@@NotBizarro or maybe she was indoctrinated and was able to get past it. That was me. The first time I read Genesis front to back outside of the Church (and I was really trying just to understand), I had a giant WTF moment. More reading led to more WTF...
@@YoumadBro-sp9gs those texts were written like hundreds of years later by people who interpreted genesis 1 and 2 as being non contradictory so yes. The Bible isn’t a single document, it’s a collection of writings by tens, possibly hundreds of different people over an absurdly long amount of time, and at each layer of history the previous texts and stories are being interpreted and reinterpreted
She is a prime example of why there are certain people on earth today who absolutely do not want critical thought to be encouraged amongst the lay folk. People would think our ways out of the wet paper bags that we've been given.
I like the wet paper bag metaphor. I think today's fiat monetary system "supplied" by the Federal Reserve qualifies as a wet paper bag that should be treated as such.
But she is NOT correct anyway. If you're going to undergo critical thinking, you have to STUDY the original Hebrew of the text. Genesis 2:17 really says, "Dying, you will die." In other words, the PROCESS of death begins. It is ASSURED (surely) at that point. In the context of the Garden of Eden narrative, Adam and Eve FORFEIT the partaking of the Tree of Life - which would've prevented their physical death from happening. STUDY of the bible is key. Etymology, history, geography, culture, etc. "Dying, you will die" occurs elsewhere in the Bible and it's important to see how this term is used rather than forcing our modern Western view on the ancient text. Numbers 26:65 is the other occurrence of the term. There we find “they shall surely die” (literally, dying they shall die). These are the same Hebrew verbs and the same grammatical construction as in Genesis 2:17. God told the Israelites shortly after they came out of Egypt to go into the land of Canaan and take possession of it, as it had been promised to Abraham. In Numbers 26:65 God says that because the adult Jews (20 years and older) refused to trust and obey God and go into the Promise Land, they would die in the wilderness over the course of 40 years (one year for every day that the twelve spies investigated the Land-see Numbers 13:1-14:10). But those rebellious unbelieving Jews did not all die at the same moment. Their deaths were spread over that whole 40-year period. So, dying they did all die and that death occurred at various times some years after God’s pronouncement of judgment. Proper Hermeneutics is the key to getting proper interpretation and NOT just "critical thinking".
@@abc_12333 But then this would mean that Adam and Eve were still mortal before they ate from the tree of knowledge since they hadn't eaten from the tree of life yet, so they were already "dying". God actually seems afraid that if they eat from the tree of knowledge and the tree of life they will become like gods so he kicks them out. He even makes clothes out of skins before he does so, which is so weird, since it would mean that God kills an animal, skins it, and tailors clothes for them instead of just creating some heavenly garments.
@@arkady0 But it wasn't a case of "dying you will die". Death was NOT ASSURED until Adam and Eve ate from the Tree of Knowledge. As long as the Tree of Life was there, there was a chance of Immortality. God preventing them from eating from BOTH trees is just a POLEMIC (Greek word for war) on the ancient Egyptian cult of Osiris. The Osiris cult myth had those with the knowledge of good and evil AND immortality. But if you look in Genesis 7, it mentioned the 17th day of the 7th month - that was the day of Osiris' DEATH. The Hebrew writers opposed Egyptian & Mesopotamian (Adapa and his sages) thoughts of immortality. Evidence is also in the names of Genesis 5 - Adam (man), Seth (appointed) Enosh (mortal). "Man was appointed to be mortal".
@@abc_12333 Well of course JUST 'critical thinking' will not provide you with nuanced or correct answers, and I guess it's a little disheartening to see people 'stopping' in the questioning process and leaving it at that, I think this is an important first step in engaging those skills.
It is so refreshing to see a creator who clearly is able to think and to shape her thoughts into words - she is ways above so many of the people you usually debunk after your "all right, let's see it!" ;-)
Just like biblical and historical evidence proves that jesus and his apostles were vegatarians biblical and historical evidence also proves that the trinity, atonement, original sin and hell are very late misinterpretations and are not supported by the early creed hence its not a part of Christianity I pray that Allah swt revives Christianity both inside and out preserves and protects it and makes its massage be witnessed by all people but at the right moment, place and time The secred text of the Bible says ye shall know them by their fruits So too that I say to my christian brothers and sisters be fruitful and multiply Best regards from a Muslim ( line of ismail )
Worship the God of Abraham YHVH! Yehovah! Jehovah! Galatians 4:22...it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the servant girl and one by the free woman; 23 but the one by the servant girl was actually born through natural descent and the other by the free woman through a promise. 24 These things may be taken as a symbolic drama; for these women mean two covenants... The Apostle Paul was in a Cult! Paul worshiped the God of Abraham! During his trial before Felix, Paul said, “I admit that I worship the God of our ancestors as a follower of the Way, which they call a sect” (Acts 24:14). We are also told that Felix knew about the Way (verse 22). It seems that the Romans considered the Way to be a sect rather than a religion. Mark 9:38 John said to him: “Teacher, we saw someone expelling demons by using your name, and we tried to prevent him, because he was not following us.” 39 But Jesus said: “Do not try to prevent him, for there is no one who will do a powerful work on the basis of my name who will quickly be able to say anything bad about me. 40 For whoever is not against us is for us. Matthew 7:22 Many will say to me in that day: ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and expel demons in your name, and perform many powerful works in your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them: ‘I never knew you! Get away from me, you workers of lawlessness!’
@@theguyver4934 Historical evidence proves jesus and his apostles were vegetarians? And here i thought we werent even sure *the* historical Jesus existed at all, as in the one performing miracles, having apostles in the first place, being crucified and coming back from death. *A* Jesus on the other hand, sure a few existed, and one probably gave rise to the myth and may have been crucified.. but everything else..
But she is NOT correct anyway. If you're going to undergo critical thinking, you have to STUDY the original Hebrew of the text. Genesis 2:17 really says, "Dying, you will die." In other words, the PROCESS of death begins. It is ASSURED (surely) at that point. In the context of the Garden of Eden narrative, Adam and Eve FORFEIT the partaking of the Tree of Life - which would've prevented their physical death from happening. STUDY of the bible is key. Etymology, history, geography, culture, etc. "Dying, you will die" occurs elsewhere in the Bible and it's important to see how this term is used rather than forcing our modern Western view on the ancient text. Numbers 26:65 is the other occurrence of the term. There we find “they shall surely die” (literally, dying they shall die). These are the same Hebrew verbs and the same grammatical construction as in Genesis 2:17. God told the Israelites shortly after they came out of Egypt to go into the land of Canaan and take possession of it, as it had been promised to Abraham. In Numbers 26:65 God says that because the adult Jews (20 years and older) refused to trust and obey God and go into the Promise Land, they would die in the wilderness over the course of 40 years (one year for every day that the twelve spies investigated the Land-see Numbers 13:1-14:10). But those rebellious unbelieving Jews did not all die at the same moment. Their deaths were spread over that whole 40-year period. So, dying they did all die and that death occurred at various times some years after God’s pronouncement of judgment. Proper Hermeneutics is the key to getting proper interpretation - which she didn't do.
Adam and Eve DEFINITELY knew what death was. Otherwise there would be no need for the Tree of Life. Animals died and plants died. They saw that first hand when they took fruits from the trees to eat.
@@abc_12333 In Genesis the only mention of death to Adam and Eve was that if they would eat the fruit they would surely die. There is no other mention of death, so there was no way to for them to even know what death was. There was no discussion of the purpose of the Tree of Life, and no indication that Adam had any need to know what it was, it was just a name. Could have been the Tree of Schwartz. If you were told of a Tree of Defenestration, and that if you ate its fruit you would be defenestrated, unless you knew that word you would have no way of knowing that it meant you would be thrown out of a window. Genesis is a narrative describing scenes and events to the reader, but there's no basis to assume that every character mentioned in a narrative knows everything about everything mentioned in the narrative. In fact in a narrative the characters in it only know things that the narrative says they know. Even when we first learn about death and it's explained to us, we really don't have any sense of it until we see something die. As a kid you might know the definition, but it's not until your hamster dies, or your grandma, that you really start to understand what it is, and neither Adam or even ever saw anything die. So clearly Adam and Eve could have had no idea what the threat actually was. But ultimately it's just a fairy tale so you can really say whatever you want. We definitely didn't come from two people in a garden.
@@abc_12333 Note that the ancient Israelites didn't consider plants to be really alive, because they didn't have the "breath of life". The New Testament says that death entered the world through Adam's Fall (Romans 5:12). Plenty of Christian apologists claim that animals didn't die or even eat each other until after the Fall. All nonsense, but there it is.
@@rollinolson3562 Pay no attention to Christian apologists. As for Romans 5:12, Paul is NOT referring to natural death. Natural death is NOT a curse. This is about the blame, violence and jealousy that leads to death. Adam was the first to place blame. The clue in Romans 5 is that is says Adam to MOSES. Notice that "death" ends at MOSES. Moses brought in the law. A law against blame, malice, violence and jealousy. Obviously natural death didn't end when Moses came along.
The story of Adam and Eve sounds exactly like the many ancient creation myths and folk tales from around the world. Presenting all the animals to Adam to find a helper - and failing? Right out of a storybook. Making Eve out of a piece of Adam? Sounds like something from Greek mythology.
Another problem is that you can't "obey" any commandment when you have no knowledge of good and evil, which A & E did not until after they ate the fruit that gave them that discernment. Myths are not rational.
She is on the money. Dan basically just said the same thing in a lot more words - explaining HOW the Bible got to be a confusing mess. I appreciate that, but I also appreciate the work of the creator of the original video Dan was reacting to.
@@andykanonik8935 by "original creator" I was referring to the nice young woman who made the video Dan was reacting to. Suffice it to say that I don't think ancient mythology is a good way to understand the universe.
@@andykanonik8935 Your comment confuses me. Did you just read "creator" and thought they talked about a god or what? Or do you literally want to know who the youtuber / tiktokker of the video was.. in which case.. yeah Dan should totally write video descriptions. Like at all.
@@andykanonik8935 There was no original creator. The concept is almost always either nonsensical or self-refuting. Insofar as being nonsensical, it becomes such by virtue of the fact that you can only call anything a creation (your unstated major premise) if you demonstrate the creator. And that requires two major undertakings : showing the existence of a creator AND demonstrating that it 'created' anything at all. Just showing the existence of a creator rather strongly depends on defining the creator in at least profoundly positive ontological terms (ie., not saying what god ISN'T but what god IS). And nobody's managed to climb that hill.
She's doing it all wrong. You're not supposed to actually read the Bible and ponder and ask questions. You're supposed to put it on your shelf in the living room for all to see, and then lecture them on a book you've never read.
I notice that Genesis also says God chose the trees in Eden for being "pleasant to the sight and good for food", so if the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil was not to be eaten, then it was presumably there for purely aesthetic reasons. Whether the fruit of that tree was toxic, or whether it conferred divine abilities of which Man is not supposed to posess, it still seems like a remarkably irresponsible place for a decorative plant. This, in my opinion, is why large projects like Creation should be a collaborative effort, rather than left in the hands of lone, inexperienced deities.
The way I reconcile Gen. 2:7, is that as soon as they ate of the fruit, they died spiritually, and because they were exiled from paradise, then became subject to the mortality that the rest of the creation does. If you are of a tradition, however, that insists on literal interpretations of the Bible, then I would agree, the scriptures listed are problematic.
Intelligence is the enemy of religious belief and indeed of superstition generally. Look at Matt Dillahunty, he started off life as a proselytiser until he discovered that it was no more than a collection of folk tales with no consistency beyond that.
99.99 of the kkkhristians has never read the comic book aka bible, they let their pastor doe for them and in gratitude they give them all their money so they can buy their jets for millions of dollars and thus be closer to the imaginary friend...😉
I always read the threat of "death" after eating from the tree's fruit as a vague and relativistic way of speaking: Adam and Eve were supposed to live in perfect balance forever but after eating from the tree they became mortal, they would "certainly die" relatively soon after that point, so I imagined that's what it meant.
So, I just heard, yesterday, a new concept to me.....that whoever wrote the bible, borrowed from Plato.....that all the stories could very well have been written by a single person, but that person had studied Plato Meaning Genesis 1 & 2 were both written at the same time It made me really think
I'm not an expert by any means, but my understanding is that a lot of the Bible predates Plato and even more predates the Hellenistic era when Platonic philosophy would likely have been available to even scholars in Judea (or Babylon during the Exile). Beyond that, there are far too many different styles of writing and different theological approaches in even the Hebrew Bible for it to be one author or at one time.
Would A&E have been, in the story, immortal before the fruit? If so, could not the threat of them dying after eating it be about the humans becoming mortal as a result? In this story.
That is the consensus of many Christians and seems logical; however it would seem that they did not have the knowledge of “Good” and “Evil” until after they “ate” of the fruit. I believe the story to be about Man’s introduction to duality, which involves separation. It involves comparisons and contrasts. Hot and Cold. In and Out. Experience seems to me to be the best teacher. I guess the proverbial apple did not fall far from the tree!
@@lawrencewilliamson5480 Yes I agree, it being about an ur-separation is my view as well basically (although, on the mythological timeline Lucifer fell before A&E, I believe, which would then maybe represent an even more "ur" separation. Also, it's a multi-layered myth of course). What I'm on about with the the two of them becoming mortal is that in that case death did actually result as a consequence of them "eating of the fruit", they did die. (not sure I was clear there).
I've always heard the idea that the compilers knew the contradictions, but didn't know which was more accurate and so kept both, to avoid losing the truth.
Two things: It's been pointed out that there are at least two writers of the book of Genesis. One consistently refers to God as Elohim, while the other one uses the Divine name. You seen the story of Noah where one writer has Noah taking two of every animal, but the other writer mentions seven of every clean animal. Also, in regards to Adam dying when he eats up the fruit.... Some say that spiritual death is what occurred, rather than the more obvious physical death. You could also say that on the day that they ate the fruit, they began to die. Of course, Adam lived hundreds of years, but he did eventually die. Had they not eaten the fruit, they would have been immortal.
So. I made a garden. And in the middle of it, I put a magic tree [Gen 2: 9] just to mess with everybody. If anyone eats the fruit, they will gain knowledge of right and wrong. Then I put the twins (they share most of the same DNA [Gen 2: 21]) in the garden to live there, and I told them that if they eat the fruit of the magic tree that they will surely die on that day [Gen 2: 17]. That's not true, of course. I lied just for convenience. We all do. I just didn't want them to understand the difference between right and wrong. Because reasons. I am not omniscient, and I have no idea if they will eat the fruit or not. If I had knowledge of the future (or any amount of reasonable forethought) I wouldn't have put that tree in the Garden to begin with. Really, I put the tree there solely for meeting out punishment, if the kids ever do eat from it. Keep in mind that the kids DON'T KNOW RIGHT FROM WRONG, nor do they really fathom what death is. Oh, also I put talking snakes in the garden. Just for fun. [Gen 3: 1] So this one snake has to go and ruin the whole thing, and tells her the truth: that if she eats the fruit, she will NOT die, but rather that she will learn to understand the difference between right and wrong. [Gen 3: 5] So she eats the fruit, DOESN'T die like I said she would, _and_ gives the fruit to her brother. Then when I get back (hey, I can't be everywhere at once, you know) [Gen 3: 8], I find out they both ate the fruit, and I'm mad because now they know right from wrong, which they DIDN'T KNOW BEFORE they ate the fruit, and had no ability to understand NOT to eat the fruit until AFTER they ate it. And also, now they know that I lie. THANKS, snake! Because she listened to the snake and ate the fruit, I curse her with painful childbirth far worse than what I originally had planned for her. [Gen 3: 16] Because he listened to her and ate the fruit, I decide that he has to work fields to produce agriculture. That's punishment enough for him. [Gen 3: 17] R/AmItheAsshole
And then we have to suffer for their sins, which i thought we were only responsible for our own sin... but i guess that`s not true but anyway totally believe this book or you`ll forever face the wrath of sin. Yeah...if it only was less complicated i`d obey and have faith right away.
One mistake here is that Adam and Eve were not expelled from the Garden because they ate the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil but because God was concerned, after that, that they might go on to eat from the tree of life. In the English of the NRSV, God expresses his concern. He says, What if the man should now eat from the tree of life and become immortal like us? Then it says, Therefore God sent the man out of the Garden. The "therefore" refers back to God's concern over them becoming immortal. They were not expelled as a direct result of eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. For that they were cursed.
We modern readers tend to get caught up in things needing to _always_ be congruent and make sense. Ancient peoples did not have an issue with this at all. The practice of putting, what were essentially, made up speeches into the mouths of various political and religious leaders was commonplace back then. They had a different relationship with what "truth" meant than we do today, and they were perfectly fine with accepting meaning over accuracy as the most important aspect of a story.
This seems to be the one of the main thing that a lot of Christian apologists seem to not understand/accept. I see so many like Erik from Testify saying things like "Matthew wouldn't have just made up this detail, he is relying on Mark in so many places and he would have to be a crazy schizophrenic to use information he had available and then just make up more specific information in other places". Reading Michael Grant's "Greek and Roman Historians: Information and Misinformation" did so much to help me understand how much I was projecting my standards of what history should look like onto ancient writers that had a very different worldview and approach to writing history.
I feel like something similar happens with the first lie. It wasn't a moral matter, it was just a story of explanation and neither the serpent nor god were "evil" was we have forced those characters to be interpreted today.
The Samaritans only had the Torah! The Samaritan lady knew about the Messiah from the Torah. John 4:25 The woman said to him: “I know that Mes·siʹah is coming, who is called Christ. Whenever that one comes, he will declare all things to us openly.”
The Greeks worshiped what they did not know! John 4:22! Joseph - Imhotep - Thoth - Hermes! Hermes, the Greek god of interpretive communication, was combined with Thoth, the Egyptian god of wisdom. The Egyptian priest and polymath Imhotep had been deified long after his death and therefore assimilated to Thoth in the classical and Hellenistic periods. When the Greeks learned that the Egyptians had a god Thoth, or Tehuti, who specialized in wisdom and learning, they named him Hermes Trismegistus, or “thrice greatest Hermes.” Supposedly Hermes Trismegistus was the scribe of the gods who authored the sacred hermetic works that described the material world as well as the quest for spiritual perfection. Altar and Pillar Isaiah 19:19 Revelation 5:5 Imhotep - Joseph the same person who built the step pyramid. Acts 7:10... God gave him favor before Pharaoh, king of Egypt. God also gave Joseph unusual wisdom, so that Pharaoh appointed him ruler over all of Egypt and put him in charge of everything he owned. The Great Pyramid has 8 sides. The 8 sides represent the 8 kingdoms of the world. Jesus is the corner stone. The last kingdom to rule forever. There is actually ten sides counting top and bottom. First Empire was Nimrod. Who represents Babylon the Great, the Empire of false religion. The bottom of the pyramid is a side. All eight Kingdoms of Revelation ride with the harlot, Babylon the Great. The Great Pyramid having no top corner stone and the top being flat is the Harlot. Jesus is the cornerstone the builders rejected. The Nations would rather follow the Harlot than Jesus. Revelation 17:9 “This calls for a mind that has wisdom: The seven heads mean seven mountains, where the woman sits on top. 10 And there are seven kings: Five have fallen, one is, and the other has not yet arrived; but when he does arrive, he must remain a short while. 11 And the wild beast that was but is not, it is also an eighth king, but it springs from the seven, and it goes off into destruction. Matthew 21:42 Jesus said to them: “Did you never read in the Scriptures, ‘The stone that the builders rejected, this has become the chief cornerstone. This has come from Jehovah, and it is marvelous in our eyes’? 43 This is why I say to you, the Kingdom of God will be taken from you and be given to a nation producing its fruits. What does the Sphinx really represent. Because Jesus is the Lion of the Tribe of Judah. Isaiah 19:19 In that day there will be an altar to Jehovah in the middle of the land of Egypt and a pillar to Jehovah at its boundary. 20 It will be for a sign and for a witness to Jehovah of armies in the land of Egypt; for they will cry out to Jehovah because of the oppressors, and he will send them a savior, a grand one, who will save them. Revelation 5:5 But one of the elders said to me: “Stop weeping. Look! The Lion of the tribe of Judah, the root of David, has conquered so as to open the scroll and its seven seals.”
An allegory is more of a recent thing. Since before the discovery of ancient human fossils everyone saw it as to take it literal. It was always taken to be literal and even the New Testament refers to Adam as the first man in enough occasions.
It's fiction yes, but allegory? No. Allegories are supposed to be instructive. This story is explanatory. What are we supposed to learn from this story? Don't fall into Yahweh's traps? It makes more sense as an [incorrect] explanation of why humans have hardships.
That may be true historically, bit as a defense of the text as divine truth, I don't think that it works. I've heard many Christians say that it is an allegory. However, they never go on to explain how it makes sense as an allegory. If God lying to two people isn't literally true, how is it allegorically true? What is it telling us and why is this a good way to tell us? If the interpretation that a person offers isn't held by most people, then the texts isn't doing a good job of communicating it.
I feel like I’ve always believed in Evolution more the the Creation (even when others were discouraging me from doing so), so I had to think of how I’m supposed to understand Genesis on its own terms. I have to say that your content has helped me understand them in a more nuanced way and I’m super grateful for that.
So Evolution is about a talking Ape. That teaches you about a talking snake! Lol There was only Adam. Adam was naming all of the animals that God was creating! How long was Adam living before the creation of a woman! Genesis 2:18 Then Jehovah God said: “It is not good for the man to continue to be alone. I am going to make a helper for him, as a complement of him.” 19 Now Jehovah God had been forming from the ground every wild animal of the field and every flying creature of the heavens, and he began bringing them to the man to see what he would call each one; and whatever the man would call each living creature, that became its name. 20 So the man named all the domestic animals and the flying creatures of the heavens and every wild animal of the field, but for man there was no helper as a complement of him.
Dan, I attended a progressive seminary, and I’m curious on your thoughts on this reading that I learned about: my OT professor read the Deuteronomistic history using “death” as a stand-in for exile or separation from the land. The two examples that spring to my mind are obviously Genesis, and also in Deuteronomy 30:19 when Moses says he set before the Israelites “life and death,” after reading the law. His contention was that post-exilic authors would have seen the lack of observance of the law as the reason for their exile, just like Adam and Eve were exiled from the Garden of Eden.
@jannette I can’t thank you enough for mentioning Adrian Bliss. I’ve just returned from my first foray into his work and found it suits my sense of humor perfectly.
My guess was that G2 had suffered from editor’s “fatigue:” that they changed some things from an earlier version where Adam did die in some sense but those changes inserted contradictions that they didn’t notice or couldn’t iron out.
Your guess is in the absence of academic knowledge. What is the value of guessing? If it matters look into it. Genesis is considered to be written in 600 BCE. That was the third rewrite during the so called Babylonian captivity. In fact scribes voluntarily went there and accessed other religions documents. For instance the flood myth tracks well with two prior telling of the story that was thousands of years old and had been part of three prior tales. You can see it is woven together. The first te.lin had a 15 foot flood. During this rewrite the pantheon of El was discarded for the warrior god Yahweh and they went from Canaanite polytheism to monotheism. Other older texts we stitched in. We only discovered they descended from Canaanites a century ago after uncovering a Canaanite grave with tablets that were clearly ancient Hebrew writing. That also proves they were revisionist as those people were supposedly wiped out. 70% of the people in Jordan carry their genes. The "royal we" references are from older writing when they were polytheist. This is from centuries of academic research and isn't something to introduce before passing the collection plate. That needs no explanation.
I was 16 when I first read the bible as a book instead of random daily verses. And then I realized this is 100% man-made there is no way that an omnipotent god would commit so many mistakes. Even the devil can inspire clearer messages to his followers according to Christians who say that everything is diabolic.
I told someone recently that if you read the Bible as you would a novel, using the rational part of your mind, a lot of it doesn't make sense. I also read the Bible, like a book of stories when I was younger and trying to piece it together, ask questions, pointing out loopholes and fallacies only managed to earn me rebuke from the ppl around me. Generally, religion requires just going with the flow for it to work. As soon as you start questioning it, it's bound to come apart at the seams.
Holman Christian Standard Bible Genesis 3:4 No! You will not die,” the serpent said to the woman.” Is Lying a Righteous Deception or an Unrighteous Deception? We are born into Satan's Kingdom. This is why we need the tree of life. Jesus is the vine the true branch of life to God. Jesus will crush this Kingdom. Eve transgressed against the Law of God. Eve is the mother of everyone living. So in birth pains everyone was born into lawlessness. The cherub angel in charge of the garden of Eden deceived her with an unrighteous deception. This made this cherub angel the ruler of this world. Satan is an Angel of Light By an unrighteous deception she ate the fruit. 2 Thessalonians 2:9 But the lawless one’s presence is by the operation of Satan with every powerful work and lying signs and wonders 10 and every unrighteous deception for those who are perishing, as a retribution because they did not accept the love of the truth in order that they might be saved. 11 That is why God lets a deceptive influence mislead them so that they may come to believe the lie, 12 in order that they all may be judged because they did not believe the truth but took pleasure in unrighteousness. 2 Corinthians 2:14 And no wonder, for Satan himself keeps disguising himself as an angel of light. 15 It is therefore nothing extraordinary if his ministers also keep disguising themselves as ministers of righteousness. But their end will be according to their works. 2 Timothy 2:14 Also, Adam was not deceived, but the woman was thoroughly deceived and became a transgressor.
Adam wasn't deceived. The ground did produce thorns and thistles because Jesus worn the crown of thorns and thistles. God told Adam the prophecy of the resurrection. Genesis 3:15 The Sacrifice of Jesus was the first part of the prophecy of Genesis 3:15 And I will put enmity between you and the woman and between your offspring and her offspring. He will crush your head, and you will bruise him in the heel.” Satan the Dragon and the Wild Beast the 6th Kingdom executed Jesus on their image the cross. It was the Roman Empire of Italy that is also the shape of the heel. So the first part of the prophecy is complete . Satan bruised Jesus in the heel.
I always read it as upon eating the fruit Adam would become susceptible to physical death. However, another reading is spiritual death. He would become spiritually dead, that is separated from God.
Dan has addressed this point in an earlier video. It’s clear in the language that god says the moment you eat it, you’ll die - as in drop dead, nothing to do with doomed or death will come upon you at some point. You have to reconcile the lie, hyperbolic or straight up deceit. He’s allowed to lie. He also changes his mind.
@@GoodieWhiteHat NOT true at all. Look up the ORIGINAL Hebrew. "DYING, you will die". Dying is a PROCESS. The process begins in that Adam forfeited his rights to the Tree of Life! That is the CONTEXT. Adam is no longer permitted to eat from the Tree of Life (Genesis 3). So with no chance of living forever, the DYING process is now official and has begun. "Dying you will die" is also the EXACT phrase in the Book of Numbers when the Israelites FORFETIED their chance of entering the promise land. Did they die immediately? NO! For many, it took 40 years.
@@GoodieWhiteHat Here’s Alter’s commentary on verses 16-17: “The form of the Hebrew in both instances is what grammarians call the infinitive absolute: the infinitive immediately followed by a conjugated form of the same verb. The general effect of this repetition is to add emphasis to the verb, but because in the case of the verb “to die” it is the pattern regularly used in the Bible for the issuing of death sentences, “doomed to die” is an appropriate equivalent.” Like I said in my original comment, it helps the narrative flow a lot better. Chapter 3 notes that the serpent was the most cunning of all the beasts. He is portrayed as a deceptive character. If God had lied in chapter 2, it would be a bit odd to paint the serpent as a deceiver, considering that he was the one who told the truth. But as for my personal beliefs, I have no desire to reconcile the passage. I would not object to God lying in this passage. Both have strong arguments for their interpretations, but in my personal opinion, Alter’s interpretation makes more sense than Dan’s.
@@abc_12333 I mean he still lied tho? Suddenly the dude drops all these other curses on them? Oh hai, farming and childbirth are gonna suck now? That said, it's also painfully obvious none of it is literal considering one of the curses was regarding agriculture and bread...and humans certainly didnt start out farming. There was the whole stone age/hunting gathering thing.
The thing about Eve and the Serpent is that Eve never actually heard the Lᴏʀᴅ God give that commandment not to eat of the Fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. She was too busy _not having been created yet_ when the Lᴏʀᴅ gave Adam that commandment. The sequence of events in *Genesis Chapter 2* after Adam was placed in the Garden to keep and dress it: • The Lᴏʀᴅ commands Adam to freely eat of any tree in the Garden except the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. • There is no help meet found for Adam. • So out of the ground the Lᴏʀᴅ made every beast of the field and bird of the air and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them, and whatever name he gave them was the name of that type of animal henceforth. • _Still_ no help meet found for Adam. • The Lᴏʀᴅ caused a deep sleep (anesthesia?) to come over Adam, and did a little divine surgery to remove a bone (often translated “rib”) and from that made a woman. • Adam wakes up and meets the woman, declares her to be bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh, and names her “Eve,” for she is the mother of all living. Now, maybe the Lᴏʀᴅ did repeat His commandment to Eve later, or maybe Adam told her second-hand, because she _did_ know about it in Chapter 3 when the Serpent asks her about it, but we’re not actually shown her learning of this commandment.
It's not just a story. It's an allegory and a riddle about the process of growing up. If you can't see that, then you aren't intellectually functioning at the level of a high school teen who is learning about literature analysis around ninth or tenth grade. ;-)
@@lepidoptera9337 “it’s not just a story. It’s an allegory” 🤓 wow dude why do you feel the need to insult me like that? You know it’s not just an allegory, it’s also a political statute, disgracing the snake which was a symbol of Egyptian power that was popular during the time of king hezekiah, and empowering the cherubim which were pushed as a religious symbol by king hezekiah.
@@grieftex803 I didn't insult you. You did that to yourself by making an unqualified statement about one of the most fundamental pieces of text in human literature. ;-) The Jewish folks didn't have beef with the Egyptians at the time the story was written in its final form. If anything, Egypt would have been an ally of Judah against the Assyrians. ;-)
@@lepidoptera9337 the Bible clearly states that Egypt betrayed the judeans and Jerusalem was sieged by the Assyrians, after this hezekiah went to worship the cherubim in the temple.
@@grieftex803 That's the political story the Jewish folks wrote. You are listening to the 2600 year old equivalent of the PLO here and take it as gospel (pun!). ;-)
Note Gen 2.17 does not say drop dead, "for when you eat from it you will certainly die.” It could imply that humans would have lived forever if they had not eaten the fruit. 3.22 "He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.”
Thanks for this explanation. I think that it makes more sense that the death threat is a white lie, just like you say in your example of a hyperbolic threat from a parent. I think it takes more mental gymnastics or theological interpretation to make it not a lie.
I don't understand apologists' motivation to try to 'defend' God in this issue. God is almighty and anwers to no one. He killed Job's family for no good reason and refused to explain his motivations to Job, making perfectly clear to Job that he did it because he could and nobody can question him. Why should this god abstain from lying? Well, I lied. I understand perfectly the apologists' motivation. I think we all do.
He probably did it because Job is very moral 😇. And moral fanatic humans are very irritating, especially to someone who wants to make a stable human society that doesn't kill itself when left alone for a short while. Especially, because the best way to make sense of the 2 Genesis accounts is God makes humans. Then they die out. Then God tried a bunch of other times until Adam and Eve. That means Yahweh resents moral 😇 fanatic humans for always leading to society's destruction. Yahweh is *consistently de facto* nice to sinners 😈. Giving them toothless punishments that follow the letter of the law, but without any actual harm or malice. Yahweh always looks out for them. Yahweh hates Job, because it is sick of humans like him given Yahweh's experience with them. @@juanausensi499
This is me in middle school. I think I was an atheist but was brainwashed to stay due to fear of hell (also, as a kid, I couldn't refuse to go to church).
Snakes have vestigial legs, not all lizards have legs, snakes and lizards have no real taxonomic distinction, and God cursed the snake to be legless so this is an origin story for how snakes *lost* their legs.
Considering how much of a stitchwork the bible is, and that other people existed besides Cain and so on, is there any point in the young earth creationists arguing that you can add the ages of the lineage from adam and eve to arrive at a 6000 year old earth? I mean, the conclusion is obviously wrong anyways, but i wonder if thats even a valid point to make, if the bible already assumes there to be a populated earth anyways.
My question had always been “Why would God expect Man to obey him if they didn’t know the difference between Good and Evil? They could not have known that they were doing something naughty until after they ate of the fruit…” There is also the issue with the serpent, who is often associated with the Lord of Lies. He who lords over lies must know the truth. Otherwise, how could they lie?
It's not very clear if the serpent knew about the punishment. In fact, it's possible to make the case for the serpent not knowing about it. First of all, the serpent itself was punished, and it gained nothing by telling the truth to Eve. And we know the serpent is cunning, because it is described as such, and such a cunning creature wouldn't put itself knowingly in danger for no reason. And second, the punishment looks like it was improvised on the spot. It was more God reacting to the possibility of humans with both knowledge and immortality (becoming like God), something he didn't want, than a meditated punishment. If the snake didn't know about the reluctance of God to allow his creatures to better themselves (Adam and Even didn't know), the punishment could have been also a surprise for the serpent.
@@machonsote918 This serpent was a Pharaoh... you know, the kings whose crown had a rearing serpent protruding from the forehead right between the eyes.
@@machonsote918 Yeah that's what I did. I approached my investigation into the Adam and Eve story by writing a paper to answer the question "What is scriptural authoring?", and what are the prerogatives of someone who is positioned to spearhead such an undertaking? Making a list of rules of thumb to serve as guidelines to the layman were they to try their hand in the arts of mythcraft... the first rule on the list... Never tell the naked truth.. Why assume the authors were trying to write a straightforward book? Firstly, Genesis 1 is clearly derived from the Creation Stele of Memphis... Then the first family is marred by fratricide, reminiscent of Osiris and Set.... Then .
A rebuttal to Day and Barr: wouldn't God already know that the hyperbolic threat wouldn't work? Or do they think that God is not all-knowing? Ignoring the fact that neither Adam and Eve knew they were doing wrong, since they hadn't yet eaten of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, _how_ could they have known? That's always bothered me - the God of Genesis is not a kind nor loving God, nor even a just or merciful God. I do like your comparison and analysis of the story as part of the local mythology trying to draw the line between human and divine. I have always been interested in the changing relationship of humans to gods based on when and where these stories originate and are retold. I do wish you had included a link to the original video you are commenting on.
From what I've read, both Day and Barr recognize that Yahweh was not generally thought of as all-knowing at this point in time (if at all). That came later, largely under the intellectual influence of Hellenism. The Eden narrative tradition (otherwise known by "J," or the "Yahwist") is filled with references to a very anthropomorphic Yahweh being surprised, changing his plans, and seeking information.
Philosophers have made careers out of thinking about the implications of belief in the Abrahamic god. I think it was Hegel who said that god could not be inside his creation, the universe, because if he was then he could not be omnipotent. If on the other hand he was outside the universe he could have no effect on it. There are more ways to spend a life counting the number of angels on a pin head than anyone could imagine.
Dan,. I appreciate your demeanor and willingness to accept information in general, when you see it's correct. I will say that I agree with the young lady presenting but I see it from a different lens. You make the point about parallels between the Ancient Sumerian story of Adapa and the Garden of Eden. One thing about the older Sumerian (original story), is that there is a plurality (more than one god) in it, where EA/Enki tells Adapa not to eat or drink the food of the gods when he (Adapa) faces Anu, EA/Enki's father! Both EA and Anu, or considered gods. I am using a small "g", because I do feel that these Anunna (Anunnaki) are the same deities spoken of in nearly all the World's religions, including the Bible but they are real beings not spiritual and definitely not the all "creators" of the Universe. Yet, as in the seminal text (Enuma Elish), they did create mankind!
AS FAR AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THE ONLY KNOWLEDGE ADAM GOT FROM THE TREE WAS 2FOLD: 1 THEY WERE NAKED 2 HE COULD SEW CLOTHES.... BUT NOT JUST ANY CLOTHES- ADAM CREATED A CAMOUFLAGE PATTERN THAT EVEN GAWD COULDN'T SEE THEM!
Spiritual death = being separated from God's presence. Adam and Eve being expelled from the garden and therefore God's presence. The day they ate they died spiritually. Just my LDS perspective on the text. Thanks as always Dan!
This is what my dad preached in our Wesleyan - Methodist Church and what I always believed. Even now after years of hearing and reading the discourse and wide-ranging takes, I still feel like this is the death of which God speaks.
Professor Christine Hayes is quite good. --------------------------------------------------------- *The Enuma Elish would later be the inspiration for the Hebrew scribes who created the text now known as the biblical Book of Genesis.* Prior to the 19th century CE, the Bible was considered the oldest book in the world and its narratives were thought to be completely original. In the mid-19th century CE, however, European museums, as well as academic and religious institutions, sponsored excavations in Mesopotamia to find physical evidence for historical corroboration of the stories in the Bible. ***These excavations found quite the opposite, however, in that, once cuneiform was translated, it was understood that a number of biblical narratives were Mesopotamian in origin.*** *Famous stories such as the Fall of Man and the Great Flood were originally conceived and written down in Sumer,* translated and modified later in Babylon, and reworked by the Assyrians ***before they were used by the Hebrew scribes for the versions which appear in the Bible.*** ***In revising the Mesopotamian creation story for their own ends, the Hebrew scribes tightened the narrative and the focus but retained the concept of the all-powerful deity who brings order from chaos.*** Marduk, in the Enuma Elish, establishes the recognizable order of the world - *just as God does in the Genesis tale* - and human beings are expected to recognize this great gift and honor the deity through service. *"Enuma Elish - The Babylonian Epic of Creation - Full Text - World History Encyclopedia"* *"Sumerian Is the World's Oldest Written Language | ProLingo"* *"Sumerian Civilization: Inventing the Future - World History Encyclopedia"* *"The Myth of Adapa - World History Encyclopedia"* Also discussed by Professor Christine Hayes at Yale University in her 1st lecture of the series on the Hebrew Bible from 8:45 to 14:30 minutes, lecture 3 from 28:30 to 41:35 minutes, lecture 4 from 0:00 up to 21:30 minutes and 24:00 up to 35:30 minutes and lecture 7 from 24:20 to 25:10 minutes. From a Biblical scholar: "Many stories in the ancient world have their origins in other stories and were borrowed and modified from other or earlier peoples. *For instance, many of the stories now preserved in the Bible are* ***modified*** *versions of stories that existed in the cultures and traditions of Israel’s* ***older*** *contemporaries.* Stories about the creation of the universe, a cataclysmic universal flood, digging wells as land markers, the naming of important cultic sites, gods giving laws to their people, and even stories about gods decreeing the possession of land to their people were all part of the cultural and literary matrix of the ancient Near East. *Biblical scribes freely* ***adopted and modified*** *these stories as a means to express their own identity, origins, and customs."* *"Stories from the Bible"* by Dr Steven DiMattei, from his website *"Biblical Contradictions"*
Ptah and the Put cycle of 9 is a CLOSER connection to Genesis 1. It was Ptah that said "Let there be..." speaking things into being. "It was good" is seen in African folklore. Same as the progression of "sun, moon and stars". There are also 50+ EGYPTIAN loan words in Genesis 1. Enuma Elish was very little to do with it.
@@user-gk9lg5sp4y Speaking things into being is completely absent in Enuma Elish. Ptah did that.Tiamat is murdered in Enuma Elish. There is no murder in Genesis 1. The abundance of Egyptian loan words in Genesis 1 is NOT in any other chapter in the Bible.
@@abc_12333 Those are not the parallels I'm talking about. You appear to want to prove to me something about a connection between Egyptian writings and Genesis. I never denied that there was a connection. Do you deny that there are parallels between the Enuma Elish and Genesis? What is your goal here?
Tiamat and Adamu = Parents of Modern man born in South Africa created as a slave or servant for the Annunaki ,(Psalms 23} = deep sleep advanced genetic engineering giving modern man a hybrid ,the power of procreation now take a offspring and procreate it with a pure blood Annunaki = Titi and Adappa born in the Eridu kept at the garden /Golbeki Tepe born in 334,000 then came the Kings list of ATLANTIS it was these who lived longer lifespans and aged slower than modern man until the great flood ..now Noah represented a step in evolution of modern man becoming Civilized man ,he was born with these bright blue eyes and fair skin , i don't where those blue eyes came from ,but the blonde hair came from Tiamat mother of modern man,she kinda had a complexion like a native American but she had blonde hair and Adamu was dark reddish brown both mothers were named after the original Eve or Evening Star who was the companion of the Mourning Star who were the infinite all only begotten , Revelations 4 verse 4 = there paradise or Kingdom until she fell from grace causing a great war in heaven over 4 billion years ago ...but i like that call Mister Enllil/Yahweh the liar he is a be free of his evil false curse ,it was those ugly lil Iggy grey perverts responsible for who would take the daughter of Tiamat and Adappa making abominations teaching wicked wickedness in league with Marduk/Ra irritating Enlil even more ,then came the fall of Sumer.. it's kinda so bear with me #MotherSisterAndBrother
And let's not forget that if Adam and Eve had not eaten of the Tree of knowledge of Good and Evil then they would not know the difference and therefore were not worthy of being punished. Another thing I find interesting is that there's the part in Genesis where God is walking through the Garden of Eden and cannot find Adam and Eve because they are hiding. Say what? But in any case, the more I find out about how the bible came together and how haphazard its construction really was there is ZERO chance that this book was not entirely written by human beings.
Am I the only one here who thinks applying this amount of analysis to the Bible is like applying quantum physics to understanding why a rabbit’s foot brings good luck?
technically, it was Eve and her rib. Think of it with people who copy other people. we all can tell which one is the original that "inspired" the copy. Why do men have nipples? Nipples are for babies and gestation and milk. Why do men have nipples? (i mean, this happened way before our species came into existence, but even a creation myth should have something so basic as which came first. That's no mistranslation or ink smear.. there's a problem with the story teller.)
@@jenniferhunter4074 The fact that tha woman was, in the story, an afterthought, just a 'helper' for a planned lone, perfect man, and that the divine family is suspiciously devoided of a mother (we have a father, a son, and .... a ghost? one of these are not like the others), makes me think the authors of the story were ravenously sexist.
@@juanausensi499 I know we say that the implication of these verses and ideas translates to "they viewed women as property". But ask yourself this. What kind of property? For me, I get this impression that women would be considered facial tissues. replaceable generic property. Get rid of one and you get another. You damaged my plastic drinking cup.. go get me another one. We're not even valuable to the point of insurance against loss. I get this sense that women are background stuff. The only time we're valuable is if the "do not break seal" is on us and we can be traded. But if the trade doesn't go through, no harm/no foul. The owner won't be pining for that first car he had when he was a teenager. It's just background ... stuff. Same for children too. I don't think that the ancient writers thought we (women) and children were human. I think they genuinely thought we weren't human... unless they needed to pass the blame and beat up somebody. Then, we were acknowledged just before they sacrificed us.
Man was created in Genesis chapter 1 and Adam was created in chapter 2. Did you REALLY think all races came from one???!!! The ten ''lost tribes'' are proven biblically, historically and archaeologically to be the Germanic, Celtic, Scandinavian, Anglo Saxon and kindred peoples of today. "Saxson'' is in reference to "Issac's son". A good film on this is Roots; From Abraham to America.
nice try. Of course all people didn't come from Adam and Eve - the stories in Genesis are myths that are completely unsupported by evidence. The book you referenced is apologetic BS.
I think the reason for the compilers of Genesis as we know it not harmonizing the different texts is because they were not trying to compile a unified narrative. As with the monk Nennius, when he compiled the History of the Britons in the 9th century, what they did was preserve different narratives from their traditions and set those narratives into a coherent timeline of the prehistory of the nation of Israel. If the above supposition is accurate, then it’s possible that, like Nennius composing the History (or Snorri Sturluson composing the Prose Edda), it was the threat of the loss of tradition that prompted the first compilation efforts of the book of Genesis-so perhaps the Assyrian conquest of the northern state of Israel was the inciting event that led to the creation of the book of Genesis, and the multiple twinning stories in Genesis reflect the twin traditions of Israel and Judah being combined into one timeline.
By the twinning narratives, I’m referring to the way that we see two different variations of the same motifs represented in Genesis-the two Creation narratives, of course, but there’s also two different variations of God creating land out of the waters of chaos (Genesis 1 begins from that point, and Gen. 6-9 has a similar, more detailed version), the parallel structures of the Abraham/Isaac/Ishmael and Isaac/Esau/Jacob stories (both Abraham & Isaac are childless into old age, both tell a foreign king that their wives are their sisters, both dig the same wells in the same area, both are succeeded by their younger sons through the direct intervention of their wives) and so forth.
In much of the debates between atheists and theists about the contents of the bible, it isn't made clear to the audience that the scholarship already knows it was stitched together, sourced from many authors over many centuries and from many cultures. The contents are also not in the order in which they were written. The consequences are that parts of it have been modified over time in an attempt to make it all congruent but it's difficult to reconcile all of them.
I love the narrative of Adam and Eve from a literary perspective. The trying to encroach and deity and being punished is super interesting to me as a reader. I also like the stories of Prometheus, Babel, and Icarus.
As the 'god' of Genesis is pretty clearly not all knowing, as billed, perhaps the god was not lying when it said "in that day you will die," but instead underestimated Adam and Eve's resilience. God, "If you set the toaster to '3,' the toast will be ruined!" Well, actually- I did set the toaster to 3, and while the toast *was* very dark, it wasn't actually blackened, nor was it inedible.
I've only recently found your channel and your tictok videos - thanks for the content! One thing that never made sense to me in the story of Adam and Eve, and I'm surprised the content creator in your video didn't mention it, when Adam and Eve eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, they can't know yet that it's bad to disobey. It seems pretty harsh to punish them forever for what they couldn't possibly know was bad. Is there some linguistic way to interpret this so that it actually makes sense?
They did die in one day - one of Jehovah the Father's 'days' (i.e. within 1000 years). Notice that in the Biblical record not a single human lives beyond 1000 years. In order for us to live forever we must have access to the 'Tree of Life', which Adam and Eve were kept away from once they sinned, but in God's Kingdom (at the end of Revelation) the 'Tree of Life' returns and we are able to eat its fruit and live forever. Much peace and love.
The original user of literature was too help people understand the world and how to deal with it. Most people didn't read until a few centuries ago, so these were oral stories. They started out as instruction but quickly became coercion, deliberate attempts to control how people behaved. "Should" was introduced and then "must". "You must do your work in the field", "what if i don't want to work?" "God orders you to work and if you disobey God will punish you." "What can God do to me?" "God can take your food." "I don't care, I'll get my own food." After awhile, "God can see to it that when you die you experience eternal torture, do you dare disobey him now?" They figured out how to scare must people into doing whatever they wanted. It has nothing to do with an actual "God", it was just controlling people, "politics". It still is, that's all it has ever been.
Those similarities between the story of adapa and adam are crazy! I wouldnt be surprised if the writers really did copy from it when creating genesis 2. A bit wierd that that would then place adam in the wrong chronological order in relation to the flood, given that his alleged descendant noah would be the paralell to Napishtim.
The story of Cain and able is about the first homside. It doesn't say they are the first children. And clearly they aren't because Cain married his sister. It is simply the first homside and the ramifications of that.
It wasn't. God did NOT lie. Genesis 2:17 really says, "Dying, you will die." In other words, the PROCESS of death begins. It is ASSURED (surely) at that point. In the context of the Garden of Eden narrative, Adam and Eve FORFEIT the partaking of the Tree of Life - which would've prevented their physical death from happening. STUDY of the bible is key. Etymology, history, geography, culture, etc. "Dying, you will die" occurs elsewhere in the Bible and it's important to see how this term is used rather than forcing our modern Western view on the ancient text. Numbers 26:65 is the other occurrence of the term. There we find “they shall surely die” (literally, dying they shall die). These are the same Hebrew verbs and the same grammatical construction as in Genesis 2:17. God told the Israelites shortly after they came out of Egypt to go into the land of Canaan and take possession of it, as it had been promised to Abraham. In Numbers 26:65 God says that because the adult Jews (20 years and older) refused to trust and obey God and go into the Promise Land, they would die in the wilderness over the course of 40 years (one year for every day that the twelve spies investigated the Land-see Numbers 13:1-14:10). But those rebellious unbelieving Jews did not all die at the same moment. Their deaths were spread over that whole 40-year period. So, dying they did all die and that death occurred at various times some years after God’s pronouncement of judgment. Proper Hermeneutics is the key to getting proper interpretation.
This is how I understand it from my studying…. Adam and Eve were made to live forever, but since they ate of the tree of knowledge now they are mortal and “will surely die”
"He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever" In other words, they didn't have eternal life either.
Wait...so the first time he seemingly ever watches a tiktok and is like "yeah that's right" is when a sassy atheist girl is just reading the dang book and pointing out what it says.
It was always explained to me that Adam & Eve were immortal; living in glorified bodies that were incorruptible & eternal and that after eating the “fruit” they became mortal and were able to die. 🤷🏾
1. Okay, it’s not Genesis 1 happened then Genesis 2 happened, you can say Genesis 2 is expansion of the the 6th day of Genesis 1. 2. He did not lie because if he hadn’t eaten it then he’d still be alive. He didn’t specify when he’d die, he didn’t say he’d die on the spot, he just said that he would die. 3. It’ll be a personal rationalization of mine.
I like how people try to smooth over the contradictions to make them seem like they were never there and make the stories even more absurd than before. Of course there are multiple stories from different authors being woven together. Even in the English translations of Genesis, we see the start of the Noah's Deluge story at chapter 6 only to see the story start all over again but with new and different details. It is two Deluge stories trying to be woven together as one story by an editor.
Wasn't it Lillith & Adam to begin with? That should be mentioned. Lillith was cast out because she was a feminist who wanted control of her own autonomy & sexuality & the Adam character didn't like that. He wanted a submissive, obedient wife. At 1st the god character scolds Adam but eventually Adam wins bc the god character was a misogynistic god who "created women to serve men"🙄 so he gives Adam Eve & the devil protects Lillith & lets her stay with him. Eve gets blamed for the garden incident, so either she was another victim of Adams wrath like Lillith or the god character was incompetent in creating a submissive, obedient woman just as he was incompetent in creating the type of humans he sought to create which is why he drowned the 1st batch & then tortured & murdered his only son & yet humans are still imperfect. The story is riddled w/ obserdities.
Why are you praising us? We are the most educated generation this country ever had. We have the critical thinking skills that Boomers don't. It's a skill that develops from formal debate and writing. Additionally, we are much harder to fool with the generational bullshit of religion, white supremacy, and the patriarchy that we inherited. Also, "young woman" you mean black person. Cause a smart, articulate black person is the opposite of what the white supremacy has taught us. You realize how much of an insult it is to compliment a person for their intellect when I'll bet you've watched hundreds of thousands of Gen Z and Millennials articulate just as well, but because they're white, their intellect was "a given." These are the kinds of micro-biases that I realized I hold and I actively disavow now.
According to most biblical scholars, Genesis 2 was written first, as it is considered part of the "Jahwist" source, which is generally thought to be older than the "Priestly" source that contains Genesis 1; meaning the story in Genesis 2 is considered the earlier creation narrative.
Good point. Yahweh lied, the Serpent told the truth. The Serpent didn't trick anyone. Yahweh is the one who put the tree in the middle of the garden , next to the talking serpent (instead of inside a black hole on the other side of the universe). Of course he expected the people to eat the fruit.
Absolutely. The serpent is described as smart, but not as good or evil. A smart creature wouldn't have put itself voluntarily in danger for no reason. We can assume the serpent didn't want to be punished, so it makes more sense the serpent didn't know about the punishment. Heck, reading the story, it seems God himself didn't think of any punishment before the fact. It reads more as a "oh, crap" moment (for God), than the application of any premade law.
She’s an astute reader, a lot of these contradictions seem to go over peoples heads
She probably didn’t get indoctrinated into ignoring the contradictions 😅
@@NotBizarro or maybe she was indoctrinated and was able to get past it. That was me. The first time I read Genesis front to back outside of the Church (and I was really trying just to understand), I had a giant WTF moment. More reading led to more WTF...
Like rewatching Kubrick.
@@YoumadBro-sp9gs those texts were written like hundreds of years later by people who interpreted genesis 1 and 2 as being non contradictory so yes. The Bible isn’t a single document, it’s a collection of writings by tens, possibly hundreds of different people over an absurdly long amount of time, and at each layer of history the previous texts and stories are being interpreted and reinterpreted
@@YoumadBro-sp9gs it’s basically like using Dante’s Inferno to interpret the bible’s position on hell lol
She is a prime example of why there are certain people on earth today who absolutely do not want critical thought to be encouraged amongst the lay folk. People would think our ways out of the wet paper bags that we've been given.
I like the wet paper bag metaphor. I think today's fiat monetary system "supplied" by the Federal Reserve qualifies as a wet paper bag that should be treated as such.
But she is NOT correct anyway. If you're going to undergo critical thinking, you have to STUDY the original Hebrew of the text. Genesis 2:17 really says, "Dying, you will die." In other words, the PROCESS of death begins. It is ASSURED (surely) at that point. In the context of the Garden of Eden narrative, Adam and Eve FORFEIT the partaking of the Tree of Life - which would've prevented their physical death from happening. STUDY of the bible is key. Etymology, history, geography, culture, etc. "Dying, you will die" occurs elsewhere in the Bible and it's important to see how this term is used rather than forcing our modern Western view on the ancient text. Numbers 26:65 is the other occurrence of the term. There we find “they shall surely die” (literally, dying they shall die). These are the same Hebrew verbs and the same grammatical construction as in Genesis 2:17. God told the Israelites shortly after they came out of Egypt to go into the land of Canaan and take possession of it, as it had been promised to Abraham. In Numbers 26:65 God says that because the adult Jews (20 years and older) refused to trust and obey God and go into the Promise Land, they would die in the wilderness over the course of 40 years (one year for every day that the twelve spies investigated the Land-see Numbers 13:1-14:10). But those rebellious unbelieving Jews did not all die at the same moment. Their deaths were spread over that whole 40-year period. So, dying they did all die and that death occurred at various times some years after God’s pronouncement of judgment. Proper Hermeneutics is the key to getting proper interpretation and NOT just "critical thinking".
@@abc_12333 But then this would mean that Adam and Eve were still mortal before they ate from the tree of knowledge since they hadn't eaten from the tree of life yet, so they were already "dying". God actually seems afraid that if they eat from the tree of knowledge and the tree of life they will become like gods so he kicks them out. He even makes clothes out of skins before he does so, which is so weird, since it would mean that God kills an animal, skins it, and tailors clothes for them instead of just creating some heavenly garments.
@@arkady0 But it wasn't a case of "dying you will die". Death was NOT ASSURED until Adam and Eve ate from the Tree of Knowledge. As long as the Tree of Life was there, there was a chance of Immortality. God preventing them from eating from BOTH trees is just a POLEMIC (Greek word for war) on the ancient Egyptian cult of Osiris. The Osiris cult myth had those with the knowledge of good and evil AND immortality. But if you look in Genesis 7, it mentioned the 17th day of the 7th month - that was the day of Osiris' DEATH. The Hebrew writers opposed Egyptian & Mesopotamian (Adapa and his sages) thoughts of immortality. Evidence is also in the names of Genesis 5 - Adam (man), Seth (appointed) Enosh (mortal). "Man was appointed to be mortal".
@@abc_12333 Well of course JUST 'critical thinking' will not provide you with nuanced or correct answers, and I guess it's a little disheartening to see people 'stopping' in the questioning process and leaving it at that, I think this is an important first step in engaging those skills.
I love the juxtaposition between the passionate girl and the deadpan follow up confirmations. They would do a video together
It's the difference between people who are on TikTok all the time and people who don't use TikTok.
It is so refreshing to see a creator who clearly is able to think and to shape her thoughts into words - she is ways above so many of the people you usually debunk after your "all right, let's see it!" ;-)
Just like biblical and historical evidence proves that jesus and his apostles were vegatarians biblical and historical evidence also proves that the trinity, atonement, original sin and hell are very late misinterpretations and are not supported by the early creed hence its not a part of Christianity I pray that Allah swt revives Christianity both inside and out preserves and protects it and makes its massage be witnessed by all people but at the right moment, place and time
The secred text of the Bible says ye shall know them by their fruits
So too that I say to my christian brothers and sisters be fruitful and multiply
Best regards from a Muslim ( line of ismail )
Why can't human find Jesus dead body or adam and eve and if God was real God probably was lie to Adam and Eve
Worship the God of Abraham YHVH! Yehovah! Jehovah! Galatians 4:22...it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the servant girl and one by the free woman; 23 but the one by the servant girl was actually born through natural descent and the other by the free woman through a promise. 24 These things may be taken as a symbolic drama; for these women mean two covenants...
The Apostle Paul was in a Cult!
Paul worshiped the God of Abraham!
During his trial before Felix, Paul said, “I admit that I worship the God of our ancestors as a follower of the Way, which they call a sect” (Acts 24:14). We are also told that Felix knew about the Way (verse 22). It seems that the Romans considered the Way to be a sect rather than a religion.
Mark 9:38 John said to him: “Teacher, we saw someone expelling demons by using your name, and we tried to prevent him, because he was not following us.” 39 But Jesus said: “Do not try to prevent him, for there is no one who will do a powerful work on the basis of my name who will quickly be able to say anything bad about me. 40 For whoever is not against us is for us.
Matthew 7:22 Many will say to me in that day: ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and expel demons in your name, and perform many powerful works in your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them: ‘I never knew you! Get away from me, you workers of lawlessness!’
@@theguyver4934 Historical evidence proves jesus and his apostles were vegetarians? And here i thought we werent even sure *the* historical Jesus existed at all, as in the one performing miracles, having apostles in the first place, being crucified and coming back from death. *A* Jesus on the other hand, sure a few existed, and one probably gave rise to the myth and may have been crucified.. but everything else..
But she is NOT correct anyway. If you're going to undergo critical thinking, you have to STUDY the original Hebrew of the text. Genesis 2:17 really says, "Dying, you will die." In other words, the PROCESS of death begins. It is ASSURED (surely) at that point. In the context of the Garden of Eden narrative, Adam and Eve FORFEIT the partaking of the Tree of Life - which would've prevented their physical death from happening. STUDY of the bible is key. Etymology, history, geography, culture, etc. "Dying, you will die" occurs elsewhere in the Bible and it's important to see how this term is used rather than forcing our modern Western view on the ancient text. Numbers 26:65 is the other occurrence of the term. There we find “they shall surely die” (literally, dying they shall die). These are the same Hebrew verbs and the same grammatical construction as in Genesis 2:17. God told the Israelites shortly after they came out of Egypt to go into the land of Canaan and take possession of it, as it had been promised to Abraham. In Numbers 26:65 God says that because the adult Jews (20 years and older) refused to trust and obey God and go into the Promise Land, they would die in the wilderness over the course of 40 years (one year for every day that the twelve spies investigated the Land-see Numbers 13:1-14:10). But those rebellious unbelieving Jews did not all die at the same moment. Their deaths were spread over that whole 40-year period. So, dying they did all die and that death occurred at various times some years after God’s pronouncement of judgment. Proper Hermeneutics is the key to getting proper interpretation - which she didn't do.
How is death a threat to people who have no idea what death is?
Adam and Eve DEFINITELY knew what death was. Otherwise there would be no need for the Tree of Life. Animals died and plants died. They saw that first hand when they took fruits from the trees to eat.
@@abc_12333 In Genesis the only mention of death to Adam and Eve was that if they would eat the fruit they would surely die.
There is no other mention of death, so there was no way to for them to even know what death was.
There was no discussion of the purpose of the Tree of Life, and no indication that Adam had any need to know what it was, it was just a name. Could have been the Tree of Schwartz.
If you were told of a Tree of Defenestration, and that if you ate its fruit you would be defenestrated, unless you knew that word you would have no way of knowing that it meant you would be thrown out of a window.
Genesis is a narrative describing scenes and events to the reader, but there's no basis to assume that every character mentioned in a narrative knows everything about everything mentioned in the narrative. In fact in a narrative the characters in it only know things that the narrative says they know.
Even when we first learn about death and it's explained to us, we really don't have any sense of it until we see something die. As a kid you might know the definition, but it's not until your hamster dies, or your grandma, that you really start to understand what it is, and neither Adam or even ever saw anything die.
So clearly Adam and Eve could have had no idea what the threat actually was.
But ultimately it's just a fairy tale so you can really say whatever you want. We definitely didn't come from two people in a garden.
@@abc_12333 Note that the ancient Israelites didn't consider plants to be really alive, because they didn't have the "breath of life".
The New Testament says that death entered the world through Adam's Fall (Romans 5:12). Plenty of Christian apologists claim that animals didn't die or even eat each other until after the Fall.
All nonsense, but there it is.
@@rollinolson3562 Pay no attention to Christian apologists. As for Romans 5:12, Paul is NOT referring to natural death. Natural death is NOT a curse. This is about the blame, violence and jealousy that leads to death. Adam was the first to place blame. The clue in Romans 5 is that is says Adam to MOSES. Notice that "death" ends at MOSES. Moses brought in the law. A law against blame, malice, violence and jealousy. Obviously natural death didn't end when Moses came along.
Once it's threatened, they goddamn sure know what it is.
The story of Adam and Eve sounds exactly like the many ancient creation myths and folk tales from around the world. Presenting all the animals to Adam to find a helper - and failing? Right out of a storybook. Making Eve out of a piece of Adam? Sounds like something from Greek mythology.
Another problem is that you can't "obey" any commandment when you have no knowledge of good and evil, which A & E did not until after they ate the fruit that gave them that discernment. Myths are not rational.
A modern variation on the fall is the story of the magic mirror. Where the user asks about perfection and feels ashamed when they find out.
She is on the money. Dan basically just said the same thing in a lot more words - explaining HOW the Bible got to be a confusing mess. I appreciate that, but I also appreciate the work of the creator of the original video Dan was reacting to.
And who is the original creator to you?
@@andykanonik8935 by "original creator" I was referring to the nice young woman who made the video Dan was reacting to. Suffice it to say that I don't think ancient mythology is a good way to understand the universe.
@@andykanonik8935 Your comment confuses me. Did you just read "creator" and thought they talked about a god or what? Or do you literally want to know who the youtuber / tiktokker of the video was.. in which case.. yeah Dan should totally write video descriptions. Like at all.
@@andykanonik8935 There was no original creator.
The concept is almost always either nonsensical or self-refuting.
Insofar as being nonsensical, it becomes such by virtue of the fact that you can only call anything a creation (your unstated major premise) if you demonstrate the creator. And that requires two major undertakings : showing the existence of a creator AND demonstrating that it 'created' anything at all.
Just showing the existence of a creator rather strongly depends on defining the creator in at least profoundly positive ontological terms (ie., not saying what god ISN'T but what god IS). And nobody's managed to climb that hill.
@@PhrontDoor nor will they climb that hill
She's doing it all wrong. You're not supposed to actually read the Bible and ponder and ask questions. You're supposed to put it on your shelf in the living room for all to see, and then lecture them on a book you've never read.
I notice that Genesis also says God chose the trees in Eden for being "pleasant to the sight and good for food", so if the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil was not to be eaten, then it was presumably there for purely aesthetic reasons. Whether the fruit of that tree was toxic, or whether it conferred divine abilities of which Man is not supposed to posess, it still seems like a remarkably irresponsible place for a decorative plant.
This, in my opinion, is why large projects like Creation should be a collaborative effort, rather than left in the hands of lone, inexperienced deities.
The way I reconcile Gen. 2:7, is that as soon as they ate of the fruit, they died spiritually, and because they were exiled from paradise, then became subject to the mortality that the rest of the creation does. If you are of a tradition, however, that insists on literal interpretations of the Bible, then I would agree, the scriptures listed are problematic.
Just found your channel. While I lack the scholarly background you have, your reading and understanding of “Scripture “ is a delight. Thanks!!!!
“Were they sinners from birth? Were they running around naked on earth?” LOL!!
As apes in Africa, yes, they would be naked.
she is very astute for her age. She's asking some very good questions. That Christians that live the whole lives at church never asked.
Intelligence is the enemy of religious belief and indeed of superstition generally. Look at Matt Dillahunty, he started off life as a proselytiser until he discovered that it was no more than a collection of folk tales with no consistency beyond that.
This is why you don't read anything smartly but wisely
99.99 of the kkkhristians has never read the comic book aka bible, they let their pastor doe for them and in gratitude they give them all their money so they can buy their jets for millions of dollars and thus be closer to the imaginary friend...😉
@@hawkeyeavenge9262 I prefer Knowledge over "wisdom".
It’s funny how God didn’t kill Adam for a Distingue his commandment. But later on, they killed a man for picking up sticks on the Sabbath.
and that just proves that man made his god in his own image
They believe made in God image don't realize there black people and white and different humans race white different eyes and hair
@@KenyatteFullerjr-xm9ys Same race.
What race that be
@@KenyatteFullerjr-xm9ys
human race
What about mix children
I always read the threat of "death" after eating from the tree's fruit as a vague and relativistic way of speaking: Adam and Eve were supposed to live in perfect balance forever but after eating from the tree they became mortal, they would "certainly die" relatively soon after that point, so I imagined that's what it meant.
So, I just heard, yesterday, a new concept to me.....that whoever wrote the bible, borrowed from Plato.....that all the stories could very well have been written by a single person, but that person had studied Plato
Meaning Genesis 1 & 2 were both written at the same time
It made me really think
I'm not an expert by any means, but my understanding is that a lot of the Bible predates Plato and even more predates the Hellenistic era when Platonic philosophy would likely have been available to even scholars in Judea (or Babylon during the Exile). Beyond that, there are far too many different styles of writing and different theological approaches in even the Hebrew Bible for it to be one author or at one time.
Would A&E have been, in the story, immortal before the fruit? If so, could not the threat of them dying after eating it be about the humans becoming mortal as a result? In this story.
That is the consensus of many Christians and seems logical; however it would seem that they did not have the knowledge of “Good” and “Evil” until after they “ate” of the fruit.
I believe the story to be about Man’s introduction to duality, which involves separation. It involves comparisons and contrasts. Hot and Cold. In and Out. Experience seems to me to be the best teacher.
I guess the proverbial apple did not fall far from the tree!
@@lawrencewilliamson5480
Yes I agree, it being about an ur-separation is my view as well basically (although, on the mythological timeline Lucifer fell before A&E, I believe, which would then maybe represent an even more "ur" separation. Also, it's a multi-layered myth of course).
What I'm on about with the the two of them becoming mortal is that in that case death did actually result as a consequence of them "eating of the fruit", they did die. (not sure I was clear there).
He curses the woman and serpent, but doesn't curses Adam he curses the earth..definitely a man was writing this..lol
I've always heard the idea that the compilers knew the contradictions, but didn't know which was more accurate and so kept both, to avoid losing the truth.
There are many other contradictions in early Genesis: for example, the way the Earth formed and the order in which life is created.
Two things:
It's been pointed out that there are at least two writers of the book of Genesis. One consistently refers to God as Elohim, while the other one uses the Divine name. You seen the story of Noah where one writer has Noah taking two of every animal, but the other writer mentions seven of every clean animal.
Also, in regards to Adam dying when he eats up the fruit.... Some say that spiritual death is what occurred, rather than the more obvious physical death. You could also say that on the day that they ate the fruit, they began to die. Of course, Adam lived hundreds of years, but he did eventually die. Had they not eaten the fruit, they would have been immortal.
So. I made a garden. And in the middle of it, I put a magic tree [Gen 2: 9] just to mess with everybody. If anyone eats the fruit, they will gain knowledge of right and wrong. Then I put the twins (they share most of the same DNA [Gen 2: 21]) in the garden to live there, and I told them that if they eat the fruit of the magic tree that they will surely die on that day [Gen 2: 17]. That's not true, of course. I lied just for convenience. We all do. I just didn't want them to understand the difference between right and wrong. Because reasons. I am not omniscient, and I have no idea if they will eat the fruit or not. If I had knowledge of the future (or any amount of reasonable forethought) I wouldn't have put that tree in the Garden to begin with. Really, I put the tree there solely for meeting out punishment, if the kids ever do eat from it.
Keep in mind that the kids DON'T KNOW RIGHT FROM WRONG, nor do they really fathom what death is. Oh, also I put talking snakes in the garden. Just for fun. [Gen 3: 1]
So this one snake has to go and ruin the whole thing, and tells her the truth: that if she eats the fruit, she will NOT die, but rather that she will learn to understand the difference between right and wrong. [Gen 3: 5]
So she eats the fruit, DOESN'T die like I said she would, _and_ gives the fruit to her brother.
Then when I get back (hey, I can't be everywhere at once, you know) [Gen 3: 8], I find out they both ate the fruit, and I'm mad because now they know right from wrong, which they DIDN'T KNOW BEFORE they ate the fruit, and had no ability to understand NOT to eat the fruit until AFTER they ate it. And also, now they know that I lie. THANKS, snake!
Because she listened to the snake and ate the fruit, I curse her with painful childbirth far worse than what I originally had planned for her. [Gen 3: 16]
Because he listened to her and ate the fruit, I decide that he has to work fields to produce agriculture. That's punishment enough for him. [Gen 3: 17]
R/AmItheAsshole
I'm not sure how I really feel about your take but I sure enjoyed reading it! 😂
Love it.
And then we have to suffer for their sins, which i thought we were only responsible for our own sin... but i guess that`s not true but anyway totally believe this book or you`ll forever face the wrath of sin. Yeah...if it only was less complicated i`d obey and have faith right away.
One mistake here is that Adam and Eve were not expelled from the Garden because they ate the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil but because God was concerned, after that, that they might go on to eat from the tree of life. In the English of the NRSV, God expresses his concern. He says, What if the man should now eat from the tree of life and become immortal like us? Then it says, Therefore God sent the man out of the Garden. The "therefore" refers back to God's concern over them becoming immortal. They were not expelled as a direct result of eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. For that they were cursed.
We modern readers tend to get caught up in things needing to _always_ be congruent and make sense. Ancient peoples did not have an issue with this at all. The practice of putting, what were essentially, made up speeches into the mouths of various political and religious leaders was commonplace back then. They had a different relationship with what "truth" meant than we do today, and they were perfectly fine with accepting meaning over accuracy as the most important aspect of a story.
This seems to be the one of the main thing that a lot of Christian apologists seem to not understand/accept. I see so many like Erik from Testify saying things like "Matthew wouldn't have just made up this detail, he is relying on Mark in so many places and he would have to be a crazy schizophrenic to use information he had available and then just make up more specific information in other places". Reading Michael Grant's "Greek and Roman Historians: Information and Misinformation" did so much to help me understand how much I was projecting my standards of what history should look like onto ancient writers that had a very different worldview and approach to writing history.
EXACTLY! Thank you.
I feel like something similar happens with the first lie. It wasn't a moral matter, it was just a story of explanation and neither the serpent nor god were "evil" was we have forced those characters to be interpreted today.
The Samaritans only had the Torah! The Samaritan lady knew about the Messiah from the Torah. John 4:25 The woman said to him: “I know that Mes·siʹah is coming, who is called Christ. Whenever that one comes, he will declare all things to us openly.”
The Greeks worshiped what they did not know! John 4:22!
Joseph - Imhotep - Thoth - Hermes! Hermes, the Greek god of interpretive communication, was combined with Thoth, the Egyptian god of wisdom. The Egyptian priest and polymath Imhotep had been deified long after his death and therefore assimilated to Thoth in the classical and Hellenistic periods.
When the Greeks learned that the Egyptians had a god Thoth, or Tehuti, who specialized in wisdom and learning, they named him Hermes Trismegistus, or “thrice greatest Hermes.” Supposedly Hermes Trismegistus was the scribe of the gods who authored the sacred hermetic works that described the material world as well as the quest for spiritual perfection.
Altar and Pillar
Isaiah 19:19 Revelation 5:5
Imhotep - Joseph the same person who built the step pyramid. Acts 7:10... God gave him favor before Pharaoh, king of Egypt. God also gave Joseph unusual wisdom, so that Pharaoh appointed him ruler over all of Egypt and put him in charge of everything he owned.
The Great Pyramid has 8 sides. The 8 sides represent the 8 kingdoms of the world. Jesus is the corner stone. The last kingdom to rule forever.
There is actually ten sides counting top and bottom. First Empire was Nimrod. Who represents Babylon the Great, the Empire of false religion. The bottom of the pyramid is a side. All eight Kingdoms of Revelation ride with the harlot, Babylon the Great.
The Great Pyramid having no top corner stone and
the top being flat is the Harlot. Jesus is the cornerstone the builders rejected. The Nations would rather follow the Harlot than Jesus. Revelation 17:9 “This calls for a mind that has wisdom: The seven heads mean seven mountains, where the woman sits on top. 10 And there are seven kings: Five have fallen, one is, and the other has not yet arrived; but when he does arrive, he must remain a short while. 11 And the wild beast that was but is not, it is also an eighth king, but it springs from the seven, and it goes off into destruction.
Matthew 21:42 Jesus said to them: “Did you never read in the Scriptures, ‘The stone that the builders rejected, this has become the chief cornerstone. This has come from Jehovah, and it is marvelous in our eyes’? 43 This is why I say to you, the Kingdom of God will be taken from you and be given to a nation producing its fruits.
What does the Sphinx really represent. Because Jesus is the Lion of the Tribe of Judah.
Isaiah 19:19 In that day there will be an altar to Jehovah in the middle of the land of Egypt and a pillar to Jehovah at its boundary. 20 It will be for a sign and for a witness to Jehovah of armies in the land of Egypt; for they will cry out to Jehovah because of the oppressors, and he will send them a savior, a grand one, who will save them.
Revelation 5:5 But one of the elders said to me: “Stop weeping. Look! The Lion of the tribe of Judah, the root of David, has conquered so as to open the scroll and its seven seals.”
Biblical literalism can be a real mind screw. Interpreting Adam and Eve as allegories of the first peoples makes a lot more sense.
An allegory is more of a recent thing. Since before the discovery of ancient human fossils everyone saw it as to take it literal. It was always taken to be literal and even the New Testament refers to Adam as the first man in enough occasions.
allegory = fiction
It's fiction yes, but allegory? No. Allegories are supposed to be instructive. This story is explanatory. What are we supposed to learn from this story? Don't fall into Yahweh's traps? It makes more sense as an [incorrect] explanation of why humans have hardships.
@@travis1240 same message as the rest of the bible: god is an azhole. I don't buy that it actually is an allegory, but if it is, that's the message.
That may be true historically, bit as a defense of the text as divine truth, I don't think that it works.
I've heard many Christians say that it is an allegory. However, they never go on to explain how it makes sense as an allegory. If God lying to two people isn't literally true, how is it allegorically true? What is it telling us and why is this a good way to tell us? If the interpretation that a person offers isn't held by most people, then the texts isn't doing a good job of communicating it.
I feel like I’ve always believed in Evolution more the the Creation (even when others were discouraging me from doing so), so I had to think of how I’m supposed to understand Genesis on its own terms. I have to say that your content has helped me understand them in a more nuanced way and I’m super grateful for that.
So Evolution is about a talking Ape. That teaches you about a talking snake! Lol
There was only Adam. Adam was naming all of the animals that God was creating! How long was Adam living before the creation of a woman! Genesis 2:18 Then Jehovah God said: “It is not good for the man to continue to be alone. I am going to make a helper for him, as a complement of him.” 19 Now Jehovah God had been forming from the ground every wild animal of the field and every flying creature of the heavens, and he began bringing them to the man to see what he would call each one; and whatever the man would call each living creature, that became its name. 20 So the man named all the domestic animals and the flying creatures of the heavens and every wild animal of the field, but for man there was no helper as a complement of him.
Dan, I attended a progressive seminary, and I’m curious on your thoughts on this reading that I learned about: my OT professor read the Deuteronomistic history using “death” as a stand-in for exile or separation from the land. The two examples that spring to my mind are obviously Genesis, and also in Deuteronomy 30:19 when Moses says he set before the Israelites “life and death,” after reading the law. His contention was that post-exilic authors would have seen the lack of observance of the law as the reason for their exile, just like Adam and Eve were exiled from the Garden of Eden.
A special take on eating the apple is from Adrian Bliss. Called: Eve has had enough.
One of the funniest videos ever made
Yes I love that young man he is so funny and talented.
You have beautiful blue eyes Dan 💯
@jannette I can’t thank you enough for mentioning Adrian Bliss. I’ve just returned from my first foray into his work and found it suits my sense of humor perfectly.
My guess was that G2 had suffered from editor’s “fatigue:” that they changed some things from an earlier version where Adam did die in some sense but those changes inserted contradictions that they didn’t notice or couldn’t iron out.
Your guess is in the absence of academic knowledge. What is the value of guessing? If it matters look into it. Genesis is considered to be written in 600 BCE. That was the third rewrite during the so called Babylonian captivity. In fact scribes voluntarily went there and accessed other religions documents. For instance the flood myth tracks well with two prior telling of the story that was thousands of years old and had been part of three prior tales. You can see it is woven together. The first te.lin had a 15 foot flood. During this rewrite the pantheon of El was discarded for the warrior god Yahweh and they went from Canaanite polytheism to monotheism. Other older texts we stitched in. We only discovered they descended from Canaanites a century ago after uncovering a Canaanite grave with tablets that were clearly ancient Hebrew writing. That also proves they were revisionist as those people were supposedly wiped out. 70% of the people in Jordan carry their genes. The "royal we" references are from older writing when they were polytheist. This is from centuries of academic research and isn't something to introduce before passing the collection plate. That needs no explanation.
I was 16 when I first read the bible as a book instead of random daily verses. And then I realized this is 100% man-made there is no way that an omnipotent god would commit so many mistakes. Even the devil can inspire clearer messages to his followers according to Christians who say that everything is diabolic.
@@MrMortal_Ra Yes. And what about god telling the Israelites to kill everybody in their way?
I told someone recently that if you read the Bible as you would a novel, using the rational part of your mind, a lot of it doesn't make sense. I also read the Bible, like a book of stories when I was younger and trying to piece it together, ask questions, pointing out loopholes and fallacies only managed to earn me rebuke from the ppl around me. Generally, religion requires just going with the flow for it to work. As soon as you start questioning it, it's bound to come apart at the seams.
@@joylastname3035that’s, “eating the apple”.
Holman Christian Standard Bible Genesis 3:4 No! You will not die,” the serpent said to the woman.”
Is Lying a Righteous Deception or an Unrighteous Deception?
We are born into Satan's Kingdom. This is why we need the tree of life. Jesus is the vine the true branch of life to God. Jesus will crush this Kingdom.
Eve transgressed against the Law of God. Eve is the mother of everyone living. So in birth pains everyone was born into lawlessness. The cherub angel in charge of the garden of Eden deceived her with an unrighteous deception. This made this cherub angel the ruler of this world.
Satan is an Angel of Light
By an unrighteous deception she ate the fruit.
2 Thessalonians 2:9 But the lawless one’s presence is by the operation of Satan with every powerful work and lying signs and wonders 10 and every unrighteous deception for those who are perishing, as a retribution because they did not accept the love of the truth in order that they might be saved. 11 That is why God lets a deceptive influence mislead them so that they may come to believe the lie, 12 in order that they all may be judged because they did not believe the truth but took pleasure in unrighteousness.
2 Corinthians 2:14 And no wonder, for Satan himself keeps disguising himself as an angel of light. 15 It is therefore nothing extraordinary if his ministers also keep disguising themselves as ministers of righteousness. But their end will be according to their works.
2 Timothy 2:14 Also, Adam was not deceived, but the woman was thoroughly deceived and became a transgressor.
Adam wasn't deceived. The ground did produce thorns and thistles because Jesus worn the crown of thorns and thistles. God told Adam the prophecy of the resurrection. Genesis 3:15
The Sacrifice of Jesus was the first part of the prophecy of Genesis 3:15 And I will put enmity between you and the woman and between your offspring and her offspring. He will crush your head, and you will bruise him in the heel.” Satan the Dragon and the Wild Beast the 6th Kingdom executed Jesus on their image the cross. It was the Roman Empire of Italy that is also the shape of the heel. So the first part of the prophecy is complete . Satan bruised Jesus in the heel.
I always read it as upon eating the fruit Adam would become susceptible to physical death. However, another reading is spiritual death. He would become spiritually dead, that is separated from God.
I like Alter’s translation of Genesis 2:17. “for on the day you eat from it, you are doomed to die.” It helps the narrative flow a lot better.
That is CORRECT! The original Hebrew is "Dying you will die" - which matches Alter's translation.
Dan has addressed this point in an earlier video. It’s clear in the language that god says the moment you eat it, you’ll die - as in drop dead, nothing to do with doomed or death will come upon you at some point. You have to reconcile the lie, hyperbolic or straight up deceit. He’s allowed to lie. He also changes his mind.
@@GoodieWhiteHat NOT true at all. Look up the ORIGINAL Hebrew. "DYING, you will die". Dying is a PROCESS. The process begins in that Adam forfeited his rights to the Tree of Life! That is the CONTEXT. Adam is no longer permitted to eat from the Tree of Life (Genesis 3). So with no chance of living forever, the DYING process is now official and has begun. "Dying you will die" is also the EXACT phrase in the Book of Numbers when the Israelites FORFETIED their chance of entering the promise land. Did they die immediately? NO! For many, it took 40 years.
@@GoodieWhiteHat Here’s Alter’s commentary on verses 16-17:
“The form of the Hebrew in both instances is what grammarians call the infinitive absolute: the infinitive immediately followed by a conjugated form of the same verb. The general effect of this repetition is to add emphasis to the verb, but because in the case of the verb “to die” it is the pattern regularly used in the Bible for the issuing of death sentences, “doomed to die” is an appropriate equivalent.”
Like I said in my original comment, it helps the narrative flow a lot better. Chapter 3 notes that the serpent was the most cunning of all the beasts. He is portrayed as a deceptive character. If God had lied in chapter 2, it would be a bit odd to paint the serpent as a deceiver, considering that he was the one who told the truth.
But as for my personal beliefs, I have no desire to reconcile the passage. I would not object to God lying in this passage. Both have strong arguments for their interpretations, but in my personal opinion, Alter’s interpretation makes more sense than Dan’s.
@@abc_12333 I mean he still lied tho? Suddenly the dude drops all these other curses on them? Oh hai, farming and childbirth are gonna suck now?
That said, it's also painfully obvious none of it is literal considering one of the curses was regarding agriculture and bread...and humans certainly didnt start out farming. There was the whole stone age/hunting gathering thing.
The thing about Eve and the Serpent is that Eve never actually heard the Lᴏʀᴅ God give that commandment not to eat of the Fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. She was too busy _not having been created yet_ when the Lᴏʀᴅ gave Adam that commandment. The sequence of events in *Genesis Chapter 2* after Adam was placed in the Garden to keep and dress it:
• The Lᴏʀᴅ commands Adam to freely eat of any tree in the Garden except the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.
• There is no help meet found for Adam.
• So out of the ground the Lᴏʀᴅ made every beast of the field and bird of the air and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them, and whatever name he gave them was the name of that type of animal henceforth.
• _Still_ no help meet found for Adam.
• The Lᴏʀᴅ caused a deep sleep (anesthesia?) to come over Adam, and did a little divine surgery to remove a bone (often translated “rib”) and from that made a woman.
• Adam wakes up and meets the woman, declares her to be bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh, and names her “Eve,” for she is the mother of all living.
Now, maybe the Lᴏʀᴅ did repeat His commandment to Eve later, or maybe Adam told her second-hand, because she _did_ know about it in Chapter 3 when the Serpent asks her about it, but we’re not actually shown her learning of this commandment.
"Simply does not happen" can be said about a lot of the "prophecies'" as well. Much like the second coming.
It's just amazing that people fill volumes trying to explain that the words of the Bible don't say what they say in order to make it more palatable.
In other words, it’s just a story
It's not just a story. It's an allegory and a riddle about the process of growing up. If you can't see that, then you aren't intellectually functioning at the level of a high school teen who is learning about literature analysis around ninth or tenth grade. ;-)
@@lepidoptera9337 “it’s not just a story. It’s an allegory” 🤓 wow dude why do you feel the need to insult me like that? You know it’s not just an allegory, it’s also a political statute, disgracing the snake which was a symbol of Egyptian power that was popular during the time of king hezekiah, and empowering the cherubim which were pushed as a religious symbol by king hezekiah.
@@grieftex803 I didn't insult you. You did that to yourself by making an unqualified statement about one of the most fundamental pieces of text in human literature. ;-)
The Jewish folks didn't have beef with the Egyptians at the time the story was written in its final form. If anything, Egypt would have been an ally of Judah against the Assyrians. ;-)
@@lepidoptera9337 the Bible clearly states that Egypt betrayed the judeans and Jerusalem was sieged by the Assyrians, after this hezekiah went to worship the cherubim in the temple.
@@grieftex803 That's the political story the Jewish folks wrote. You are listening to the 2600 year old equivalent of the PLO here and take it as gospel (pun!). ;-)
Note Gen 2.17 does not say drop dead, "for when you eat from it you will certainly die.” It could imply that humans would have lived forever if they had not eaten the fruit. 3.22 "He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.”
Thanks for this explanation. I think that it makes more sense that the death threat is a white lie, just like you say in your example of a hyperbolic threat from a parent.
I think it takes more mental gymnastics or theological interpretation to make it not a lie.
I don't understand apologists' motivation to try to 'defend' God in this issue. God is almighty and anwers to no one. He killed Job's family for no good reason and refused to explain his motivations to Job, making perfectly clear to Job that he did it because he could and nobody can question him.
Why should this god abstain from lying?
Well, I lied. I understand perfectly the apologists' motivation. I think we all do.
He probably did it because Job is very moral 😇. And moral fanatic humans are very irritating, especially to someone who wants to make a stable human society that doesn't kill itself when left alone for a short while.
Especially, because the best way to make sense of the 2 Genesis accounts is God makes humans. Then they die out. Then God tried a bunch of other times until Adam and Eve.
That means Yahweh resents moral 😇 fanatic humans for always leading to society's destruction.
Yahweh is *consistently de facto* nice to sinners 😈. Giving them toothless punishments that follow the letter of the law, but without any actual harm or malice. Yahweh always looks out for them.
Yahweh hates Job, because it is sick of humans like him given Yahweh's experience with them.
@@juanausensi499
I kept getting bullshit answers or in trouble, pointing out these exact same points in Christian School. Thank you young lady, thank you Dan
This is me in middle school. I think I was an atheist but was brainwashed to stay due to fear of hell (also, as a kid, I couldn't refuse to go to church).
Incidentally, the bible keeps saying "serpent" but that fool had legs. That's a lizard in my book.
Snakes have vestigial legs, not all lizards have legs, snakes and lizards have no real taxonomic distinction, and God cursed the snake to be legless so this is an origin story for how snakes *lost* their legs.
@@pseudonymous9153 No taxonomic distinction, eh? What about an etymological distinction?
I love all the creation stories! I wish there was an anthology of creation stories of the world - past and present...
Considering how much of a stitchwork the bible is, and that other people existed besides Cain and so on, is there any point in the young earth creationists arguing that you can add the ages of the lineage from adam and eve to arrive at a 6000 year old earth? I mean, the conclusion is obviously wrong anyways, but i wonder if thats even a valid point to make, if the bible already assumes there to be a populated earth anyways.
My question had always been “Why would God expect Man to obey him if they didn’t know the difference between Good and Evil? They could not have known that they were doing something naughty until after they ate of the fruit…”
There is also the issue with the serpent, who is often associated with the Lord of Lies.
He who lords over lies must know the truth. Otherwise, how could they lie?
And also, if we take Genesis 4 literally, doesn't it render the whole original sin passed on to every people senseless?
Her last observation is one I asked in Bible School and got in trouble and kicked out. Your replies are so helpful. Thank you
The serpent probably knows…they will be punished. A rationalization. Otherwise, as usual, a useful and informative video.
It's not very clear if the serpent knew about the punishment. In fact, it's possible to make the case for the serpent not knowing about it.
First of all, the serpent itself was punished, and it gained nothing by telling the truth to Eve. And we know the serpent is cunning, because it is described as such, and such a cunning creature wouldn't put itself knowingly in danger for no reason.
And second, the punishment looks like it was improvised on the spot. It was more God reacting to the possibility of humans with both knowledge and immortality (becoming like God), something he didn't want, than a meditated punishment. If the snake didn't know about the reluctance of God to allow his creatures to better themselves (Adam and Even didn't know), the punishment could have been also a surprise for the serpent.
Serpents that can talk..................WOW!
Did this serpent participate in "The Lion King"?
@@machonsote918 This serpent was a Pharaoh... you know, the kings whose crown
had a rearing serpent protruding from the forehead right between the eyes.
@@Highspergamy : Oh, God...................C'mon people..........let's activate those brain cells......both of them.
@@machonsote918 Yeah that's what I did. I approached my investigation into the Adam and Eve story by writing a paper to answer the question "What is scriptural authoring?", and what are the prerogatives of someone who is positioned to spearhead such an undertaking? Making a list of rules of thumb to serve as guidelines to the layman were they to try their hand in the arts of mythcraft... the first rule on the list... Never tell the naked truth..
Why assume the authors were trying to write a straightforward book?
Firstly, Genesis 1 is clearly derived from the Creation Stele of Memphis...
Then the first family is marred by fratricide, reminiscent of Osiris and Set....
Then .
The one thing that dosen’t make sense in that incest is banned but Adam and Eves grandchildren would either their, or their kids kids
A rebuttal to Day and Barr: wouldn't God already know that the hyperbolic threat wouldn't work? Or do they think that God is not all-knowing?
Ignoring the fact that neither Adam and Eve knew they were doing wrong, since they hadn't yet eaten of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, _how_ could they have known? That's always bothered me - the God of Genesis is not a kind nor loving God, nor even a just or merciful God.
I do like your comparison and analysis of the story as part of the local mythology trying to draw the line between human and divine. I have always been interested in the changing relationship of humans to gods based on when and where these stories originate and are retold.
I do wish you had included a link to the original video you are commenting on.
From what I've read, both Day and Barr recognize that Yahweh was not generally thought of as all-knowing at this point in time (if at all). That came later, largely under the intellectual influence of Hellenism. The Eden narrative tradition (otherwise known by "J," or the "Yahwist") is filled with references to a very anthropomorphic Yahweh being surprised, changing his plans, and seeking information.
Philosophers have made careers out of thinking about the implications of belief in the Abrahamic god. I think it was Hegel who said that god could not be inside his creation, the universe, because if he was then he could not be omnipotent. If on the other hand he was outside the universe he could have no effect on it. There are more ways to spend a life counting the number of angels on a pin head than anyone could imagine.
Dan,. I appreciate your demeanor and willingness to accept information in general, when you see it's correct. I will say that I agree with the young lady presenting but I see it from a different lens. You make the point about parallels between the Ancient Sumerian story of Adapa and the Garden of Eden. One thing about the older Sumerian (original story), is that there is a plurality (more than one god) in it, where EA/Enki tells Adapa not to eat or drink the food of the gods when he (Adapa) faces Anu, EA/Enki's father! Both EA and Anu, or considered gods. I am using a small "g", because I do feel that these Anunna (Anunnaki) are the same deities spoken of in nearly all the World's religions, including the Bible but they are real beings not spiritual and definitely not the all "creators" of the Universe. Yet, as in the seminal text (Enuma Elish), they did create mankind!
So in 2 days we've had "is jesus god ?" and "why is Genisis tosh/full of contraductions ?"
Not backing away from the big stuff !
I like it !!!
AS FAR AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THE ONLY KNOWLEDGE ADAM GOT FROM THE TREE WAS 2FOLD:
1 THEY WERE NAKED
2 HE COULD SEW CLOTHES.... BUT NOT JUST ANY CLOTHES-
ADAM CREATED A CAMOUFLAGE PATTERN THAT EVEN GAWD COULDN'T SEE THEM!
Spiritual death = being separated from God's presence. Adam and Eve being expelled from the garden and therefore God's presence. The day they ate they died spiritually. Just my LDS perspective on the text. Thanks as always Dan!
Or it's just a fable. Seems like the most reasonable interpretation. No need for any ex post facto rationalizations.
@@EnglishMikeYou could always pray and ask God yourself 😉 haha
This is what my dad preached in our Wesleyan - Methodist Church and what I always believed. Even now after years of hearing and reading the discourse and wide-ranging takes, I still feel like this is the death of which God speaks.
@@dinocollins720What makes you think I didn't try? Nobody home.
@@sashagabor76 love it sister!!!
Rod and/or Tod Flanders: “Did Cain and Abel have children with their mother or with each other?”
Dan, have you done a video about the parallels of the Enuma Eilish and Genesis 1?
Professor Christine Hayes is quite good.
---------------------------------------------------------
*The Enuma Elish would later be the inspiration for the Hebrew scribes who created the text now known as the biblical Book of Genesis.* Prior to the 19th century CE, the Bible was considered the oldest book in the world and its narratives were thought to be completely original. In the mid-19th century CE, however, European museums, as well as academic and religious institutions, sponsored excavations in Mesopotamia to find physical evidence for historical corroboration of the stories in the Bible. ***These excavations found quite the opposite, however, in that, once cuneiform was translated, it was understood that a number of biblical narratives were Mesopotamian in origin.***
*Famous stories such as the Fall of Man and the Great Flood were originally conceived and written down in Sumer,* translated and modified later in Babylon, and reworked by the Assyrians ***before they were used by the Hebrew scribes for the versions which appear in the Bible.***
***In revising the Mesopotamian creation story for their own ends, the Hebrew scribes tightened the narrative and the focus but retained the concept of the all-powerful deity who brings order from chaos.*** Marduk, in the Enuma Elish, establishes the recognizable order of the world - *just as God does in the Genesis tale* - and human beings are expected to recognize this great gift and honor the deity through service.
*"Enuma Elish - The Babylonian Epic of Creation - Full Text - World History Encyclopedia"*
*"Sumerian Is the World's Oldest Written Language | ProLingo"*
*"Sumerian Civilization: Inventing the Future - World History Encyclopedia"*
*"The Myth of Adapa - World History Encyclopedia"*
Also discussed by Professor Christine Hayes at Yale University in her 1st lecture of the series on the Hebrew Bible from 8:45 to 14:30 minutes, lecture 3 from 28:30 to 41:35 minutes, lecture 4 from 0:00 up to 21:30 minutes and 24:00 up to 35:30 minutes and lecture 7 from 24:20 to 25:10 minutes.
From a Biblical scholar:
"Many stories in the ancient world have their origins in other stories and were borrowed and modified from other or earlier peoples. *For instance, many of the stories now preserved in the Bible are* ***modified*** *versions of stories that existed in the cultures and traditions of Israel’s* ***older*** *contemporaries.* Stories about the creation of the universe, a cataclysmic universal flood, digging wells as land markers, the naming of important cultic sites, gods giving laws to their people, and even stories about gods decreeing the possession of land to their people were all part of the cultural and literary matrix of the ancient Near East. *Biblical scribes freely* ***adopted and modified*** *these stories as a means to express their own identity, origins, and customs."*
*"Stories from the Bible"* by Dr Steven DiMattei, from his website *"Biblical Contradictions"*
Ptah and the Put cycle of 9 is a CLOSER connection to Genesis 1. It was Ptah that said "Let there be..." speaking things into being. "It was good" is seen in African folklore. Same as the progression of "sun, moon and stars". There are also 50+ EGYPTIAN loan words in Genesis 1. Enuma Elish was very little to do with it.
@@abc_12333 I disagree with your conclusion
@@user-gk9lg5sp4y Speaking things into being is completely absent in Enuma Elish. Ptah did that.Tiamat is murdered in Enuma Elish. There is no murder in Genesis 1. The abundance of Egyptian loan words in Genesis 1 is NOT in any other chapter in the Bible.
@@abc_12333 Those are not the parallels I'm talking about. You appear to want to prove to me something about a connection between Egyptian writings and Genesis. I never denied that there was a connection. Do you deny that there are parallels between the Enuma Elish and Genesis? What is your goal here?
Do you think you'll ever do a playlist of videos breaking down each book of the bible from start to finish?
You make sense of all this. Thank you!
On this one, both missed.
They've apparently never seen K-Dramas or Pulp Fiction.
Tiamat and Adamu = Parents of Modern man born in South Africa created as a slave or servant for the Annunaki ,(Psalms 23} = deep sleep advanced genetic engineering giving modern man a hybrid ,the power of procreation now take a offspring and procreate it with a pure blood Annunaki = Titi and Adappa born in the Eridu kept at the garden /Golbeki Tepe born in 334,000 then came the Kings list of ATLANTIS it was these who lived longer lifespans and aged slower than modern man until the great flood ..now Noah represented a step in evolution of modern man becoming Civilized man ,he was born with these bright blue eyes and fair skin , i don't where those blue eyes came from ,but the blonde hair came from Tiamat mother of modern man,she kinda had a complexion like a native American but she had blonde hair and Adamu was dark reddish brown both mothers were named after the original Eve or Evening Star who was the companion of the Mourning Star who were the infinite all only begotten , Revelations 4 verse 4 = there paradise or Kingdom until she fell from grace causing a great war in heaven over 4 billion years ago ...but i like that call Mister Enllil/Yahweh the liar he is a be free of his evil false curse ,it was those ugly lil Iggy grey perverts responsible for who would take the daughter of Tiamat and Adappa making abominations teaching wicked wickedness in league with Marduk/Ra irritating Enlil even more ,then came the fall of Sumer.. it's kinda so bear with me #MotherSisterAndBrother
And let's not forget that if Adam and Eve had not eaten of the Tree of knowledge of Good and Evil then they would not know the difference and therefore were not worthy of being punished.
Another thing I find interesting is that there's the part in Genesis where God is walking through the Garden of Eden and cannot find Adam and Eve because they are hiding. Say what? But in any case, the more I find out about how the bible came together and how haphazard its construction really was there is ZERO chance that this book was not entirely written by human beings.
Its very refreshing to Sistas use critical thinking to break free from these mythologies.
It's just a poorly written fairy tale.
Dr. Dan - I am sincerely asking you the question as a truth seeker. What do you say is the way to eternal salvation?
Actually, before anything, could you clarify what you mean by "salvation"?
This is why the Bible is so not believable
And yet so many believe in the myth…..
Am I the only one here who thinks applying this amount of analysis to the Bible is like applying quantum physics to understanding why a rabbit’s foot brings good luck?
Unfortunately, too many of YHVH's lapdogs think that the Bible is "literally true". We need to stamp into their brains that it is not.
It’s all a mistranslation. Or an ink smear. In any case, turns out it actually *was* Adam and Steve.
technically, it was Eve and her rib. Think of it with people who copy other people. we all can tell which one is the original that "inspired" the copy. Why do men have nipples? Nipples are for babies and gestation and milk. Why do men have nipples?
(i mean, this happened way before our species came into existence, but even a creation myth should have something so basic as which came first. That's no mistranslation or ink smear.. there's a problem with the story teller.)
@@jenniferhunter4074 The fact that tha woman was, in the story, an afterthought, just a 'helper' for a planned lone, perfect man, and that the divine family is suspiciously devoided of a mother (we have a father, a son, and .... a ghost? one of these are not like the others), makes me think the authors of the story were ravenously sexist.
@@juanausensi499 I'm not sure about ravenously sexist. I don't think they even thought that women needed to be considered. We were just background.
@@jenniferhunter4074 More property than background, but yes, i see what you mean
@@juanausensi499 I know we say that the implication of these verses and ideas translates to "they viewed women as property". But ask yourself this. What kind of property?
For me, I get this impression that women would be considered facial tissues. replaceable generic property. Get rid of one and you get another. You damaged my plastic drinking cup.. go get me another one.
We're not even valuable to the point of insurance against loss. I get this sense that women are background stuff. The only time we're valuable is if the "do not break seal" is on us and we can be traded. But if the trade doesn't go through, no harm/no foul. The owner won't be pining for that first car he had when he was a teenager. It's just background ... stuff.
Same for children too. I don't think that the ancient writers thought we (women) and children were human. I think they genuinely thought we weren't human... unless they needed to pass the blame and beat up somebody. Then, we were acknowledged just before they sacrificed us.
Getring kicked out of where you aren't appreciated is a blessing, not a curse.
Man was created in Genesis chapter 1 and Adam was created in chapter 2. Did you REALLY think all races came from one???!!! The ten ''lost tribes'' are proven biblically, historically and archaeologically to be the Germanic, Celtic, Scandinavian, Anglo Saxon and kindred peoples of today. "Saxson'' is in reference to "Issac's son". A good film on this is Roots; From Abraham to America.
nice try. Of course all people didn't come from Adam and Eve - the stories in Genesis are myths that are completely unsupported by evidence. The book you referenced is apologetic BS.
Your white supremacy is showing.
@@travis1240 *Your wisdom is underwhelming. And I have no time for bs.* 👋🔥
Vulcan Forge Your sub humaness is obvious.
@@residue-er5dooo Then stop reading apologetics and try some science
In regards to eve and being told they would die,couldn’t that have meant she will eventually die as opposed to having immortality?
In Genesis God was not talking about physical death but rather spiritual death. They continued to live on Earth but separated from God
I think the reason for the compilers of Genesis as we know it not harmonizing the different texts is because they were not trying to compile a unified narrative. As with the monk Nennius, when he compiled the History of the Britons in the 9th century, what they did was preserve different narratives from their traditions and set those narratives into a coherent timeline of the prehistory of the nation of Israel.
If the above supposition is accurate, then it’s possible that, like Nennius composing the History (or Snorri Sturluson composing the Prose Edda), it was the threat of the loss of tradition that prompted the first compilation efforts of the book of Genesis-so perhaps the Assyrian conquest of the northern state of Israel was the inciting event that led to the creation of the book of Genesis, and the multiple twinning stories in Genesis reflect the twin traditions of Israel and Judah being combined into one timeline.
By the twinning narratives, I’m referring to the way that we see two different variations of the same motifs represented in Genesis-the two Creation narratives, of course, but there’s also two different variations of God creating land out of the waters of chaos (Genesis 1 begins from that point, and Gen. 6-9 has a similar, more detailed version), the parallel structures of the Abraham/Isaac/Ishmael and Isaac/Esau/Jacob stories (both Abraham & Isaac are childless into old age, both tell a foreign king that their wives are their sisters, both dig the same wells in the same area, both are succeeded by their younger sons through the direct intervention of their wives) and so forth.
In much of the debates between atheists and theists about the contents of the bible, it isn't made clear to the audience that the scholarship already knows it was stitched together, sourced from many authors over many centuries and from many cultures. The contents are also not in the order in which they were written. The consequences are that parts of it have been modified over time in an attempt to make it all congruent but it's difficult to reconcile all of them.
This is maybe the first #maklelan video I've seen where the original poster might be enlightened by the scholarship
I love the narrative of Adam and Eve from a literary perspective. The trying to encroach and deity and being punished is super interesting to me as a reader. I also like the stories of Prometheus, Babel, and Icarus.
Ancient myth-writers were big on having the gods keep humans under their thumb. They would have been horrified by the internet and space travel.
They should have named the bible "Fairy tales for adults".
As the 'god' of Genesis is pretty clearly not all knowing, as billed, perhaps the god was not lying when it said "in that day you will die," but instead underestimated Adam and Eve's resilience.
God, "If you set the toaster to '3,' the toast will be ruined!"
Well, actually- I did set the toaster to 3, and while the toast *was* very dark, it wasn't actually blackened, nor was it inedible.
I've only recently found your channel and your tictok videos - thanks for the content!
One thing that never made sense to me in the story of Adam and Eve, and I'm surprised the content creator in your video didn't mention it, when Adam and Eve eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, they can't know yet that it's bad to disobey. It seems pretty harsh to punish them forever for what they couldn't possibly know was bad.
Is there some linguistic way to interpret this so that it actually makes sense?
Stop trying to justify YHVH's actions.
They did die in one day - one of Jehovah the Father's 'days' (i.e. within 1000 years). Notice that in the Biblical record not a single human lives beyond 1000 years. In order for us to live forever we must have access to the 'Tree of Life', which Adam and Eve were kept away from once they sinned, but in God's Kingdom (at the end of Revelation) the 'Tree of Life' returns and we are able to eat its fruit and live forever. Much peace and love.
🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤣🤣🤣
The original user of literature was too help people understand the world and how to deal with it.
Most people didn't read until a few centuries ago, so these were oral stories.
They started out as instruction but quickly became coercion, deliberate attempts to control how people behaved.
"Should" was introduced and then "must".
"You must do your work in the field", "what if i don't want to work?"
"God orders you to work and if you disobey God will punish you."
"What can God do to me?"
"God can take your food."
"I don't care, I'll get my own food."
After awhile, "God can see to it that when you die you experience eternal torture, do you dare disobey him now?"
They figured out how to scare must people into doing whatever they wanted.
It has nothing to do with an actual "God", it was just controlling people, "politics".
It still is, that's all it has ever been.
Those similarities between the story of adapa and adam are crazy! I wouldnt be surprised if the writers really did copy from it when creating genesis 2. A bit wierd that that would then place adam in the wrong chronological order in relation to the flood, given that his alleged descendant noah would be the paralell to Napishtim.
Do we have any manuscripts that do not start with a chapter 1 and begin with the chapter 2 ?
The story of Cain and able is about the first homside. It doesn't say they are the first children. And clearly they aren't because Cain married his sister. It is simply the first homside and the ramifications of that.
So terrifying that we are controlled by people who fervently believe this stuff.
I don't think that interpreting gen 2 as god lying is tenable, that simply could not have been the authors intention.
It wasn't. God did NOT lie. Genesis 2:17 really says, "Dying, you will die." In other words, the PROCESS of death begins. It is ASSURED (surely) at that point. In the context of the Garden of Eden narrative, Adam and Eve FORFEIT the partaking of the Tree of Life - which would've prevented their physical death from happening. STUDY of the bible is key. Etymology, history, geography, culture, etc. "Dying, you will die" occurs elsewhere in the Bible and it's important to see how this term is used rather than forcing our modern Western view on the ancient text. Numbers 26:65 is the other occurrence of the term. There we find “they shall surely die” (literally, dying they shall die). These are the same Hebrew verbs and the same grammatical construction as in Genesis 2:17. God told the Israelites shortly after they came out of Egypt to go into the land of Canaan and take possession of it, as it had been promised to Abraham. In Numbers 26:65 God says that because the adult Jews (20 years and older) refused to trust and obey God and go into the Promise Land, they would die in the wilderness over the course of 40 years (one year for every day that the twelve spies investigated the Land-see Numbers 13:1-14:10). But those rebellious unbelieving Jews did not all die at the same moment. Their deaths were spread over that whole 40-year period. So, dying they did all die and that death occurred at various times some years after God’s pronouncement of judgment. Proper Hermeneutics is the key to getting proper interpretation.
The defense of God lying, in the conclusion of the paper, is as weak as apologists's arguments get. God lied. Period.
This is how I understand it from my studying…. Adam and Eve were made to live forever, but since they ate of the tree of knowledge now they are mortal and “will surely die”
Well, you clearly didn't study enough. Try again. It's nothing like that. ;-)
"He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever" In other words, they didn't have eternal life either.
Wait...so the first time he seemingly ever watches a tiktok and is like "yeah that's right" is when a sassy atheist girl is just reading the dang book and pointing out what it says.
It was always explained to me that Adam & Eve were immortal; living in glorified bodies that were incorruptible & eternal and that after eating the “fruit” they became mortal and were able to die. 🤷🏾
That explanation is bullshit because they didn't eat from the Tree of Eternal Life either.
She is really sharp actually.
Oh dear, you mean big omniscient, omnipotent sky daddy created something and then observed that it was "imperfect"? Say it isn't so.
1. Okay, it’s not Genesis 1 happened then Genesis 2 happened, you can say Genesis 2 is expansion of the the 6th day of Genesis 1.
2. He did not lie because if he hadn’t eaten it then he’d still be alive. He didn’t specify when he’d die, he didn’t say he’d die on the spot, he just said that he would die.
3. It’ll be a personal rationalization of mine.
I like how people try to smooth over the contradictions to make them seem like they were never there and make the stories even more absurd than before.
Of course there are multiple stories from different authors being woven together. Even in the English translations of Genesis, we see the start of the Noah's Deluge story at chapter 6 only to see the story start all over again but with new and different details. It is two Deluge stories trying to be woven together as one story by an editor.
Wasn't it Lillith & Adam to begin with? That should be mentioned. Lillith was cast out because she was a feminist who wanted control of her own autonomy & sexuality & the Adam character didn't like that. He wanted a submissive, obedient wife. At 1st the god character scolds Adam but eventually Adam wins bc the god character was a misogynistic god who "created women to serve men"🙄 so he gives Adam Eve & the devil protects Lillith & lets her stay with him. Eve gets blamed for the garden incident, so either she was another victim of Adams wrath like Lillith or the god character was incompetent in creating a submissive, obedient woman just as he was incompetent in creating the type of humans he sought to create which is why he drowned the 1st batch & then tortured & murdered his only son & yet humans are still imperfect. The story is riddled w/ obserdities.
She’s not included in the Biblical creation narratives but in other Mesopotamian mythology.
Dan talked about it in a podcast. The Lilith myth originated even later than Genesis 1 or Genesis 2.
I love hearing a young woman speak about weighty subjects
Why are you praising us? We are the most educated generation this country ever had. We have the critical thinking skills that Boomers don't. It's a skill that develops from formal debate and writing. Additionally, we are much harder to fool with the generational bullshit of religion, white supremacy, and the patriarchy that we inherited.
Also, "young woman" you mean black person. Cause a smart, articulate black person is the opposite of what the white supremacy has taught us. You realize how much of an insult it is to compliment a person for their intellect when I'll bet you've watched hundreds of thousands of Gen Z and Millennials articulate just as well, but because they're white, their intellect was "a given." These are the kinds of micro-biases that I realized I hold and I actively disavow now.
How do you know Genesis 2 written before Genesis 1?
More made up crap
According to most biblical scholars, Genesis 2 was written first, as it is considered part of the "Jahwist" source, which is generally thought to be older than the "Priestly" source that contains Genesis 1; meaning the story in Genesis 2 is considered the earlier creation narrative.
Excuse me, what data suggest that the serpent had an idea that there would be punishment?
Good point. Yahweh lied, the Serpent told the truth. The Serpent didn't trick anyone. Yahweh is the one who put the tree in the middle of the garden , next to the talking serpent (instead of inside a black hole on the other side of the universe). Of course he expected the people to eat the fruit.
Absolutely. The serpent is described as smart, but not as good or evil. A smart creature wouldn't have put itself voluntarily in danger for no reason. We can assume the serpent didn't want to be punished, so it makes more sense the serpent didn't know about the punishment.
Heck, reading the story, it seems God himself didn't think of any punishment before the fact. It reads more as a "oh, crap" moment (for God), than the application of any premade law.
I'd love to hear from you about other people outside the garden as you touch on here.