6 ms·

Hmm, I was really surprised about the part on woman creation, as I've never read such version (in Polish), but, indeed this https://www.biblegateway.com/passage

Hmm, I was really surprised about the part on woman creation, as I've never read such version (in Polish), but, indeed this https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2&version=NASB https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2&versi... (very) strange translation mentions woman to be taken from man's rib. This translation https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%201&version=NIV https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%201&ver... looks much better "So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them" and it makes much more sense in context of the rest of the Bible, especially New Testament.

goto11 6y ago
You are looking at two different verses. NIV have basically the same text for Genesis 2:21: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2%3A21&version=NIV https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2%3A21&... > So the Lord God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs and then closed up the place with flesh.
- levosmetalo 6y ago
  He took a rib from the left or from the right side? The truth would be easy to prove by counting how many ribs a man has on which side. If it's true, one side would have one rib more. If the number of ribs is the same, then it's either that God didn't create a woman from man's rib, or he took two ribs, one from each side, and created two women.
  - jacobr1 6y ago
    Or the loss of rib isn't a form lamarckian inheritance.
  - dmos62 6y ago
    I love this form of theology. Maybe the rib spawned the woman, similarly to how a woman gives birth to a child, without perishing herself.
- tsimionescu 6y ago
  I had heard a different theory, that this may be a mythological explanation on why humans don't have a penile bone like many common farm animals at that time (with 'rib' being a mistranslation of a more vague 'bone'). This would also make more symbolic sense, as a penile bone would be more obviously related to creation than a rib.
  - dmos62 6y ago
    Quoting the wiki article for penile bone: > The baculum (also penis bone, penile bone, or os penis, os genitale or os priapi) is a bone found in the penis of many placental mammals. It is absent in the human penis, but present in the penises of other primates, such as the gorilla and chimpanzee.
    - tsimionescu 6y ago
      Well, ancient Israelis were quite likely to have known that sheep and goats have a baculum (and perhaps wonder why they do not), and less likely to have known about gorillas and chimpanzees.
  - goto11 6y ago
    Do you know this is actually a mistranslation from Hebrew, or are you just repeating an urban legend?
    - 082349872349872 6y ago
      Image search for הצלע pretty much gives rib (and rib cuts). On the other hand, it's unclear that all of the many biblical references to feet are meant literally as pedal extremities.
    - tsimionescu 6y ago
      I might well be perpetuating an urban legend. Edit: seems that there is some theory advanced by real biblical scholars, but it also seems that it is highly unlikely to be true: https://www.haaretz.com/jewish/god-didn-t-use-adam-s-penis-bone-to-make-eve-1.5383262 https://www.haaretz.com/jewish/god-didn-t-use-adam-s-penis-b...

goto11 6y ago

You are looking at two different verses. NIV have basically the same text for Genesis 2:21: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2%3A21&version=NIV https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2%3A21&... > So the Lord God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs and then closed up the place with flesh.

levosmetalo 6y ago
He took a rib from the left or from the right side? The truth would be easy to prove by counting how many ribs a man has on which side. If it's true, one side would have one rib more. If the number of ribs is the same, then it's either that God didn't create a woman from man's rib, or he took two ribs, one from each side, and created two women.
- jacobr1 6y ago
  Or the loss of rib isn't a form lamarckian inheritance.
- dmos62 6y ago
  I love this form of theology. Maybe the rib spawned the woman, similarly to how a woman gives birth to a child, without perishing herself.
tsimionescu 6y ago
I had heard a different theory, that this may be a mythological explanation on why humans don't have a penile bone like many common farm animals at that time (with 'rib' being a mistranslation of a more vague 'bone'). This would also make more symbolic sense, as a penile bone would be more obviously related to creation than a rib.
- dmos62 6y ago
  Quoting the wiki article for penile bone: > The baculum (also penis bone, penile bone, or os penis, os genitale or os priapi) is a bone found in the penis of many placental mammals. It is absent in the human penis, but present in the penises of other primates, such as the gorilla and chimpanzee.
  - tsimionescu 6y ago
    Well, ancient Israelis were quite likely to have known that sheep and goats have a baculum (and perhaps wonder why they do not), and less likely to have known about gorillas and chimpanzees.
- goto11 6y ago
  Do you know this is actually a mistranslation from Hebrew, or are you just repeating an urban legend?
  - 082349872349872 6y ago
    Image search for הצלע pretty much gives rib (and rib cuts). On the other hand, it's unclear that all of the many biblical references to feet are meant literally as pedal extremities.
  - tsimionescu 6y ago
    I might well be perpetuating an urban legend. Edit: seems that there is some theory advanced by real biblical scholars, but it also seems that it is highly unlikely to be true: https://www.haaretz.com/jewish/god-didn-t-use-adam-s-penis-bone-to-make-eve-1.5383262 https://www.haaretz.com/jewish/god-didn-t-use-adam-s-penis-b...