Bible and Church; contradiction club.

Hello,

I posted this thread in order to create conversation regarding the contradictions that are evident when regarding what Bible actually says in contrast to what various churches teach. I also posted to hear all kind of comments and explanations regarding these contradictions.

There are interesting details in Bible when you read it with critical eye. For example first book of Moses (Genesis) it says:

26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Genesis 1

This raises two questions:

1) Is Christianity either monotheistic or polytheistic?
Church of course says it is a monotheistic religion where the Lord Jahve is the sole creator and god. But according to the Bible, one can have distinct opinion. Why does God say: "Let us make man in our image"? Furthermore, original versions of Hebrew Bible speaks of Jehovah Elohim - that has both masculine and feminine aspects - hence compiling aspects of the Father and the Mother, Logos and Sofia. In Bible translations of today, Jehovah Elohim has been reduced as Jahve.

2) What is this man, created as male and female - androgynous?
Above verse is in Genesis Chapter 1, whereas following verse is from second chapter, thus logically concluding it must be later event:

20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.
21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;
22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

Genesis 2

It is obvious (according to the Bible) that human was first created as androgynous and later the sexes were distinguished, when God took Adam and make Eve out of his rib bone. I am unsure how church teaches or explains this matter, but I personally haven't heard them explaining the androgynous human, especially the part: "male and female he created them".

This was the first part of series of posts I am going to make in this thread. We shall firstly focus on this, and once it is concluded (I'll be judge of that), we shall move on with the Bible and see how it fits into what Church teaches. Our next issue will be the paradise and the expel of human. But for now, in your replies, please keep in these androgynous and mono- or polytheistic questions.

-v

Since the Son of God pre-existed His earthly time here with us, that is why He says "us." If you read into the books of Adam and Eve (something Churches also cover up) then you find out A TREASURE TROVE of information and the earliest prophecy by God about the Messiah in the times of Adam and Eve. Yahushua (Jesus) is often called the Word of God. In the books of Adam and Eve every time Adam and Eve try to kill themselves after leaving the Garden of Eden, the "Word of God" raises them up again. So US is referring to God, Jesus, and the "sons of God" who pre-existed man. Also in the Garden of Eden you must peel back the metaphors. What action would really make you ashamed of being naked? Not an apple...

Originally posted by v01i0

There is one God but He manifests Himself as God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.

As for androgynous, I never have really thought about that. Could you explain it more?

reply to post by v01i0

1) Is Christianity either monotheistic or polytheistic?
Church of course says it is a monotheistic religion where the Lord Jahve is the sole creator and god. But according to the Bible, one can have distinct opinion. Why does God say: "Let us make man in our image"?

Not really.

Was man created in God's image? No. Man sinned, God cannot sin.
But we are being created in His image, and uses the "us" to do it.

2) What is this man, created as male and female - androgynous?
...
It is obvious (according to the Bible) that human was first created as androgynous

No. How can that be and where does it say that?

but I personally haven't heard them explaining the androgynous human

Probably because it's not there.

I agree with you that what scriptures teach and what churches teach are 2 very different things, but this issue isn't one of them, IMO.

reply to post by watchtheashes


Books of Adam and Eve are totally new for me.. Any links? Anyway, this thread is about the Bible in the contrast of what church teaches about it.

Originally posted by watchtheashes
Also in the Garden of Eden you must peel back the metaphors. What action would really make you ashamed of being naked? Not an apple...

I know it is not an apple. But please, as I stated in the end of my post - please refrain from going ahead of topics, we shall talk about these 2 questions first stated in my OP.

Thanks,

-v

Originally posted by texastig
As for androgynous, I never have really thought about that. Could you explain it more?

Well in Moses 1:27 it says: "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.".

This precedes Moses 2:22 where Eve is made out of Adam's bone.

So god created man to a man and women before he created a woman.

-v

reply to post by PSUSA


You are welcomed with you opinions. Though your opinions are somewhat distinct to what Bible says.

-v

reply to post by v01i0


If you're going to dissect the Bible as if it is written in a "perfect " chronological order, then you're going to have a lot of work on your hands.

Oftentimes in stories, and even on TV, you will see that there are times when the story teller reiterates on a former point and expands upon it.

In fact, you foretold in your post about your next thread... I expect you will probably expand upon that topic. If I was to follow your posts in this thread chronologically, I would find that you would be imperfect.

To be a good storyteller, and not all stories are fantasy mind you, it is good to tell the story based on the perception of the one reading or hearing and focus less on the perception of the author in order to get the points across.

reply to post by v01i0


Specifics?

Or are you writing in generalities?

reply to post by TarzanBeta

Originally posted by TarzanBeta
reply to post by v01i0

 

If you're going to dissect the Bible as if it is written in a "perfect " chronological order, then you're going to have a lot of work on your hands.

That is not exactly my argument. Although you may have point.

You seem to be suggesting, that creation of (distinct) man and woman in Bible took place before of what the Bible actually says. Genesis 1 is the description where God created world in six days - and rested on seventh. And only after that he created Eve out of Adam's rib bone.

It is quite obvious (according to the Bible) that second chapter of Genesis - where God creates Eve out of Adam - chronologically comes after the creation (First chapter of Genesis). How else there would be animals and plants Adam to name, as the Bible is suggesting?

-v

reply to post by PSUSA

Originally posted by v01i0
reply to post by PSUSA

 

You are welcomed with you opinions. Though your opinions are somewhat distinct to what Bible says.

-v

Originally posted by PSUSA
reply to post by v01i0

 

Specifics?

Or are you writing in generalities?

Originally posted by PSUSA
reply to post by v01i0

1) Is Christianity either monotheistic or polytheistic?
Church of course says it is a monotheistic religion where the Lord Jahve is the sole creator and god. But according to the Bible, one can have distinct opinion. Why does God say: "Let us make man in our image"?

Not really.

Was man created in God's image? No.

It is clearly stated in Moses 1:26:

And God said, Let us make man in our image

Originally posted by PSUSA
reply to post by v01i0

 

2) What is this man, created as male and female - androgynous?
...
It is obvious (according to the Bible) that human was first created as androgynous

No. How can that be and where does it say that?

In Moses 1:27:

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Which, if you actually ever read that book, takes place before when Eve was made out of Adam's bone. So the conclusion is, that man before that was andogynous.

-v

[edit on 28-10-2009 by v01i0]

reply to post by v01i0

It is clearly stated in Moses 1:26:

And God said, Let us make man in our image

Actually it's in Genesis.

Was man made in Gods' image?

Genesis 3:6
3:6
When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.

Compare that to
1Jo 2:16 -
For everything in the world--the cravings of sinful man, the lust of his eyes and the boasting of what he has and does--comes not from the Father but from the world.

She sinned before "eating" anything.

God is perfect, right? HOw then is it that God created something so imperfect unless it was for a perfect reason?

We are being made in His image. It's a process, not a one time deal that suddenly went sour.

Ro 8:29 -
For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.


Ro 8:20
For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,

n Moses 1:27:

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.


Which, if you actually ever read that book, takes place before when Eve was made out of Adam's bone. So the conclusion is, that man before that was andogynous.

I did read it. Be careful when assuming someones ignorance.

Man was made man.
Your conclusion is that everything in that scripture happened at the exact same time. Nowhere does it say that.

It says "created he THEM", not "created He Him that was also a Her". It says nothing about some "androgynous" man. You're reading something into it that just isn't there.



[edit on 28/10/09 by PSUSA]

reply to post by PSUSA

Originally posted by PSUSA
reply to post by v01i0

 

It is clearly stated in Moses 1:26:

And God said, Let us make man in our image

Actually it's in Genesis.

Yes you are correct, it is in Genesis, and Genesis is in 1st book of Moses.

Originally posted by PSUSA
reply to post by v01i0

 

It says "created he THEM", not "created He Him that was also a Her". It says nothing about some "androgynous" man. You're reading something into it that just isn't there.

If creation of man happened on fifth day, when he created man to man and woman, isn't it quite obvious that Eve was yet to be made, because she was made only when Adam is already in paradise of Eden and all the plants, animals and other stuff already created?

Here, you can interpret this how you like:

27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

It is direct quotation from King James version. "In the image of God created he him; male and female created he them."

Originally posted by PSUSA
reply to post by v01i0

 

I did read it. Be careful when assuming someones ignorance.

Why should I be? Are you going punish me for that? Look, I can do what ever I like and you can do what ever you like; especially, when you failed to comply on my request in opening post:

Originally posted by v01i0
But for now, in your replies, please keep in these androgynous and mono- or polytheistic questions.

-v

I don't see how your quotations are connected to the matter at hand - they might be come handy in later tho, when we get there, as I've pointed out.

Thanks,

-v

[edit on 28-10-2009 by v01i0]

reply to post by v01i0

27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.


It is direct quotation from King James version. "In the image of God created he him; male and female created he them."

How you get some kind of "androgynous" manbearpig like beast from this I cannot understand. But to each his or her own.

There are many thoughts about Elohim, the plural grammatical form.

One view is that it reflects a North-South division of religious opinion among the Hebrews. The North appears to be relatively cosmoplitan and in frequent contact with the neighboring nations and their religious ideas. The South, in contrast, is a desert and isolated.

So, the theory goes that Northerners viewed the national god, whom we now call God, as one among many gods, but someone special to them as Hebrews. Southerners preferred a one god, period approach. Supposedly this diversity was fine so long as everything was orally transmitted, or local texts would circulate only locally. At the return from Exile, however, time came to compile a single, definitive text of the national epic. The matter needed to be resolved.

Committees usually resolve things by compromise, splitting the differences, and letting the fog roll in where needed. Internal evidence for the two-theologies theory, besides the double creation story in Genesis and God talking to himself there, are:

* The lawyerly phrasing of the First Commandments (Exodus 20:2-5):

"I, the Lord, am your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slavery. You shall not have other gods besides me. You shall not carve idols for yourselves in the shape of anything in the sky above or on the earth below or in the waters beneath the earth;
you shall not bow down before them or worship them...

OK, no idolatry and no worship of any gods that you make yourselves. Is that because there are no other gods, or is it because even though there are other gods, they are other nations' gods?

* The invocation of gods whose attributes are not Yahweh's in Psalm 58: 2-3:

Do you indeed pronounce justice, O gods; do you judge mortals fairly? No, you freely engage in crime; your hands dispense violence to the earth.

* And the dead mouse on the kitchen floor, Psalm 82:

A psalm of Asaph. God rises in the divine council, gives judgment in the midst of the gods. "How long will you judge unjustly and favor the cause of the wicked? Selah Defend the lowly and fatherless; render justice to the afflicted and needy. Rescue the lowly and poor; deliver them from the hand of the wicked." The gods neither know nor understand, wandering about in darkness, and all the world's foundations shake. I declare: "Gods though you be, offspring of the Most High all of you, Yet like any mortal you shall die; like any prince you shall fall." Arise, O God, judge the earth, for yours are all the nations.

-

As to the androgynous Adam theory, can't help you there. The text really doesn't give any support to Adam being anything other than a man. What God removes from Adam is not a woman, but something that God fashions a woman from (2: 22).

reply to post by PSUSA

Originally posted by PSUSA
reply to post by v01i0

 

How you get some kind of "androgynous" manbearpig like beast from this I cannot understand. But to each his or her own.

Heh, easily enough it seems - I want also to address that this is not necessarily my personal opinion, but merely an interpretation of literal text. But I also respect your view of it. Thanks for contributing.

-v

reply to post by eight bits


You provide some interesting information

But what comes to the androgynous Adam I must try and distill my interpretation, as it seems to be left somewhat vague.

Since God created man on fifth day according to Genesis:

27. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

I tend to see this in a way, that this takes place before creation of Eve in paradise from the rib of Adam. So there was no woman, yet God created man - and furthermore it is detailed "male and female created he them.", saying first "in the image of God created he him" separated with semicolon.

Well, I guess this could be interpret in many ways, but isn't it somewhat contradictory that he created man and woman before he actually creates woman?

Furthermore, as concept of Jehovah Elohim is said both to include masculine and feminine aspects in Hebrew etymology, it would be appropriate when God creates man as their image, man also has both, masculine and feminine aspects.

Of course, I am not an linguist and especially very familiar with Hebrew, I have to rely on what I've learned from second hand sources on this matter.

Indeed the apparent 'dual creation'-story in book of Moses seems to confuse the deck.

Sincerely,

-v

[edit on 28-10-2009 by v01i0]

reply to post by v01i0

But I also respect your view of it.

Same here. It's nothing personal, even if I come off that way sometimes.

I will be interesting to finally get all the answers.

reply to post by v01i0


Star and Flag

I talk about this often with my religious friends: they say to me " Come and go to church with me."

I say, "For what?"
" To learn about the bible"
" No offense, I know how to read and apply logic on my own. Besides, the bible has NOTHING to do with 'church'.

So many contradictions: there is more than one 'god' in the bible, but church brainwashed you into thinking there is only one. the garden of Eden story is baout 'god' not wanting mankind to be knowledgeble ( knowledgeble people do not make good slaves), whereas church has you to think Eve did a very babd thing gaining knowledge ( eating the apple), and so on and so on....

I challenge my religious friends to explain who god is talking to in Gen 1:26 " Let US make mankind in OUR image...."

No he is not talking to himself..That third person stuff (trinity) is BS....sorry but it is. that was 'created' by the controlling governments to throw you off; that there was more than one god. When you learn there is more than one god, you begin to remove 'god' from this pedalstal and regard him on a more common ground.

Hmmmm....this was a race of beings that

a. come from another planet ( than Earth)
b. travel through space
c. seem to posess supernatural powers ( nothing more than advanced technology)

Sounds extraterrstrial by all acoounts, which I firmly believe to be true but that's another thread.