Why are women created twice?

[tumbleweed41]

I suppose a theory is a form of fiction, as there is no proof, else it'd be fact.

Scientific Theories do not become Scientific Facts. They explain Scientific Facts.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Is woman created twice?

Gen 1:27 says:
And God proceeded to create man in his image, in God’s image he created him; male and female he created them.

In Gen 2:18 we see that Adam is on his own again. What happened to Adam's first wife?

Followed by, Gen 2:22, where God now makes woman out of a rib.

Adam was created both male and female, "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." Gen1:27. In Gen 2:22 God separated male from female.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

So if Lady Guy Guy is actually a hermaphrodite, we might actually be witnessing the messiah here now! God has formed man and women back into one creature. Many thought maybe it was Jamie Lee Curtis for years, but that was just the false prophet, Lady Guy Guy is the messiah!

 

[Sententia]

Because we're special.

But if men were created first why do they have nipples?

 

[tumbleweed41]

But if men were created first why do they have nipples?

To make transitions easier for the transgendered?

 

[Sententia]

To make transitions easier for the transgendered?

God just cares so much that some times I miss it. What were those crazy evolutionists thinking?

 

[sandy whitelinger]

So if Lady Guy Guy is actually a hermaphrodite, we might actually be witnessing the messiah here now! God has formed man and women back into one creature. Many thought maybe it was Jamie Lee Curtis for years, but that was just the false prophet, Lady Guy Guy is the messiah!

There is nothing in Scripture that would merit consideration of any point you made. Maybe in the Apocrypha.

 

[Sententia]

To make transitions easier for the transgendered?

Wait god created Adam the male, Eve the female... who was the trans-gendered?

 

[tumbleweed41]

Wait god created Adam the male, Eve the female... who was the trans-gendered?

Cain and Abel's little brother, Lesley.

 

[sojourner]

From a thread I started...May of 09

Day One...Light
Day Two... Heaven
Day Three...everything that is green and bears seed.
Day Four...the seasons are set into order....the sun, moon, and stars
Day Five...everything that swims or flies.
Day Six...everything that walks...including Man

Obviously, there are some discussions to make about which items are out of order...some things need be in position before others.
But, we can do that portion later. For now, the list continues.

Day Seven...all is created...God rests...no more will be created.

Chapter Two.
God takes a man and places him into ideal living conditions.
His life is greatly extended, as the conditions allow it to be so.
Nothing will harm him. He is sheltered.

This isolated living is terminal.
Without a mate, the man is doomed to a solitary life.
A deep sleep is administered.
A rib is removed.
The rib is increased to full stature as a woman.

This is the basic structure of Scripture...Chapter One, and the intro of Chapter Two.

Chapter Two, is actually Day Eight.
The book doesn't say so.
But it should not have been needed to say so. It's obvious.
The Six Days of Creation are done. Day Seven...done.
What happens in Chapter Two is a separate event altogether.

Apparently...(and yes I can do this)...God is not yet...satisfied.
So He takes a man...which He made out of dust...and places Him into ideal living conditions.
The Man develops well...more so than his wandering counterparts...but his situation is confined solitude.
So he is given anesthesia, and his rib is taken. That's surgery.
The rib is increased to full stature. That's cloning.
That the clone will be female, is done in process. That's genetic engineering.
Adam was given his twin sister for a bride.
She looked like him....but not quite....no navel.

Obviously...the course of Man needed to be altered.
He was behaving too much like an animal.

Except that there are two completely different creation stories, one in chap. 1 and the other in chap. 2. And chap. 2 is older than chap. 1. The two stories don't jive, and were never meant to jive. furthermore, you're forgetting two other things: First, this isn't a science text. It's a theological treatment. Second, the ancients understood creation differently than we do. Therefore, your post makes no sense.

 

[Katzpur]

Is woman created twice?

Gen 1:27 says:
And God proceeded to create man in his image, in God’s image he created him; male and female he created them.

In Gen 2:18 we see that Adam is on his own again. What happened to Adam's first wife?

Followed by, Gen 2:22, where God now makes woman out of a rib.

If you really want to get picky (which is obviously the case), why didn't you ask the same thing about man? God apparently created man a second time in Genesis 2:7.

 

[Thief]

If you really want to get picky (which is obviously the case), why didn't you ask the same thing about man? God apparently created man a second time in Genesis 2:7.

And with that in mind.....see post#19.

 

[jessicalynn]

To start with, Genesis "recounts" the creation of, not only female, but male as well.

It is necessary to first point out that one cannot defend a "literal" interpretation of Genesis, but rather a complication and selection from two different stories whose details are mutually exclusive. The text cannot be interpreted literally without falling into contradiction. In Genesis 1:20-27, God creates all the animals first, and then finally creates the human being (male and female at once). In Genesis 2:15-22, God creates first man, then the animals, and finally woman (from the man's rib). This strengthens the claim that Genesis does not try to tell us exactly how God made the universe, but rather that all things that exists are God's creation.
Another way one could look at this would be that the name "Adam" (the name given to us in Genesis), is a play on words that indicate his origin from earth, for in Hebrew adham means human being. This name is used repeatedly in the Old Testament, to possibly refer, not to an individual, but to humanity. Therefore the name Eve may very well refer to all women instead of a single female.

When given this question some may bring up the Jewish folklore of Adam's "first wife", Lillith. This however would not be considered "Biblically Literate" for she is not mentioned in the Bible.

One may also look at this with the view that Genesis 1 is the general overview of all creation. Whereas, Genesis 2 goes back and describes in greater detail the way in which man and woman were made/ created. There also could of been two different "authors" with two different points-of-view/ ways of explaining creation.

With all of this said, I don't think that the bible is saying that women nor men were created "twice" but that (as I mentioned earlier) they were definitely created by God. Also, both creation stories have much in common but are also very different in parts; both creation accounts hold much information and if one were to be "removed" from the Bible we would miss out on much detail. Both stories hold important content in which we need to gather all the information about creation.

I hope that I've helped answer your question or at least raised some questions in which you can think about/ ask yourself. All of the information that I provided you with is from a range of personal experience, Biblical text, and theologian theories.

 

[Thief]

To start with, Genesis "recounts" the creation of, not only female, but male as well.

It is necessary to first point out that one cannot defend a "literal" interpretation of Genesis, but rather a complication and selection from two different stories whose details are mutually exclusive. The text cannot be interpreted literally without falling into contradiction. In Genesis 1:20-27, God creates all the animals first, and then finally creates the human being (male and female at once). In Genesis 2:15-22, God creates first man, then the animals, and finally woman (from the man's rib). This strengthens the claim that Genesis does not try to tell us exactly how God made the universe, but rather that all things that exists are God's creation.
Another way one could look at this would be that the name "Adam" (the name given to us in Genesis), is a play on words that indicate his origin from earth, for in Hebrew adham means human being. This name is used repeatedly in the Old Testament, to possibly refer, not to an individual, but to humanity. Therefore the name Eve may very well refer to all women instead of a single female.

When given this question some may bring up the Jewish folklore of Adam's "first wife", Lillith. This however would not be considered "Biblically Literate" for she is not mentioned in the Bible.

One may also look at this with the view that Genesis 1 is the general overview of all creation. Whereas, Genesis 2 goes back and describes in greater detail the way in which man and woman were made/ created. There also could of been two different "authors" with two different points-of-view/ ways of explaining creation.

With all of this said, I don't think that the bible is saying that women nor men were created "twice" but that (as I mentioned earlier) they were definitely created by God. Also, both creation stories have much in common but are also very different in parts; both creation accounts hold much information and if one were to be "removed" from the Bible we would miss out on much detail. Both stories hold important content in which we need to gather all the information about creation.

I hope that I've helped answer your question or at least raised some questions in which you can think about/ ask yourself. All of the information that I provided you with is from a range of personal experience, Biblical text, and theologian theories.

So you think Chapter One and Chapter Two are the same event?

Did you review post#19?

And regardless of text or belief.....someone had to be first.
Someone walked with God....first.

His name is Adam.

 

[sojourner]

So you think Chapter One and Chapter Two are the same event?

Did you review post#19?

And regardless of text or belief.....someone had to be first.
Someone walked with God....first.

His name is Adam.

Actually, chap. 1 and 2 are two separate recollections of the same event. Chap. 2 is the older, Yahwist account. Chap. 1 is the newer, Elohist account. Different cultural perspectives, using, possibly, different older traditions. Since the two are fundamentally different from one another, chap. 2 cannot be seen as a "continuation" of chap. 1 (especially in light of the fact that it's older).

Adam is not a proper name. It's a designation for humanity. Regardless of text or belief, we just don't know who the first religious person was. What we do know is that her/his name most likely was not "Adam."

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

So Adam and Eve had children.... Where did they get their husbands and wives from.

 

[Thief]

Actually, chap. 1 and 2 are two separate recollections of the same event. Chap. 2 is the older, Yahwist account. Chap. 1 is the newer, Elohist account. Different cultural perspectives, using, possibly, different older traditions. Since the two are fundamentally different from one another, chap. 2 cannot be seen as a "continuation" of chap. 1 (especially in light of the fact that it's older).

Adam is not a proper name. It's a designation for humanity. Regardless of text or belief, we just don't know who the first religious person was. What we do know is that her/his name most likely was not "Adam."

My version works better.
It allows for evolution....Chapter One.
It allows for God's immediate alterations....Chapter Two.

And regardless of namesake.....someone had to be first...walking with God.
You can call Adam anything you want to.
But he was first and I call him....Adam.

 

[sojourner]

My version works better.

No it doesn't. Because that's not the way it is.

It allows for evolution....Chapter One.

The Bible isn't a science text. It's a theological text.

And regardless of namesake.....someone had to be first...walking with God.
You can call Adam anything you want to.
But he was first and I call him....Adam.

Did they? Maybe a group of early human beings got together and arrived at an understanding of Deity. The Adam of Genesis is nothing more than a character in an allegorical story.

 

[Thief]

No it doesn't. Because that's not the way it is.
And you know the way it is...by what means?

The Bible isn't a science text. It's a theological text.
And Chapter Two does not describe a science experiment?
Yes it does.

Did they? Maybe a group of early human beings got together and arrived at an understanding of Deity. The Adam of Genesis is nothing more than a character in an allegorical story.
And Genesis makes note of this?

In spite of your nay saying.....my version takes away the nay saying.

You can have your belief in evolution and your Genesis....Chapter One
You can have your science and your Genesis....Chapter Two.

And again...as you pick any version of God's first interaction with Man....
someone had to be first.
I call him Adam.

 

[search the scriptures]

Gen 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created,

in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

After the fact a more detailed account of the creation of man, as well as the formed earth or "how/details of" :

Gen 2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

Gen 2:6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.

At that point in time :

Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

where? :

Gen 2:8 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.

etc...