Do Christians and muslims worship the same God?

[Tonguez]

I was under the impression that the Apocrypha was more of a Catholic thing, and that early Christian leaders basically edited out parts from the Jewish texts that they didn't agree with, like Adam having multiple wives. And I'm not worried at all about Lilith appearing in a "Christianized" text, .

Lutherans and KJV Anglicans also include the Apocryphal Books as Intertestament Books, they are not considered canon but they are books by godly men and thus recommended reading. They include the Maaccabees and various legends and do make for interesting reads

the word lilith is actually first mention in Isaiah as part of a list of animals and is thought to have referred to a type pf owl (whose screech sounded like that of a woman). The word was also used to refer to a female monster or demon and in this way eventually worked its way into being the first disobedient harridan wife of Adam

 

[Kramodlog]

it amuses me that the Bible avoids thoughts of incest here and yet explicitly includes it in the story of Lot. Then again perhaps the biblical account acknowledges that Adam and eve were the first Cro-Magnons and that the people in the Land of Nod were neanderthals (and thus not truely humans) that would explain why Adam and Eve were special but Seth was able to find a wife.

I think its stated that Abel had some kids (with whom?) before he was killed. So Seth could have used his nieces to make babies. Alabama is like Eden.

But maybe we're paying too much attention to this and do not understand the original function of the book of Genesis. There is evidence that shows that early Hebrews were possibly polytheist or monolatrist. There is a book on Hebrew goddesses. The story of Yahweh, Lucifer, Adam, Eve, Lilith, Cain, Abel and Seth, might just be stories designed to consolidate minor divinities worshipped by different tribes or cities. The stories of the bible were conceived in at a time when cities had there own divinity and unity was reach by manipulating divine ancestry. For example, the Egyptian deity Ra was fused with Amun to become Amun-Ra because of political reasons. The book of Genesis says Adam was created in the image of Yahweh. Maybe Adam was originally a divinity different from Yahweh and the Genesis story makes them sort of one and the same, and unity between two cities made possible. Eve could just have been a deity who was the wife of Yahweh, Abel and Cain divinities that need to have ancestry from Adam/Yahweh.

There is so much context missing from the stories in the bible, that focusing on modern concerns like incest might just miss the point. The story of the Tower of Babel is about a tower that reached heaven. Sumerians built ziggurats with what might have been astrological signs (heaven) on them. The Babel story could just be about proscribing astrology, like Abraham and Isaac's story is just about forbidding child sacrifice in a region where it was the norm.

 

[The_Silversword]

I think its stated that Abel had some kids (with whom?) before he was killed. So Seth could have used his nieces to make babies. Alabama is like Eden.

But maybe we're paying too much attention to this and do not understand the original function of the book of Genesis. There is evidence that shows that early Hebrews were possibly polytheist or monolatrist. There is a book on Hebrew goddesses. The story of Yahweh, Lucifer, Adam, Eve, Lilith, Cain, Abel and Seth, might just be stories designed to consolidate minor divinities worshipped by different tribes or cities. The stories of the bible were conceived in at a time when cities had there own divinity and unity was reach by manipulating divine ancestry. For example, the Egyptian deity Ra was fused with Amun to become Amun-Ra because of political reasons. The book of Genesis says Adam was created in the image of Yahweh. Maybe Adam was originally a divinity different from Yahweh and the Genesis story makes them sort of one and the same, and unity between two cities made possible. Eve could just have been a deity who was the wife of Yahweh, Abel and Cain divinities that need to have ancestry from Adam/Yahweh.

There is so much context missing from the stories in the bible, that focusing on modern concerns like incest might just miss the point. The story of the Tower of Babel is about a tower that reached heaven. Sumerians built ziggurats with what might have been astrological signs (heaven) on them. The Babel story could just be about proscribing astrology, like Abraham and Isaac's story is just about forbidding child sacrifice in a region where it was the norm.

That...that actually makes sense.

 

[The_Silversword]

Lutherans and KJV Anglicans also include the Apocryphal Books as Intertestament Books, they are not considered canon but they are books by godly men and thus recommended reading. They include the Maaccabees and various legends and do make for interesting reads

the word lilith is actually first mention in Isaiah as part of a list of animals and is thought to have referred to a type pf owl (whose screech sounded like that of a woman). The word was also used to refer to a female monster or demon and in this way eventually worked its way into being the first disobedient harridan wife of Adam

Interesting stuff, to be perfectly honest I first heard of Lilith through Sandman comics, the cool things you learn from comic books!

 

[Staffan]

the word lilith is actually first mention in Isaiah as part of a list of animals and is thought to have referred to a type pf owl (whose screech sounded like that of a woman).

Huh. So that's why Lilith in the Exalted RPG is a Lunar with an owl as her totem.

 

[Umbran]

But anyways, I was just sticking to "Christian" texts cause I thought thats what the conversation was focusing on, and most Christians seem to hate it when you bring up stuff from other religions, like Judaism, cause Jesus is the New Law and Christians can ignore all that Old Testament stuff and eat bacon.

Well, the thread is about all three, and the basic story is common to all of them, so I don't see a real reason to exclude any, especially because even among those who call themselves Christian, there are differences in the canon.

 

[Umbran]

But maybe we're paying too much attention to this and do not understand the original function of the book of Genesis.

The original function, and the function(s) when it came to be canon for each Abrahamic religion in turn, and the function when each revised its canon, and its function today, are all likely to be different things. The question is which of these things do we care about.

There is so much context missing from the stories in the bible, that focusing on modern concerns like incest might just miss the point.

A writing teacher of mine once said that there are (at least) three copies of any text - what the author intended, what the author put on the page, and what the audience came to understand. "The point" seems to be focused on the intent of some people a few thousand years ago, in a different culture.

This is of some interest - kind of like discussing what "Henry V" meant to people in Shakespeare's age. But, that has little relevance when considering the impact on people who see it today, most of whom are not so steeped in the history to have that in mind. They consider the St. Crispin's Day speech from teh point of view of a modern person, familiar with a different history.

 

[Kramodlog]

The question is which of these things do we care about.

Obviously, what "we've" been caring about for centuries is interpreting those texts so they say what "we" want them to say. Original meaning be damned.

 

[Bedrockgames]

The original function, and the function(s) when it came to be canon for each Abrahamic religion in turn, and the function when each revised its canon, and its function today, are all likely to be different things. The question is which of these things do we care about.



A writing teacher of mine once said that there are (at least) three copies of any text - what the author intended, what the author put on the page, and what the audience came to understand. "The point" seems to be focused on the intent of some people a few thousand years ago, in a different culture.

This is of some interest - kind of like discussing what "Henry V" meant to people in Shakespeare's age. But, that has little relevance when considering the impact on people who see it today, most of whom are not so steeped in the history to have that in mind. They consider the St. Crispin's Day speech from teh point of view of a modern person, familiar with a different history.

I think there is a big difference though when you are talking about text intended to entertain or engage our imagination, versus texts purporting to make claims about reality or being presented as accounts of the past. Then I think it becomes important to understand its origins, its intentions and its flaws. We shouldn't just accept the opinions of believers regarding the text.

 

[Homicidal_Squirrel]

So back to the original topic. Looks like Wheaton is going to fire the professor that dared say Christians and Muslims worship the same god. I'm just surprised it took them this long to do it.