@@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.
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...😉
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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.”
@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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).
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.
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.
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.
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.
Thank you for the clarifications. I really appreciate it. It is so much easier now to consider the Bible theology/narratives as certainly not more important/true compared to the Polynesian csomogonies/theologies. Polytheism is awesome and much more considerate of the natural elements of the world.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!). ;-)
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.
6:10 yes well the woman and the man probably figured out that there would be consequences as well, which is why they hide from god when he turns up in the early evening, so I don't know that this responsibility can be placed onto the serpent.
"the eyes of both of them were opened". I've often thought that Genesis 3 might be interpreted as becoming self aware. They were previously like other animals that aren't conscious of who they are or what the future might hold.
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 .
Adam and Eve make the most sense with the following chain ⛓ of events: • Some divine beings get together and make humans. • Humans die out due to humans being humans. • The divine beings try again a bunch of times • Yahweh, the nation 🏛 of the divine beings, becomes formalised and stable in the meantime • Yahweh makes Adam and Eve as another attempt at making humanity • Yahweh decides humans need to be amoral because they go crazy 🤪 with morality (just see 👀 how often humans do terrible things for morality today) • Adam and Eve are raised on the morality suppressing "tree of life" • Yahweh lies 🤥 that the "knowledge of good and evil" will instantly kill them. In reality, it is just waiting for Adam and Eve to grow up enough that they can be introduced to morality without instantly going insane. • The talking snake 🐍, who is almost certainly a previous attempt at making humans, interferes. Either out of ignorance or suspicion • Yahweh is pretty pleased with the results and decides it should encourage humans to be *immoral 😈.* Then it gives them a bunch of nonsense curses that don't do anything, often just reiterating their current situation.
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.
4:03 what makes it this disanalogous to a human parent is humans aren't omnipotent. We don't have the ability to see and understand all. Why this isn't analogous to God is because God can see all and knows all and thus knew what was going to happen. So when he makes the claim that you shall surely die the day you eat up this fruit, he already knew that they were going to eat from that fruit. So he made the claim even though he knew what was going to happen in the future. This is a classic definition of a lie. There's no way around it. Us as humans can make threats and not act on the threat because we can't foresee the future. There may be circumstances that allow us to not go through with the threat because we didn't have a complete understanding of what was to happen. God can't say that because God knows and sees all.
one way of harmonizing gen 2-3 with 4 involves the reported longevity of antedeluvians. cain could have been 100 years old by the time of the murder, by which time adam and eve could have had several generations of descendants from other children unnamed in the story. setting aside the lack of genetic diversity, there could have been hundreds of descendants by then.
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.
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.”
I'd say the only thing I would be on the fence on this explanation would be death penalty for eating the fruit of knowledge, it seems like the text presents this in a really vague way by announcing this so called punishment in 3 different instances if I recall. One is laid out by god to Adam, the other is expressed by Eve when questioned by the Serpent (and usually the translations seem to be different from the explanation from god to Adam), and the later expression it would seem to be the conclusion where both the serpent explanation and god explanation unite when god forbids anyone to take from the fruit of life with a flaming sword, which ultimately leads to mortality. Is there a difference in the Hebrew between god explanation to Adam and Eve explanation to the serpent about the punishment? I can't tell, because I can't read Hebrew. And the other question is that IF the first description indeed leaves no room to interpret that a later date death isn't congruent with the context and grammar. I would usually concede that possibility (for a christian trying to excuse what seemed to be a lie), but it does seem to be more on the plain text meaning that god simply changed his mind (and as such, lied), as he does all the time in many of the myths compiled in genesis.
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?
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.
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.
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.
The more I learn the more I wonder about what is truth and what is not. The Bible has a lot of wisdom, but I never started reading the Bible for wisdom, I wanted truth. I never understood if a message was so detrimental to our existence, why it would be written in Binary, and like you have said before need to be interpreted by people who truly understand.
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.
Chapters and verses of the Bible is a much later invention. Say if Genesis is to be reorganized today, it is more logical to treat it as a collection of different stories, such as Gen 1 to Gen 2:4 group under one story, and Gen 2:5 to the end of the chapter be another story. Each story would have a clear and sensible title, and new story to be started on a new page, much like modern day books and their chapters.
Which is a regurgitation of stories much more detailed and informative from Sumer. Also god was using the first example of reverse psychology. They would’ve completely avoided the tree if the temptation of “what if” wasn’t so heavily dangled. This was most likely designed to jumpstart the “in our image” godlike thinking capability given to us. It gave them independence in thought. Psychology was used repeatedly in the book.
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!
I grew up JW. We tried so hard to make the Genesis chapters make sense in light of science but if the science says something different we rejected the science or have was aren't l alternate explanation, but we accepted an old expanding universe and a rotating globe earth. Yet we fiercely denied evolution. It was quite the amalgam of liberal/conservative/common sense and insanity.
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 think it's awesome writing. The serpent is using a truism to deceive Eve. Truism is the best deception. She wouldn't die per her perception of death but she would die in a way beyond her perception. She would gain "wisdom". There was one thing they were not allowed to do and no reason to do it. So they were given a reason to do it. I suspect I would have done the same thing. Makes sense. This is all just my rationalization and I like it. I think it's a great story. They didn't do it because they were told not to do it. They did it because reason was provided. Freewill is not the issue.
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.
Can you give links to what your saying/claiming? I enjoy listening but I get lost when the videos are so short and there’s no links to the information your providing.
Dan, @7:15 you make the argument that Genesis 2-3 and Gen 4 were composed by different people and at different times. Can you expand on this? Other Biblical scholars such as Richard Elliot Friedman and Joel Baden identify Genesis 2, 3, and 4 as part of the J source and written by the same person.
I can't comment on the language aspects of it, but structurally Genesis 2-3 and Genesis 4 are nothing alike. Genesis 3 is a riddle and Genesis 4 is a legal definition. One was written by a very good jokester, the other by a lawyer. Maybe the writer was a funny lawyer? ;-)
And that deity that told Adapa not to eat of the food at Anu's table was Enki,,,,,Yahu. The question you have to ask yourself is did the Yehudah lift this story, or did they simply retell and old story that was part of the Beth Lahmi cliche.
Parables parables just like we have MINDBODY and Spirit also does our father. He can teach three meanings out of one "sentence", and then there’s another level past present and future always think of parables.
![เป็นไปได้ไหม - WanMai [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/_6lZ6b3_7Vo/mqdefault.jpg)
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.
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.
I love the juxtaposition between the passionate girl and the deadpan follow up confirmations. They would do a video together
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 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".
Just found your channel. While I lack the scholarly background you have, your reading and understanding of “Scripture “ is a delight. Thanks!!!!
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
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.
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.
I love all the creation stories! I wish there was an anthology of creation stories of the world - past and present...
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.
There are many other contradictions in early Genesis: for example, the way the Earth formed and the order in which life is created.
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.
“Were they sinners from birth? Were they running around naked on earth?” LOL!!
As apes in Africa, yes, they would be naked.
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.
"Simply does not happen" can be said about a lot of the "prophecies'" as well. Much like the second coming.
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 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.
Her last observation is one I asked in Bible School and got in trouble and kicked out. Your replies are so helpful. Thank you
Incidentally, the bible keeps saying "serpent" but that fool had legs. That's a lizard in my book.
Getring kicked out of where you aren't appreciated is a blessing, not a curse.
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.”
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.
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
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.
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.
I'd love to hear from you about other people outside the garden as you touch on here.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).
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.
i LOOOOVE her attitude love it
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.
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.
🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤣🤣🤣
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.
Thank you for the clarifications. I really appreciate it. It is so much easier now to consider the Bible theology/narratives as certainly not more important/true compared to the Polynesian csomogonies/theologies. Polytheism is awesome and much more considerate of the natural elements of the world.
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.
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 !!!
2:24 I thought “God was the Father of Truth and Satan was the Father of Lies”?
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.
He curses the woman and serpent, but doesn't curses Adam he curses the earth..definitely a man was writing this..lol
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.
Wow what a great video
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.
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!
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!). ;-)
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.
6:10 yes well the woman and the man probably figured out that there would be consequences as well, which is why they hide from god when he turns up in the early evening, so I don't know that this responsibility can be placed onto the serpent.
"the eyes of both of them were opened". I've often thought that Genesis 3 might be interpreted as becoming self aware. They were previously like other animals that aren't conscious of who they are or what the future might hold.
It seems that the stories are oriented to discouraged learning, understanding, higher knowledge.
❤❤❤
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 .
This is maybe the first #maklelan video I've seen where the original poster might be enlightened by the scholarship
Adam and Eve make the most sense with the following chain ⛓ of events:
• Some divine beings get together and make humans.
• Humans die out due to humans being humans.
• The divine beings try again a bunch of times
• Yahweh, the nation 🏛 of the divine beings, becomes formalised and stable in the meantime
• Yahweh makes Adam and Eve as another attempt at making humanity
• Yahweh decides humans need to be amoral because they go crazy 🤪 with morality (just see 👀 how often humans do terrible things for morality today)
• Adam and Eve are raised on the morality suppressing "tree of life"
• Yahweh lies 🤥 that the "knowledge of good and evil" will instantly kill them. In reality, it is just waiting for Adam and Eve to grow up enough that they can be introduced to morality without instantly going insane.
• The talking snake 🐍, who is almost certainly a previous attempt at making humans, interferes. Either out of ignorance or suspicion
• Yahweh is pretty pleased with the results and decides it should encourage humans to be *immoral 😈.* Then it gives them a bunch of nonsense curses that don't do anything, often just reiterating their current situation.
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.
4:03 what makes it this disanalogous to a human parent is humans aren't omnipotent. We don't have the ability to see and understand all. Why this isn't analogous to God is because God can see all and knows all and thus knew what was going to happen. So when he makes the claim that you shall surely die the day you eat up this fruit, he already knew that they were going to eat from that fruit. So he made the claim even though he knew what was going to happen in the future. This is a classic definition of a lie. There's no way around it.
Us as humans can make threats and not act on the threat because we can't foresee the future. There may be circumstances that allow us to not go through with the threat because we didn't have a complete understanding of what was to happen. God can't say that because God knows and sees all.
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"?
one way of harmonizing gen 2-3 with 4 involves the reported longevity of antedeluvians. cain could have been 100 years old by the time of the murder, by which time adam and eve could have had several generations of descendants from other children unnamed in the story. setting aside the lack of genetic diversity, there could have been hundreds of descendants by then.
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.
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.”
I'd say the only thing I would be on the fence on this explanation would be death penalty for eating the fruit of knowledge, it seems like the text presents this in a really vague way by announcing this so called punishment in 3 different instances if I recall. One is laid out by god to Adam, the other is expressed by Eve when questioned by the Serpent (and usually the translations seem to be different from the explanation from god to Adam), and the later expression it would seem to be the conclusion where both the serpent explanation and god explanation unite when god forbids anyone to take from the fruit of life with a flaming sword, which ultimately leads to mortality.
Is there a difference in the Hebrew between god explanation to Adam and Eve explanation to the serpent about the punishment? I can't tell, because I can't read Hebrew. And the other question is that IF the first description indeed leaves no room to interpret that a later date death isn't congruent with the context and grammar. I would usually concede that possibility (for a christian trying to excuse what seemed to be a lie), but it does seem to be more on the plain text meaning that god simply changed his mind (and as such, lied), as he does all the time in many of the myths compiled in genesis.
🤘
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.
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.
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.
All the same principle of Adapu in the Sumarian
THis kinda demonstrates the dichotomy of how Christians look at scripture and how Scholars and Jews look at scripture.
And also, if we take Genesis 4 literally, doesn't it render the whole original sin passed on to every people senseless?
I wonder if Dan and the girl became friends. I think they have a lot to talk about.
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.
The more I learn the more I wonder about what is truth and what is not. The Bible has a lot of wisdom, but I never started reading the Bible for wisdom, I wanted truth. I never understood if a message was so detrimental to our existence, why it would be written in Binary, and like you have said before need to be interpreted by people who truly understand.
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.
Chapters and verses of the Bible is a much later invention. Say if Genesis is to be reorganized today, it is more logical to treat it as a collection of different stories, such as Gen 1 to Gen 2:4 group under one story, and Gen 2:5 to the end of the chapter be another story. Each story would have a clear and sensible title, and new story to be started on a new page, much like modern day books and their chapters.
On this one, both missed.
They've apparently never seen K-Dramas or Pulp Fiction.
Which is a regurgitation of stories much more detailed and informative from Sumer.
Also god was using the first example of reverse psychology. They would’ve completely avoided the tree if the temptation of “what if” wasn’t so heavily dangled. This was most likely designed to jumpstart the “in our image” godlike thinking capability given to us. It gave them independence in thought. Psychology was used repeatedly in the book.
They should have named the bible "Fairy tales for adults".
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!
I grew up JW. We tried so hard to make the Genesis chapters make sense in light of science but if the science says something different we rejected the science or have was aren't l alternate explanation, but we accepted an old expanding universe and a rotating globe earth. Yet we fiercely denied evolution. It was quite the amalgam of liberal/conservative/common sense and insanity.
The Creator's name is Seraphina Simone ..... let's put so respect on her name!
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.
How are we establishing that chapter 2 was written before chapter 1? What data proves that?
This sister is onto something. Keep on reading the bible accurately.
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
I think it's awesome writing. The serpent is using a truism to deceive Eve. Truism is the best deception. She wouldn't die per her perception of death but she would die in a way beyond her perception. She would gain "wisdom". There was one thing they were not allowed to do and no reason to do it. So they were given a reason to do it. I suspect I would have done the same thing. Makes sense.
This is all just my rationalization and I like it. I think it's a great story. They didn't do it because they were told not to do it. They did it because reason was provided.
Freewill is not the issue.
Its very refreshing to Sistas use critical thinking to break free from these mythologies.
Anyone know the name of the chic that's reading?
Dan,
Can you give a link to the video you're reacting to?
Do we have any manuscripts that do not start with a chapter 1 and begin with the chapter 2 ?
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.
Well, this is where the spirit of the letter takes flight from scholarly works.
Can you give links to what your saying/claiming? I enjoy listening but I get lost when the videos are so short and there’s no links to the information your providing.
Dan, @7:15 you make the argument that Genesis 2-3 and Gen 4 were composed by different people and at different times. Can you expand on this? Other Biblical scholars such as Richard Elliot Friedman and Joel Baden identify Genesis 2, 3, and 4 as part of the J source and written by the same person.
I can't comment on the language aspects of it, but structurally Genesis 2-3 and Genesis 4 are nothing alike. Genesis 3 is a riddle and Genesis 4 is a legal definition. One was written by a very good jokester, the other by a lawyer. Maybe the writer was a funny lawyer? ;-)
And that deity that told Adapa not to eat of the food at Anu's table was Enki,,,,,Yahu. The question you have to ask yourself is did the Yehudah lift this story, or did they simply retell and old story that was part of the Beth Lahmi cliche.
Where can we see the evidence of chapter 2 being written before chapter 1 please?
Parables parables just like we have MINDBODY and Spirit also does our father. He can teach three meanings out of one "sentence", and then there’s another level past present and future always think of parables.
did the serpent not know it'd get punished, too, then? i'm not so sure.