Eve fashioned from Adam's penis bone

[technomage]

It would be an explanation of why we don't I suppose.

Explanations like that tend to go too far. I cannot tell you how many well-intended Christian apologetes I've heard earnestly explaining that men have one fewer rib than women.

 

[Amechania]

Explanations like that tend to go too far. I cannot tell you how many well-intended Christian apologetes I've heard earnestly explaining that men have one fewer rib than women.

So God told Adam he could have this perfect companion and Adamasked how much it would cost and God said "An arm and a leg," so Adam asked, "What can I get for a rib?" and then they wrote the Bible.

 

[technomage]

So God told Adam he could have this perfect companion and Adamasked how much it would cost and God said "An arm and a leg," so Adam asked, "What can I get for a rib?" and then they wrote the Bible.

I would repeat that joke to my wife ... but I've grown rather fond of breathing, and would like to continue to do so.

 

[Ingledsva]

Here are two reason why I think this is wrong:

1. Genesis 2:21 say "ויּקח אחת מצלעתיו". And He took one from his [צלע]s. The word is in plural. There were a bunch. G-d took one of them. If there was only one, it should have said, "ויּקח צלעו", and He took his צלע.

2. The way you want to define צלע will make the translation of Ex. 26:20 rather odd. "And the second צלע of the Tabernacle..."

I agree with you - to a point.


I noticed when I was looking at this that the form is often used for one of a pair - such as a door post - which has a second post to work, or a boat rib -which has a another side to the "V."


I concluded from the sentence, that Adam was not a male from which a female was made, - but male and female in one - which were separated for procreation purposes.


*

 

[Tumah]

I agree with you - to a point.


I noticed when I was looking at this that the form is often used for one of a pair - such as a door post - which has a second post to work, or a boat rib -which has a another side to the "V."


I concluded from the sentence, that Adam was not a male from which a female was made, - but male and female in one - which were separated for procreation purposes.


*

Well I'm not sure how you came to that observation, but your conclusion that Adam was a combination of male and female in one, is the same as that of the Jewish commentators.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

Explanations like that tend to go too far. I cannot tell you how many well-intended Christian apologetes I've heard earnestly explaining that men have one fewer rib than women.

Yeah when I was little and I was told that story I counted the ribs on every model skeleton I saw and noticed that nope we all had the same amount... Of course just cause Adam was missing a rib doesn't mean we would be missing one.

 

[Muffled]

"Which “Bone” Was Eve Made From?

The creation and Adam and Eve narratives are often said to be nice moral tales that convey spiritual truths. Being myth does not disqualify them from containing meaningful messages for modern readers.

So at wedding ceremonies and in sunday school classes bible-believers are regaled with the “beautiful story” of the God practising a bit of psychic surgery as his hand penetrates Adam’s side to pull out a rib which he used to create Eve.

And I suspect many theologians would prefer to keep it that way. Meaningful myth or symbol is sophisticated.

So what’s wrong with the rib meaning the rib?

First, the Hebrew word used for rib is tsela (צְלָעֹ&#1514, but this word never means ‘rib’ anywhere else in the Bible

It usually means ‘side’. In architecture, it is used of a side-room or cell, or of rafters or ceiling beams. “The common idea in all these different meanings seems to be that of a tangent or branch extending out from a central structure or body. Given this basic sense, Adam’s tsela would seem to refer to a “limb” or “appendage” — something that jutted out from his body.”

Second, the image of a rib does not fit with the etiological agenda of the larger story. This is a narrative chock full of origin-myths — tales explaining how things began: where humans came from, why snakes crawl, why people wear clothes, why women have labor pains, why marriage. But removing a rib from Adam and using it to create Eve explains nothing like this. Men don’t have one less rib than women.

Third, the story is full of allusions to human sexuality (being naked and unashamed; recognizing they are naked; covering their genitals), but the rib detail does not relate to any of the sexual differences between men and women. It stands out as something of an anomaly for this reason, too.

Fourth, the rib story does not leave us with being able to make very much of what is meant by God “closing up” the flesh afterwards. Genesis 2:21:

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
​

“Again, considering the etiological (explanatory) nature of the story, this statement seems intended to explain the existence of some suture- or scar-like mark on the torsos of human males that is not found on females. But there is no such mark on males – at least not near their ribs.” (p.5)

Hebrew Bible scholar, Ziony Zevit, suggests that the Hebrew tsela might really refer to the baculum. From that Wikipedia article:

In another, non scientific, context, it has been speculated that Adam’s “rib” mentioned in the Eden narrative of Creation really refers to the baculum. The Hebrew term translated as “rib” (tsela`) can also mean “side”, “chamber”, as well as any strut-like supporting structure, e.g. a beam or a tree trunk. The existence of the baculum is unlikely to escape the notice of pastoralisthunter-gatherer cultures . . . . , but there is no specific term for it – nor for the penis itself – in Biblical Hebrew.
​

The benefit of this explanation is that it matches the etiological nature of the Genesis story. We have an explanation for why humans, unlike just about all other male animal, lack a penis bone. It was removed by God in order to make Eve from it."
source

​

Kinda what I've always thought.

I believe Eve was cloned so "cell" makes a lot of sense. However it still requires an adjustment to remove the "y" chromosome.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Here are two reason why I think this is wrong:

1. Genesis 2:21 say "ויּקח אחת מצלעתיו". And He took one from his [צלע]s. The word is in plural. There were a bunch. G-d took one of them. If there was only one, it should have said, "ויּקח צלעו", and He took his צלע.

2. The way you want to define צלע will make the translation of Ex. 26:20 rather odd. "And the second צלע of the Tabernacle..."

1. The 'problem' dissolves if the plural term denotes "support structures."
2. Isn't it true that connotation often works like that?

 

[Muffled]

It wasn't "penis bone" but "pinkie toe."

Whatever the case, once she was created, she was destined to be smarter than man and rule him forever.

I believe a woman who chooses to rule a man loses the man and gets amouse instead.

 

[Muffled]

Eve fashioned from Adam's penis bone


Oy, haven't you been going on & on about " penis bone " in every ther post?

Why alway with the penis bone ?

Try to curb your enthusiam with the penis bone resurfacing topic?

How about writting a haiku once in a while?

Or have I read too much into this?

Or am I having mass-dejavu?

But which came first? The Bone or the boneless?

This may explain why the chick ran across the road.

The chick ran across the road because the grass is always greener on the other side.

 

[Sunstone]

Pfft. Women give men boners, not men give women boners. The OP has it backwards.

 

[Ingledsva]

I agree with you - to a point.


I noticed when I was looking at this that the form is often used for one of a pair - such as a door post - which has a second post to work, or a boat rib -which has a another side to the "V."


I concluded from the sentence, that Adam was not a male from which a female was made, - but male and female in one - which were separated for procreation purposes.

Well I'm not sure how you came to that observation, but your conclusion that Adam was a combination of male and female in one, is the same as that of the Jewish commentators.

I looked at all of the words in the full story, and the way they were being used.


I believe 22 is saying - And repaired YHVH Elohiym the side which was taken from the Adam (the first human form)...


And look at what 23 actually says.



*

 

[Tumah]

1. The 'problem' dissolves if the plural term denotes "support structures."
2. Isn't it true that connotation often works like that?

1. So if the word is a general term that can include the baculum and its support structures (not sure what this might include), then it doesn't mean baculum anymore.
2. Connotation does work like that. That's probably why "rib" makes more sense when discussing the "sides" of the Tabernacle.