• Announcements

    • Nemesis

      Contact Us Broken   09/27/2016

      Users, It has come to our attention that the contact us feature on the site is broken.  Please do not use this feature to contact board admins.  Please go through normal channels.  If you are ignored there then assume your request was denied. Also if you try to email us that email address is pretty much ignored.  Also don't contact us to complain, ask for favors, donations, or any other thing that you may think would annoy us.  Nemesis

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

David Bokovoy

Adam's Rib:

48 posts in this topic

Genesis 2:20-21 features an interesting portrayal of the creation of the first woman. I

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fascinating and intriguing indeed....though I'd love to see the jaws drop in the average Gospel Doctrine class if it was ever addressed.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fascinating and intriguing indeed....though I'd love to see the jaws drop in the average Gospel Doctrine class if it was ever addressed.

I don't know. I suggest you give it a try, then return and report! :P

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the book of Abraham (Moses, or any other Mormon scripture) give any more details on the creation of Adam and Eve (in the physical bodies)?

Genesis says Adam was made fron dust, and Eve from a bone.

Is that the same picture given in Mormon scripture?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know. I suggest you give it a try, then return and report! :P

Not sure the latter will be feasible...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fascinating concept.

However, might you have it backwards. Could it be that ancient cultures, noting the baculum deficiency, explained it by proposing the creation of woman as the reason. Such an explanation would bolster the concept that women were inferior to men and this was God's will as demonstrated by the way He created the woman from part of man's sexual apparatus.

Larry p

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fascinating concept.

However, might you have it backwards. Could it be that ancient cultures, noting the baculum deficiency, explained it by proposing the creation of woman as the reason. Such an explanation would bolster the concept that women were inferior to men and this was God's will as demonstrated by the way He created the woman from part of man's sexual apparatus.

Larry p

Sorry, I'm a bit confused. In what way is this a reversal from what I wrote? Also, if the theory is correct, I'm not sure that the woman's creation would indicate inferiority simply because she was created from the man's baculum.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lest anyone assume that I'm simply trying to be shocking and/or controversial here, I believe that if correct, this observation supports my reading of Genesis 2-3 as an explanatory narrative revealing why humans share the mortal nature of animals yet are so unique in terms of their sexual awareness and behaviors. In Genesis, humans are sexual beings like the Gods.

So this issue should carry a lot of interest for an LDS audience.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So this issue should carry a lot of interest for an LDS audience.

...and equids, monotremes, marsupials, lagomorphs, hyenas, and cetaceans.

How does this make humans uniquely sexual beings "like the Gods".

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey David, check out that Exegesis for the creation of Eve in my Nail of Heaven book that I sent you, and you will see even more. Tachtenna is also a euphemism for "her womb" and the phrase "closing the flesh in the stead thereof" actually translates to "enclosing the phallus in her womb."

Ed Goble

Genesis 2:20-21 features an interesting portrayal of the creation of the first woman. I

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Genesis 2:20-21 features an interesting portrayal of the creation of the first woman. I

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David,

When are you going to be finished with your dissertation? It sounds fascinating!

And I'm with Tyler: the Gospel Doctrine reaction would be priceless.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know. I suggest you give it a try, then return and report! :crazy:

If I were to do this, the bishop would say something similar to "return and report,", he would say "go away and repent." :P;)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a viewpoint I've yet to consider. I can see the basis for that interpretation, and it merits further pondering.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the book of Abraham (Moses, or any other Mormon scripture) give any more details on the creation of Adam and Eve (in the physical bodies)?

Genesis says Adam was made fron dust, and Eve from a bone.

Is that the same picture given in Mormon scripture?

Seeing that the Holy Bible is the largest book in the "Mormon scriptures" (larger than the Book of Mormon, D&C, and Pearl of Great Price combined) I know we have the "same picture". It still amazes me that people think that we have different scriptures, that we don't use the Bible or that the BoM, D&C, and PoGP are contradictory to the Holy Bible.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...and equids, monotremes, marsupials, lagomorphs, hyenas, and cetaceans.

How does this make humans uniquely sexual beings "like the Gods".

The author of the account didn't have much if any exposure to these other species and may have assumed that it was a unique human feature. But even if correct, this is but one minor point raised in a hundred page chapter. Human sexuality is much more unique when considered in terms of behaviors.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David, the day has finally arrived that I finally found something first! I discussed this about a year ago and found it fascinating.

</h2> http://archaiologia.wordpress.com/

Excuse me while I quietly feel smug...for at least five seconds. Okay...I'm back to normal...At least I know I'm on the right track.

Well why didn't you draw it to my attention, Bro! You know I'm in to stuff like this. And it's not as if I regularly peruse the American Journal of Medical Genetics! :P

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David,

When are you going to be finished with your dissertation? It sounds fascinating!

And I'm with Tyler: the Gospel Doctrine reaction would be priceless.

That, my friend, is the million dollar question. Should be soon.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey David, check out that Exegesis for the creation of Eve in my Nail of Heaven book that I sent you, and you will see even more. Tachtenna is also a euphemism for "her womb" and the phrase "closing the flesh in the stead thereof" actually translates to "enclosing the phallus in her womb."

Ed Goble

Interesting, I'll have to take a look.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For some reason this isn't a real big testimony builder for me.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Humans behave sexually like the gods in Near Eastern conceptions. I believe that the story of Eden explains why this is the case. The first humans ate from a tree that gave them sexual awareness unlike the animals, but precisely like that which the Gods themselves possess.

Hmmmm...

I'm either suffering from a lack of imagination, or am a romantic dud. (or both) But I'm failing to see the biological/behavioral/spirtitual connections or significance.

Which is exactly the reason why I would look forward to reading your upcoming work. :P

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Er.... yeah, not working for me.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well why didn't you draw it to my attention, Bro! You know I'm in to stuff like this. And it's not as if I regularly peruse the American Journal of Medical Genetics! :P

Hey, I'm just happy I got something right. Try explaining to the good brothers and sisters in Gospel Doctrine that side and feet as Hebraisms are euphemistic for sex and sex organs. I get stares enough as it is. Even my wife is sitting away from me. Seriously, though good research. I think this is an area that begs research. I have often taught that without a virile supreme deity then the population suffers. Why should Israel be any different. They expected as much from their kings, vis-a-vis David being kept "warm" by Abishag, but failing to "know" her. What did this lead to? His son Adonijah conspiracy against his kingship. Unless God remains potent then he can be, at least in a primitive mindset, be overrun by lesser beings via Baal and El where Baal cuckolds El in taking his consort/sister.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the point is here, is that those that believe that we are literal descendants of Heavenly Parents in our mortal bodies, and not just in our spirits, find this thing faith-promoting because it isn't just something that modern prophets made up, but is a concept from ancient times. And the more we dig in to the meanings of these symbols in Genesis, the more this view is upheld by the evidence. So even if your faith is not edified by this, other people's are.

For me, it isn't a question of Adam being the sire of the whole human race. Undoubtedly we mixed in with the Neanderthals at some point, and a great percentage of our ancestry lies in the anatomically modern human race that pre-dates Adam. But to have Elohim as one of my ancestors in my body literally is a wonderful concept to me, regardless of the origins of the rest of the humans that were on the earth before Adam. This is not an either/or proposition where we must choose Adam or the Pre-Adamites. It is rather an and/also proposition, where it is both in our ancestry. We are a hybrid race.

Hmmmm...

I'm either suffering from a lack of imagination, or am a romantic dud. (or both) But I'm failing to see the biological/behavioral/spirtitual connections or significance.

Which is exactly the reason why I would look forward to reading your upcoming work. :P

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the point is here, is that those that believe that we are literal descendants of Heavenly Parents in our mortal bodies, and not just in our spirits, find this thing faith-promoting because it isn't just something that modern prophets made up, but is a concept from ancient times. And the more we dig in to the meanings of these symbols in Genesis, the more this view is upheld by the evidence. So even if your faith is not edified by this, other people's are.

For me, it isn't a question of Adam being the sire of the whole human race. Undoubtedly we mixed in with the Neanderthals at some point, and a great percentage of our ancestry lies in the anatomically modern human race that pre-dates Adam. But to have Elohim as one of my ancestors in my body literally is a wonderful concept to me, regardless of the origins of the rest of the humans that were on the earth before Adam. This is not an either/or proposition where we must choose Adam or the Pre-Adamites. It is rather an and/also proposition, where it is both in our ancestry. We are a hybrid race.

What does this have to do with the proposed baculumectomy?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.