She’s an astute reader, a lot of these contradictions seem to go over peoples heads

@NotBizarro

8 ай бұрын

She probably didn’t get indoctrinated into ignoring the contradictions 😅

@travis1240

8 ай бұрын

@@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...

@MarcillaSmith

8 ай бұрын

Like rewatching Kubrick.

@PasteurizedLettuce

8 ай бұрын

@@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

@PasteurizedLettuce

8 ай бұрын

@@YoumadBro-sp9gs it’s basically like using Dante’s Inferno to interpret the bible’s position on hell lol

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!" ;-)

@theguyver4934

7 ай бұрын

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 )

@KenyatteFullerjr-xm9ys

6 ай бұрын

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

@strappedfatman7858

6 ай бұрын

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!’

@Yamyatos

6 ай бұрын

@@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..

@abc_12333

5 ай бұрын

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.

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.

@Corvidknows

8 ай бұрын

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.

@abc_12333

5 ай бұрын

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".

@arkady0

5 ай бұрын

@@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.

@abc_12333

5 ай бұрын

@@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".

@tysfalsehood

4 ай бұрын

@@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.

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

8 ай бұрын

And who is the original creator to you?

@travis1240

8 ай бұрын

@@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.

@Yamyatos

8 ай бұрын

@@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.

@PhrontDoor

7 ай бұрын

@@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.

@stephencalvird7276

7 ай бұрын

@@PhrontDoor nor will they climb that hill

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.

@tonycook7679

2 ай бұрын

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.

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.

How is death a threat to people who have no idea what death is?

@abc_12333

5 ай бұрын

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.

@itsROMPERS...

5 ай бұрын

@@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.

@rollinolson3562

3 ай бұрын

@@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.

@abc_12333

3 ай бұрын

@@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.

@rubberbiscuit2880

2 ай бұрын

Once it's threatened, they goddamn sure know what it is.

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.

@abc_12333

2 ай бұрын

That is CORRECT! The original Hebrew is "Dying you will die" - which matches Alter's translation.

@GoodieWhiteHat

24 күн бұрын

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.

@abc_12333

24 күн бұрын

@@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.

@user-kv1po2dm5j

24 күн бұрын

@@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.

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

@sashagabor76

8 ай бұрын

I'm not sure how I really feel about your take but I sure enjoyed reading it! 😂

@GoodieWhiteHat

24 күн бұрын

Love it.

and that just proves that man made his god in his own image

@KenyatteFullerjr-xm9ys

6 ай бұрын

They believe made in God image don't realize there black people and white and different humans race white different eyes and hair

@StudentDad-mc3pu

2 ай бұрын

@@KenyatteFullerjr-xm9ys Same race.

@KenyatteFullerjr-xm9ys

2 ай бұрын

What race that be

@ranilodicen4460

2 ай бұрын

@@KenyatteFullerjr-xm9ys human race

There are many other contradictions in early Genesis: for example, the way the Earth formed and the order in which life is created.

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 !!!

“Were they sinners from birth? Were they running around naked on earth?” LOL!!

Just found your channel. While I lack the scholarly background you have, your reading and understanding of “Scripture “ is a delight. Thanks!!!!

You make sense of all this. Thank you!

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.

"Simply does not happen" can be said about a lot of the "prophecies'" as well. Much like the second coming.

By saying "on this day you will dxx", that could be in a figurative sense, as in they became mortal on that day, i.e., signing their own dxxth warrant, which is normally how the consequence of eating the fruit is interpreted. So they did dxx on that day, but in the sense of converting themselves into a state where they eventually would dxx instead of not dxxng if they kept obeying the command.

Do you think you'll ever do a playlist of videos breaking down each book of the bible from start to finish?

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.

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.

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

@jeffmacdonald9863

6 ай бұрын

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.

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.

@Yoandrys23

8 ай бұрын

@@MrMortal_Ra Yes. And what about god telling the Israelites to kill everybody in their way?

@joylastname3035

8 ай бұрын

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.

@funderberg

7 ай бұрын

@@joylastname3035that’s, “eating the apple”.

@strappedfatman7858

6 ай бұрын

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.

@strappedfatman7858

6 ай бұрын

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.

A DAY WITH THE LORD IS LIKE A THOUSAND YEARS

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.

@strappedfatman7858

6 ай бұрын

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.

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.

@kittyhooch1

7 ай бұрын

Your guess is in the absence of academic knowledge. What is the value of guessing? If it matters look into it. Genesis is considered to be written in 600 BCE. That was the third rewrite during the so called Babylonian captivity. In fact scribes voluntarily went there and accessed other religions documents. For instance the flood myth tracks well with two prior telling of the story that was thousands of years old and had been part of three prior tales. You can see it is woven together. The first te.lin had a 15 foot flood. During this rewrite the pantheon of El was discarded for the warrior god Yahweh and they went from Canaanite polytheism to monotheism. Other older texts we stitched in. We only discovered they descended from Canaanites a century ago after uncovering a Canaanite grave with tablets that were clearly ancient Hebrew writing. That also proves they were revisionist as those people were supposedly wiped out. 70% of the people in Jordan carry their genes. The "royal we" references are from older writing when they were polytheist. This is from centuries of academic research and isn't something to introduce before passing the collection plate. That needs no explanation.

I wonder if Dan and the girl became friends. I think they have a lot to talk about.

Do we have any manuscripts that do not start with a chapter 1 and begin with the chapter 2 ?

Dan, Can you give a link to the video you're reacting to?

I've heard apologists say that the "death on the very day" was a spiritual death. He didn't die physically, but was spiritually dead. How does this idea factor into this?

@fnjesusfreak

4 ай бұрын

The usual justification I've heard was that "death" was the entrance of mortality into the world.

@rollinolson3562

3 ай бұрын

@@fnjesusfreak It's possible to make anything mean anything you want, if you try hard enough.

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.

@juanausensi499

8 ай бұрын

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.

@UniDocs_Mahapushpa_Cyavana

8 ай бұрын

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

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.

@matthewnitz8367

8 ай бұрын

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.

@Joyfulness87

8 ай бұрын

EXACTLY! Thank you.

@xaayer

8 ай бұрын

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.

@strappedfatman7858

6 ай бұрын

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.”

@strappedfatman7858

6 ай бұрын

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.”

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.

Do you agree with biblical scholar Peter Enns that Adam story is the story of Israelite origins and not about the first humans?

I wonder if you can reasonably conclude that the "death" of which God speaks in his warning is a reference to separation from the Tree of Life. Are there scholars exploring that possibility?

How are we establishing that chapter 2 was written before chapter 1? What data proves that?

Her last observation is one I asked in Bible School and got in trouble and kicked out. Your replies are so helpful. Thank you

my guy...i have found a new favorite channel. im a christian, but i see allot of people believing blindly the bible.. love the way you analyse and think carefully your point of view

On this one, both missed. They've apparently never seen K-Dramas or Pulp Fiction.

I like the story with Eden being offworld and Earth being one of the planets to which humans are sent.

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).

“ the serpent probably knows there will be some sort of punishment coming for disobeying god “ why ? Has anyone disobeyed god before ? Is the serpent a judge of divine character ? Can the serpent prophesy ? More importantly if Eve was going to be punished the serpent was going to be punished. If the serpent set themselves up for divine punishment , they were sacrificing themselves so that humans could gain the knowledge of good and evil. Is that reflected anywhere else in the text ?

In regards to eve and being told they would die,couldn’t that have meant she will eventually die as opposed to having immortality?

Biblical literalism can be a real mind screw. Interpreting Adam and Eve as allegories of the first peoples makes a lot more sense.

@gutss8608

8 ай бұрын

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.

@scambammer6102

8 ай бұрын

allegory = fiction

@travis1240

8 ай бұрын

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.

@scambammer6102

8 ай бұрын

@@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.

@maninalift

8 ай бұрын

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.

Dr. Dan - I am sincerely asking you the question as a truth seeker. What do you say is the way to eternal salvation?

@FishfaceTheDestroyer

2 ай бұрын

Actually, before anything, could you clarify what you mean by "salvation"?

The serpent probably knows…they will be punished. A rationalization. Otherwise, as usual, a useful and informative video.

@juanausensi499

8 ай бұрын

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

5 ай бұрын

Serpents that can talk..................WOW! Did this serpent participate in "The Lion King"?

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.

Its very refreshing to Sistas use critical thinking to break free from these mythologies.

Then how is keeping "genesis chapter 2" not in direct contradiction with the instructionary directive of keeping old wine out of new wine skins? Why have reasoning if not to enforce it when necessary?

And also, if we take Genesis 4 literally, doesn't it render the whole original sin passed on to every people senseless?

One thing I have heard someone say is that a day to god is 1000 years and neither Adamn and Eve lived to be 1000 years old, thus in that single day to God they died.

THis kinda demonstrates the dichotomy of how Christians look at scripture and how Scholars and Jews look at scripture.

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.

Frankly, it never occurred to me that Genesis 2 and 3 were written before and separately from Genesis 1, though it seems obvious to others. I just Googled this, and was very surprised. This shattered a lot of my paradigms, but rather than resist it, I am going to rethink my beliefs, rather than resist the new knowledge, which is which any rational person should do. The topic of this video was "making sense of the story of Adam and Eve". I would like to add something that adds more sense to me and doesn't make God out to be a liar: One question I do have is the meaning and use of the word day [yom]. According to Strong's Concordance, this word can mean a number of things: day, time, year day (as opposed to night) day (24 hour period) as defined by evening and morning in Genesis 1 as a division of time a working day, a day's journey days, lifetime (pl.) time, period (general) year I don't need to cite you the passages where "day" or "days" has different meanings. I'm sure you know these better than I do, but could it be that the days of creation were not meant to be literal 24-hour days, and when God says that "in the day that thou eatest thereof", was not also a literal 24-hour day?

Where can we see the evidence of chapter 2 being written before chapter 1 please?

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.

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.

Where do I read this Adapa myth?

All the same principle of Adapu in the Sumarian

🤘

Wow. Okay, when do you suppose this "someone" or "someones" wrote Genesis 1, 1200 BC, 1000 BC, later?

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.

Well, this is where the spirit of the letter takes flight from scholarly works.

So, has no major scholars come to the conclusion that the death God was referring to was simply the loss of immortality by being kicked out of Eden?

Getring kicked out of where you aren't appreciated is a blessing, not a curse.

Excuse me, what data suggest that the serpent had an idea that there would be punishment?

@travis1240

8 ай бұрын

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.

@juanausensi499

8 ай бұрын

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.

As the 'god' of Genesis is pretty clearly not all knowing, as billed, perhaps the god was not lying when it said "in that day you will die," but instead underestimated Adam and Eve's resilience. God, "If you set the toaster to '3,' the toast will be ruined!" Well, actually- I did set the toaster to 3, and while the toast *was* very dark, it wasn't actually blackened, nor was it inedible.

I love hearing a young woman speak about weighty subjects

@ImNotaRussianBot

7 ай бұрын

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.

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.

@AurorXZ

8 ай бұрын

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.

@tonycook7679

2 ай бұрын

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.

Oh, so someone after Moses wrote chapter 4 as well. When do you supposed they wrote it, and who were they?

So is it safer to say God threatened them with a lie and the serpent told half truth? It said the truth but it didnt say the complete truth to trick them? But does the serpent really knows of the punishment? God confirmed that the serpent was right. But the serpent didnt really deceive them because deceive means to make someone believe something that is not true. But it was true so im not getting it.

@travis1240

8 ай бұрын

Yeah I'm of the opinion that Yahweh engaged in deception, but the Serpent did not. Adam and Eve are blameless because they didn't even know the difference between good and evil.

@juanausensi499

8 ай бұрын

@@travis1240 Also, why they would suspect of one of God's creatures?

@abc_12333

5 ай бұрын

No half truth. God gave Adam the Eve the WHOLE truth. 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.

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.”

This is maybe the first #maklelan video I've seen where the original poster might be enlightened by the scholarship

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.

They did die in one day - one of Jehovah the Father's 'days' (i.e. within 1000 years). Notice that in the Biblical record not a single human lives beyond 1000 years. In order for us to live forever we must have access to the 'Tree of Life', which Adam and Eve were kept away from once they sinned, but in God's Kingdom (at the end of Revelation) the 'Tree of Life' returns and we are able to eat its fruit and live forever. Much peace and love.

"the 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.

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.

@rollinolson3562

3 ай бұрын

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.

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 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.

Why wouldnt God telling them they would die isnt about a spiritual death? Or a metaphorical death? That is the way I always understood it. Are all of these passages meant to be taken as literal? I did enjoy the scholarship regardless, I just am struggling on that point.

It seems that the stories are oriented to discouraged learning, understanding, higher knowledge.

I always read it as upon eating the fruit Adam would become susceptible to physical death. However, another reading is spiritual death. He would become spiritually dead, that is separated from God.

I'm genuinely curious what evidence you look to to suggest Genesis 1 is in response to Genesis 2, and not merely an independent narrative that arose fully independent of Genesis 2-3. I've just always heard they were independent and hadn't heard that Genesis 1 is in response to Genesis 2.

Have a look at Ezekiel 33, esp. vss 13-16. Ok, it doesn't say that Adam and Eve repented, but it does show God can go back on what he says in certain circumstances.

Would A&E have been, in the story, immortal before the fruit? If so, could not the threat of them dying after eating it be about the humans becoming mortal as a result? In this story.

@lawrencewilliamson5480

6 ай бұрын

That is the consensus of many Christians and seems logical; however it would seem that they did not have the knowledge of “Good” and “Evil” until after they “ate” of the fruit. I believe the story to be about Man’s introduction to duality, which involves separation. It involves comparisons and contrasts. Hot and Cold. In and Out. Experience seems to me to be the best teacher. I guess the proverbial apple did not fall far from the tree!

@JohnDoe-xl4be

6 ай бұрын

@@lawrencewilliamson5480 Yes I agree, it being about an ur-separation is my view as well basically (although, on the mythological timeline Lucifer fell before A&E, I believe, which would then maybe represent an even more "ur" separation. Also, it's a multi-layered myth of course). What I'm on about with the the two of them becoming mortal is that in that case death did actually result as a consequence of them "eating of the fruit", they did die. (not sure I was clear there).

Chapter 2 recaps chapter 1 in detail...

Dan I wish you could do this type of explanations in spanish I know you're fluent in spanish, the catholic spanic creed is the largest in the world and it hurst deeply our societies

How do you know Genesis 2 written before Genesis 1?

@Ex_christian

2 ай бұрын

More made up crap

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.

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.

One mistake here is that Adam and Eve were not expelled from the Garden because they ate the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil but because God was concerned, after that, that they might go on to eat from the tree of life. In the English of the NRSV, God expresses his concern. He says, What if the man should now eat from the tree of life and become immortal like us? Then it says, Therefore God sent the man out of the Garden. The "therefore" refers back to God's concern over them becoming immortal. They were not expelled as a direct result of eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. For that they were cursed.

The story of Cain and able is about the first homside. It doesn't say they are the first children. And clearly they aren't because Cain married his sister. It is simply the first homside and the ramifications of that.

One thing I’d like to know more about from a scholarly, no-agenda perspective is omniscience. Has Molinism’s propounded “middle knowledge” strong scriptural or historical support? If not, then how has YHWH’s purported omniscience been understood in historical Judaism?

Dan, have you done a video about the parallels of the Enuma Eilish and Genesis 1?

@epicofatrahasis3775

8 ай бұрын

Professor Christine Hayes is quite good. --------------------------------------------------------- *The Enuma Elish would later be the inspiration for the Hebrew scribes who created the text now known as the biblical Book of Genesis.* Prior to the 19th century CE, the Bible was considered the oldest book in the world and its narratives were thought to be completely original. In the mid-19th century CE, however, European museums, as well as academic and religious institutions, sponsored excavations in Mesopotamia to find physical evidence for historical corroboration of the stories in the Bible. ***These excavations found quite the opposite, however, in that, once cuneiform was translated, it was understood that a number of biblical narratives were Mesopotamian in origin.*** *Famous stories such as the Fall of Man and the Great Flood were originally conceived and written down in Sumer,* translated and modified later in Babylon, and reworked by the Assyrians ***before they were used by the Hebrew scribes for the versions which appear in the Bible.*** ***In revising the Mesopotamian creation story for their own ends, the Hebrew scribes tightened the narrative and the focus but retained the concept of the all-powerful deity who brings order from chaos.*** Marduk, in the Enuma Elish, establishes the recognizable order of the world - *just as God does in the Genesis tale* - and human beings are expected to recognize this great gift and honor the deity through service. *"Enuma Elish - The Babylonian Epic of Creation - Full Text - World History Encyclopedia"* *"Sumerian Is the World's Oldest Written Language | ProLingo"* *"Sumerian Civilization: Inventing the Future - World History Encyclopedia"* *"The Myth of Adapa - World History Encyclopedia"* Also discussed by Professor Christine Hayes at Yale University in her 1st lecture of the series on the Hebrew Bible from 8:45 to 14:30 minutes, lecture 3 from 28:30 to 41:35 minutes, lecture 4 from 0:00 up to 21:30 minutes and 24:00 up to 35:30 minutes and lecture 7 from 24:20 to 25:10 minutes. From a Biblical scholar: "Many stories in the ancient world have their origins in other stories and were borrowed and modified from other or earlier peoples. *For instance, many of the stories now preserved in the Bible are* ***modified*** *versions of stories that existed in the cultures and traditions of Israel’s* ***older*** *contemporaries.* Stories about the creation of the universe, a cataclysmic universal flood, digging wells as land markers, the naming of important cultic sites, gods giving laws to their people, and even stories about gods decreeing the possession of land to their people were all part of the cultural and literary matrix of the ancient Near East. *Biblical scribes freely* ***adopted and modified*** *these stories as a means to express their own identity, origins, and customs."* *"Stories from the Bible"* by Dr Steven DiMattei, from his website *"Biblical Contradictions"*

@abc_12333

5 ай бұрын

Ptah and the Put cycle of 9 is a CLOSER connection to Genesis 1. It was Ptah that said "Let there be..." speaking things into being. "It was good" is seen in African folklore. Same as the progression of "sun, moon and stars". There are also 50+ EGYPTIAN loan words in Genesis 1. Enuma Elish was very little to do with it.

@user-gk9lg5sp4y

5 ай бұрын

@@abc_12333 I disagree with your conclusion

@abc_12333

5 ай бұрын

@@user-gk9lg5sp4y Speaking things into being is completely absent in Enuma Elish. Ptah did that.Tiamat is murdered in Enuma Elish. There is no murder in Genesis 1. The abundance of Egyptian loan words in Genesis 1 is NOT in any other chapter in the Bible.

@user-gk9lg5sp4y

5 ай бұрын

@@abc_12333 Those are not the parallels I'm talking about. You appear to want to prove to me something about a connection between Egyptian writings and Genesis. I never denied that there was a connection. Do you deny that there are parallels between the Enuma Elish and Genesis? What is your goal here?

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.

1. Okay, it’s not Genesis 1 happened then Genesis 2 happened, you can say Genesis 2 is expansion of the the 6th day of Genesis 1. 2. He did not lie because if he hadn’t eaten it then he’d still be alive. He didn’t specify when he’d die, he didn’t say he’d die on the spot, he just said that he would die. 3. It’ll be a personal rationalization of mine.

How do you know the things you're saying? For example, how do you know that Genesis II was written after Genesis I? Where are your citations?

Exactly, in genesis 1 god created human but in genesis 2 god says there is no people , genesis 1 god say let us create human in our image , genesis 2 again says he made human by breathing life into the nostrils

Am I correct? Edam and Evi had three sons. Who did those three sons have sex with, their mother?

@flowingafterglow629

8 ай бұрын

Although this is not the focus of this video, yeah, that's a problem. The most common (maybe the only?) apologetic I have heard is that Adam and Even also had daughters that aren't mentioned in the bible and therefore were the wives of Adam and Even. Yes, that's right. The apologetic explanation is that incest was ok, because they had to mate with someone.

@VulcanLogic

8 ай бұрын

​@@flowingafterglow629I've actually heard apologists say "oh don't worry, God can prevent birth defects from inbreeding when necessary like here and with Noah's grandkids."

@flowingafterglow629

8 ай бұрын

@@VulcanLogic He's got his priorities, you know.

@juanausensi499

8 ай бұрын

@@flowingafterglow629 The stories of the OT deal with two groups of people: the israelites, and their enemies (mostly everybody else). Adam and Eve weren't originally supposed to give rise to all humanity, just the israelites. The chosen people, you know.

@ancientfiction5244

8 ай бұрын

​@@juanausensi499 It's fiction anyway. So...

But of course if we run with the popular belief that this god is also omnipotent then he would be aware that these lies would be exposed eventually. The threat of death was pointless, seeing as predestination was in play and he knew he'd only spare and punish them, supposedly.