I love Paul! I think he's a compelling and charismatic personality as well as a great writer and thinker, and some of his epistles are among my favourite books of the Bible. The depth of my fervor and admiration is probably because of my complete volte-face regarding him. I used to regard him as some sort of misogynistic prig, and then I actually read him, and the scales fell from my eyes! Got to disagree with you about his lack of charm - his charisma and love for Christ and his fellow men (and women!) pervades all his writings and is of course best shown in his soaring paean to love in 1 Corinthians 13, and the concept of grace is a beautiful one. I know my admiration for him was not exactly evident in my previous post so I don't blame you for sticking up for him.

The sexist stuff only makes me smile, but unfortunately so many seem to take it as true and binding for ever. "You are all one in Christ Jesus" is all very well, but what about his diktat that women should not teach or have authority over a man? The church I belong to (Church Of South India) has been ordinating women for some time now, but the Roman Catholic church and some other denominations are I think still in the middle ages on this issue.

See the quote-+ button to the right of the reply with quote buttons? Click on that to check off each response that you want to reply to, and all will be quoted in your reply box.

Thanks, Calidore! All these days I used to select all and copy, and then reply to the next post. You have made my life easier.