- Goddesses, Whores, Wives, and Slaves: Women in Classical Antiquity (1975) by Sarah B. Pomeroy

Just wrote "biblical mythology" in my essay am being offensive or could that be correct? Do I have to write theology even though it doesn't really fit? What's the proper terminology here? This is a very genuine question.

It depends on which part of the Bible you’re referring to. The Bible certainly contains myths, but it’s an anthology made up of a bunch of different genres including folk tales, fiction, mythology, letters, legal codes, poetry, history, apocalyptic literature, and philosophy.

Well I’m tracking a metaphor in a book where the character is compared a fallen angel, and I have to describe how the character then diverts from the biblical “mythology” about fallen angels. I’m not religious myself and this is a lot more technical than what I’ve been taught in class so I thought it best to ask?

Fallen angels aren't really a part of biblical mythology. They're part of Christian mythology and you see some similar concepts in some of the Second Temple period writings (e.g. I Enoch), but you won't actually find the concept in the Old or New Testaments; it's mostly the result of post-biblical interpretations by the Church Fathers and their successors.

Super basic and shallow theological question but I'm working in this Catholic school and they're playing this cartoon about Adam and Eve, a story we all know.

Anyway. How the fuck is it fair to punish Adam and Eve for disobeying God when they literally have no concept of evil. They don't understand deception-- that anything would lie for the sake of hurting them. The snake/devil/whatever acted upon them with willful evil intent, and they genuinely lack the ability to recognize that as a motivation. What the fuck.

Well, the basic answer, I think, is that even if Adam and Eve didn't know the snake was trying to hurt them, they did know that God told them not to eat of the fruit (Genesis 2:16-17). Adam and Eve could have trusted in God's wisdom and followed what He said, or they could have opted to disregard God in favor of the possibility of appropriating His wisdom on their own terms (Genesis 3:4-6). And they chose the latter. It was in the act of this disobedience that they learned the nature of evil; they felt shame. In that initial rift in the relationship between human being and God, the human beings realized their vulnerability, and they hid from Him. Fulton Sheen once said that "since the days of Adam, man has been hiding from God and saying, 'God is hard to find,'" and that's kind of the tragedy of the whole thing. The tragedy of the Fall is that we tried to seize God's power for ourselves and failed, when God would have gladly given all of Himself to us freely. We tried to get the benefit of God without valuing our relationship with God. And so began humanity's alienation from Him.

So if I understand OP’s critique (and the similar critiques others have made), they’re reading “knowledge of good and evil” very literally. Obedience to God is, in your standard Christian framework, good; disobedience, evil. So, if Adam and Eve lacked knowledge of good and evil they couldn’t have known that obedience was good or even expected of them; they might have even lacked a concept of obedience and disobedience since obedience is a virtue.

Now, my reading of the text is that the expulsion from the Garden was less of a punishment than a consequence. The Genesis 3 myth posits that gods are gods by dint of two characteristics: their knowledge of good and evil* and their immortality. In the Garden Adam and Eve were immortal, but lacked knowledge. Once obtained, if they remained immortal they would have become like god, immortal and knowing good and evil. God doesn’t want humans to be like him, and so expelled them from Eden to deny them immortality.

Although both our (I’m Jewish and @apenitentialprayer​ is Christian) there’s a sense that God ultimately desires our return to Eden, there’s no indication in the myth itself that a return to Eden is something God desires; in the myth God is willing to allow humans immortality or knowledge of good and evil, but emphatically not both.

*There’s a case to be made that “knowledge of good and evil” is a euphemism for puberty, in which case the characteristic is the ability to create new life rather than knowledge.

Yo was no one going to fucking tell me Vulcan is just volcano in German with a c instead of a k??

It comes from the Latin: Volcanus, the Roman god of fire and volcanoes.

Just a thought…

So my English teacher who is very Catholic brought up today how the devil always lies, but didn’t Lucifer first get cast off and become the “devil” for telling the truth to his father about loving him more than humanity?

Disclaimer: I am no expert in religion and may have misinterpreted the story behind Lucifer, please correct me if I am wrong because I’m always looking to learn new stuff correctly.

That particular myth (in the technical sense) of Satan’s fall is Islamic in origin, not Christian. Christianity doesn’t have a canonical myth of Satan’s fall, but generally Christian myths of Satan’s fall involve him declaring war against God (the reason varies) and convincing one-third of the angels to join him. They are cast down by God’s might and imprisoned in Hell. John Milton holds a lot of influence on Anglophone Christianity in terms of the exact nature of this war, but he’s not canonical (Paradise Lost is a giant Genesis 1-3 fanfiction).

Satan, although conceived in Christianity as a liar and the father of lies, is still capable of telling the truth. He can, famously, quote Scripture and if you accept the Christian tenet that the Serpent was Satan, was strictly truthful when convincing Eve to eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

Vickery, John. Myths and Texts: Strategies of Incorporation and Displacement. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1983. pp. 20-21 (via agnosticmysticism)

A trans woman at my friend’s div school (via therewillberest)

The misogyny of the bible is why god is a he.  He created man in his image, Adam first form dirt.  Then Eve, after the animals, from Adam’s rib.  In most of the other creation myths I can recall, the universe/earth is created by either a woman, or was woman initiated and helped by man.

(via skeptic42)

The creation myth in Genesis 1 is the one where God creates humans in the image of God; they are created simultaneously. The creation myth in Genesis 2  is the one where Eve is created last, but in that myth humans are not made in the image of God.

The interpretation that the creation myth of Genesis 2 indicates that women are inferior to men comes from the pastoral epistles. My inclination is to treat Genesis 2-3 as (among other things) an etiological myth for puberty; in that interpretation woman is made last so that women can be shown as the only suitable companion for men. Adam does not become ish (man) until he finds ishah (woman).

(via entanglingbriars)

I also recall an interpretation in which Adam is presented as being both genders (literally androgynous, in platonic terms, following Aristhophanes’ speech) until the creation of Eve, by which Adam is split into two different gendered beings. (Here’s a quick reference I found while looking into that: x )

A trans woman at my friend’s div school (via therewillberest)

The misogyny of the bible is why god is a he.  He created man in his image, Adam first form dirt.  Then Eve, after the animals, from Adam’s rib.  In most of the other creation myths I can recall, the universe/earth is created by either a woman, or was woman initiated and helped by man.

(via skeptic42)

The creation myth in Genesis 1 is the one where God creates humans in the image of God; they are created simultaneously. The creation myth in Genesis 2  is the one where Eve is created last, but in that myth humans are not made in the image of God.

The interpretation that the creation myth of Genesis 2 indicates that women are inferior to men comes from the pastoral epistles. My inclination is to treat Genesis 2-3 as (among other things) an etiological myth for puberty; in that interpretation woman is made last so that women can be shown as the only suitable companion for men. Adam does not become ish (man) until he finds ishah (woman).

I just love the myth of Persephone, i mean the real, original version of it, because it’s not like she got kidnapped, no, this bitch was la-de-da-ing in a meadow and she just happened to find an entrance to the Underworld and she was like “Imma check this out”. And she just wanders into the Underworld and discovers that hey this place ain’t too bad.

Meanwhile Hades is in the background “????? UM??? PRETTY GIRL??? WHY ARE YOU HERE?????? YOU AREN’T DEAD???” 

And Persephone (who was originally called Kore just a little fyi) just looked at him and said “I like it here. I’m staying.”

And Hades kinda just went with it, until Demeter started throwing the temper tantrum of the millenium upstairs and Zeus had to intervene because this shit was getting out of hand and its actually his job to be admistrator of justice. Which considering the shit he gets up to is kinda histerical but that’s another story there. 

And basically Persephone wasn’t a prisoner or kidnap victim at all she just really loved the Underworld and her (eventual) husband, and the Greeks feared her arguably more than her husband because Hades could be reasoned with but Persephone was the one laying the smack down on sinners, and really, who wouldn’t be at least a little scared of someone who’s name means something along the lines of “the destroyer”

Basically, Persephone is amazing and everbody needs to get on her level

i think the best part of that myth is that Zeus decided to change Kore’s name to Persephone (basically “the one who brings chaos”) only because she wanted to stay in the underworld and SHE WOULDN’T FUCKING LISTEN then Zeus, all-mighty king of the gods, kinda gives up and goes “fine, but you’re going to visit your mom” “also, I changed your name” “get rekt”

Also, if I’m not mistaken, Kore means “little girl” so imagine going from that to “chaos bringer”

I mean, going from little girl to chaos bringer sounds like a p solid deal to me, sign me up.

This may not be the version of the myth that’s commonly known and taught. But is is the original, from before it was altered to scare Greek/Roman girls into submission. Persephone was a badass bitch.

#so I don't know how true this is of being 'the totes original version'#because as we all know tumblr is good at facts without sources#but I do like this version a lot

No, it’s not the “original.” Myths don’t come in original; because they begin as oral traditions and are changed by storytellers to suit the time, place, and storyteller’s beliefs, the best we can say is “earliest recorded” which is emphatically not the same thing. There is no evidence whatsoever for the repeatedly popular idea on tumbr that Persophone was “originally” anything other than a victim of abduction.

Which isn’t to say that Persephone’s role as queen of the underworld wasn’t important in Greek religion, but that isn’t the same thing as her being Hades’ willing bride.

Greek myths are fucking great because their gods are so human. They argue, they fuck up at things, they make fun of each other, they piss each other off, it’s great, there’s so much human interaction and then Christianity comes in like that guy and is all like “oh my god is infallible and knows everything and immortal and everywhere at once and you can’t see it but its totally there and stronger than everything” shut the fuck up Christianity go take a writing class

did you just call the Christian god a Mary Sue

**Abrahamic God. 

By the first century Greek philosophers and theologians had been expressing discomfort with classical mythology for some time, reworking and even rejecting it to create theologies of the gods that said they were infallible and perfectly wise. I can't find the specific quote in Moford and Lenardon's book "Classical Mythology," but one writer in particular is notable for his repeated use of the phrase "Zeus, whose wisdom is immortal."

I just discovered that the Bible came from the Giglamesh Epic. As a person who was raised as a southern baptist, I find it interesting.

Ps: No sex before marriage is bullshit Pss: A lot of religious things we know are made up.

Parts of the Bible are based on Babylonian mythology, including the Epic of Gilgamesh. Gilgamesh most notably supplies a version of Noah’s flood, although I suspect there may be other influences I’m not aware of, and also gives us some of the context for understanding what Sheol meant to the Israelites and Judaites.

The first chapter of Genesis draws heavily from the Babylonian creation myth the Enuma Eliś for its ordering of the cosmos, although thematically it’s very different.

I and II Samuel, I and II Kings, I and II Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah are, however inaccurate and biased, historical accounts and not derived from mythology per se, although they include mythological elements.

Is there even a difference between the words mythology and belief or faith?

Or am I allowed to refer to the Bible as the Christian Mythology from now on?

mythology refers to the narrative stories underlying a religious or cultural institution as well as the interpretation of the significance of those stories

belief refers to the tenets of a religious or cultural institution

faith refers to the trust one places in the mythologies and beliefs of a religious or cultural institution

the Bible contains numerous myths, but is not limited to myth. Genesis; parts of Exodus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy; the Deuteronomist History (Deuteronomy through II Kings, excluding Ruth); parts of I and II Chronicles; Jonah; Ruth; Esther; Job; the Gospels and Acts; and Revelation could be accurately described as myths. However, Leviticus; most of Exodus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy; the Proverbs; the Psalms, Ecclesiastes, most of the Prophetic literature; and the New Testament epistles could not be.

The Bible contains a whole bunch of genres of literature, including mythology.

hey I learned something today

It might be due to differences in language and/or colloquialism but I always felt like Mythology implied some kind of legend or heroic saga meaning stories that are told but not necessarily believed in. Which would result in the upsetting of people who see Christianity as the only acceptable religion.

It’s the difference between how someone in the field of religious studies (like me and notalwaysluminous) sees the term mythology versus how its used by most people.

Is there even a difference between the words mythology and belief or faith?

Or am I allowed to refer to the Bible as the Christian Mythology from now on?

mythology refers to the narrative stories underlying a religious or cultural institution as well as the interpretation of the significance of those stories

belief refers to the tenets of a religious or cultural institution

faith refers to the trust one places in the mythologies and beliefs of a religious or cultural institution

the Bible contains numerous myths, but is not limited to myth. Genesis; parts of Exodus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy; the Deuteronomist History (Deuteronomy through II Kings, excluding Ruth); parts of I and II Chronicles; Jonah; Ruth; Esther; Job; the Gospels and Acts; and Revelation could be accurately described as myths. However, Leviticus; most of Exodus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy; the Proverbs; the Psalms, Ecclesiastes, most of the Prophetic literature; and the New Testament epistles could not be.

Ernst Jünger, The Forest Passage  (via alteringminds)

sources for prepatriarchal persephone

"However, long before the mythical Hades was ever conceived, in more ancient, pre-patriarchal times, Persephone was Queen of the Underworld and was another form of Hecate. Originally, the Triple Goddess was represented by Kore, the virgin; Demeter, the mother preserver; and Hecate or Persephone, the destroyer. In later years, Kore and Persephone became the same Goddess. The pomegranate was an ancient symbol of female fertility; the souls of the underworld ate pomegranates so that they could be reborn. They are standing in front of a bas-relief of their reunion from Eleusis, Greece, early 5th century BCE and are holding Boetian figures used in the Demeter and Persephone rites from the mid 6th century BCE. Demeter’s ribbed seed necklace is from Kourion, 400-300 BCE; her earring is part of a pendant with 2 bees from Mallia, Middle Minoan, 1700-1550 BCE. Persephone’s pomegranate pendant is from Enkomi, Cyprus, 1400-1300 BCE; her earring is from Mycenae, 1550-1500 BCE; her bracelet from Thessaly, 8th century BCE.” (x)

"In another sense a process was completed that had been in motion since the dawn of the patriarchy. In the earliest representations of the story of Demeter and Persephone, only the Goddesses were present. As the patriarchy gained power, the story was changed. Persephone, instead of going of her own free will into the underworld, was abducted by the (now male) God of Death and became his captive bride. In the stories of Ishtar and Inanna, male “consorts” were introduced. In the legend of Isis, the Dying Goddess became the male Osiris.” (x)

“The rape motif in the story underscores that the Hellenic takeover was a violent one that wrested power from women. In the words of Robert Graves, “It refers to male usurpation of the female agricultural mysteries in primitive times.”” (x)

Basically, if you can’t grasp that fact that Persephone’s rape was a patriarchal representation and installation of the Greek’s doing as a means to oppress Goddess worship and the matriarchy, wow, I don’t know even know what do for you.

As someone who has spent the last six years studying Greek and Roman religion, practice, literature, society, and it’s intersection with women, we have no evidence of a matriarchal tradition. The closest thing we have are some possibly religious depictions of women, but we literally can’t tell more than that. Making assumptions is dangerous, especially since we still don’t know where Cretans came from (Linear A has yet to be translated, but we know it’s not an indo-european language).

Women had far more power and position in society than the translators of the ancient authors want to give them credit for, but that doesn’t mean that society was matriarchal, or that there was an uprising and the patriarchy conquered a/the matriarchy. That’s also an extremely outdated and sexist way of looking at the development of societies, and hasn’t been considered academically sound for quite some time. As best as we know, early societies were egalitarian and shifted to patriarchy out of a need to protect the other members. (My own reading and research supports this, but I’m trying to avoid a segue.)

Hecate is traditionally associated with Artemis, not Persephone. Persephone/Demeter/Hecate have been popular with the New Age movement for a while now as an ancient maiden/mother/crone, even though this distinction isn’t important in antiquity. Moreover, Hecate and Persephone often appear together on the same pottery (often hydria, vessels for the marriage bath) in discrete roles. Persephone and Hecate have a clearly supportive relationship and Hecate respects her, and they’re two goddesses who, although invoked on curse tablets a-plenty, never take any issue with each other. We see two goddesses, in power, in state, and not competing, but supporting each other in their duties. This is important for understanding society and religion (curse tablets have yet to be indexed by deity, if anyone is looking for a grad project), so conflating the two goddesses is dangerous. (Hecate can be associated with Persephone, but I haven’t seen a reference to it before Alexander, so it’s likely a Hellenistic development.)

There is no earlier version of the myth. The Homeric Hymn to Demeter is all we have. (Disclaimer: That translation is ridiculously sexist and I hate it.) This is the only and earliest recorded myth we have for the Kore/Persephone divide (and the origin of the Eleusinian Mysteries). Can we see an “original” myth underneath it? No, because that is not how stories work. What we see is one myth that someone interpreted in their own way, and submitted to a poetry contest, and it happened to survive.

Assuming deep textual analysis in Greek is out (I can’t blame you), the best thing to do is study and research the lives of women in antiquity. We have tons of evidence that suggests Persephone and Hades were intended as a healthy couple in contrast to Zeus and Hera. (Being the goddess of married women, Hera had to suffer the indignities of that life, where Persephone and Hades could escape it as it was not their domain.) Moreover, Hades and Persephone imagery is most popular on wedding pottery for women, whereas the spear counterpart seems to prefer Zeus and Thetis. The Hades/Persephone relationship was clearly seen very differently by women, so it’s important to think about how they would have constructed that myth for themselves in their society.

(Seriously though, if there’s one thing you take away from this, it should be that most mythology studies are more interested in supporting current theory than learning about the past, so always, always read critically and especially think about how and why things are being translated.)

(Especially this.)

^ Cosigned and bolding mine. Getting pretty irritated of all the tumblrwrong and revisionism I’m seeing about Persephone on Tumblr. 

Getting past the idea of "original" myths is one of the most important things a religious studies scholar can do. Mythology grows organically and the occasions where we can truly identify the original myth that all the variations grew out of are so rare that they might as well be nonexistent. There may not even have been an original myth. It's equally possible for several related myths to arise independently and then to get integrated by a later storyteller.