God removed a CELL from Adam?

reply to post by Utnapisjtim


TSELA: Can never mean human cell as they had no understanding of that. It means a part, or side. So it would be translated as part of the man's side which is then understood as rib. Cell would never be an accurate translation for this word in this verse.

BASAR: This word does not mean male genitals. Male gentialia is A definition, but certainly not the most common one. Flesh of the body is by far the most common use for this word without any inference for genitalia (over 99% of all usage).

RedmoonMWC

Utnapisjtim


Why does none of our modern translations contain more info of what I discribe in this OP, at least in a footnote or two?

Any thoughts?

Because all of the modern "translations" are re-writings of the King James Bible, not actual translations of the original texts.
The problems stem from flawed translation techniques that haven't been updated in hundreds of years.
Hope that answers your question.

Completely false. Most modern translations 100% reject the KJV flaws and use original texts.

reply to post by Utnapisjtim

Its more like God took 2 ribs from Adam and closed the flesh over it and created Eve

reply to post by texasyeti


Gods or aliens, same thing to some respect. It's quite obvious the Sumerian gods and/or the divine of the Bible were extra terrestrials at some point. But if we take the first chapters of Genesis for what they are, these guys terraformed this planet and designed the environment here and introduced life, let alone adjusting the orbits of Venus and Earth to leave his usual tagline: Phi and Pi. In a way the aliens may be more terrestrial than Man or even the dragons of 60+ million years ago...

reply to post by LightAssassin


I checked it out....

It is clever. Only root words are translated (in some cases given totally new meanings), very vaguely and thats why there is no need for explaining the rest of the words that arent included and what they mean in the context of said story (aliens replicating apes to produce man).

It is still interesting as suprisingly, they got some words right maybe 1 outta every 8 words they mistranslated. Although they didnt mistranslate many as only a few words are needed to give the whole story a new meaning e.g. 'barah' = create.... so they say its 'replicate'... it is not all wrong.... just most of it!

dont get me wrong.... if one can read the bible original hebrew and understand its meaning down within the root words and why they sound and are written they way they are, then the words can be understood in a new light and this is very very hardcore.... not many scholars ever have gotten to that level and the ones that did ususally ended up either martyred or in a nuthouse!

but the point is that this site tries to do this but doesnt even get close.... but they got the right idea.... kinda!

combatmaster
youd be surprised what the top kabalistic rabbis know and dont say!

Over here it's Yggdrasil and Edda, the old Norse were quite into mystics and language too. For fun, read Elder Edda and pay special attention to anything having to do with Heimdall and compare him to Noah. You'd be surprised, I bet.

As for the critical typo, the same thing happened at some stage with 616 becoming 666 thus fulfilling the very prophecy surrounding it. I am aware of small bumps turning over great wagons. Like I said, I simply quoted what I did since it was the available direct translation of Bereshet 2:21 at the time I posted the OP. I have no idea what they are up to. I was just being lazy. Let's hope it doesn't turn into a lesson

Nochzwei
reply to post by Utnapisjtim

 

Its more like God took 2 ribs from Adam and closed the flesh over it and created Eve

Possibly, it's what being taught. Hell, you even thought of the ever elusive second rib, kudos to that Jokes aside: God took a Heb. 'tsela' from Adam. Heb. 'Tsela' is basically the same word as Lat. 'Cella', only Cella, being a cognate of the former, naturally doesn't share exactly the same semantics and lexical definitions. The etymological interrelation is however clear as a day star.

reply to post by combatmaster


Thanks for that, I appreciate your opinion.

Can I assume you read their research notes? Is what they are doing plausible?

In this translation they have translated the section we're discussing as follows:

v18 And so Creator of the Originators
dispensed anesthetic to be upon the Adam
and so he slept. And so was taken that to
duplicate (genetic material) to be remaining
a continuous match. And the open flesh
was closed to proceed to heal.
v19 And so Creator of the Originators
branched off to join...

...a duplicate to establish, taken from the
Adam for a woman and so this "amid" arose
to begin toward the Adam.
v20 And so the Adam declared ,"To refer to
the cross section (of my) frame, that frame
has appeared and (the) body, that body
which has appeared, for reference shall be
called 'to pass to' (a woman) as so in
reference to that (of) a male, transferred
toward (her).”
v21 To come about as stated, to join so to
enable man...

...to be able to father and to join being to
conceive and to bond amid his wife and so
to exist being (of) unified flesh.
v22 And so they came into existence by
dividing off (Adam) to make them. Then
they freely selecting each other, the Adam
and wife being and did not exist to proceed
to be disputing (the arrangement).

And their comments about the 'rib':

1. The Hebrew, is to shade to arc, meaning a copy next to, like a floorboard, rib or other duplicating item laid
next to. This was the mistake of the original translators, thinking it meant something arcing, or curved, hence a
rib

reply to post by LightAssassin



again.... they are using truth in a wrong context and then you can manipulate it.....

I am into the whole ancient alien theory and maybe this site is actually onto something but if they are, they dont even know it because its all mumbo jumbo! true words but not in the right context!

LightAssassin
And their comments about the 'rib':

1. The Hebrew, is to shade to arc, meaning a copy next to, like a floorboard, rib or other duplicating item laid
next to. This was the mistake of the original translators, thinking it meant something arcing, or curved, hence a
rib

Which makes me think at the vitality of correct geometric alignment of chromosomes, they have to be at just the right angle at the right time to be replicated correctly. This troubled the scientists for quite some time, truth is we are just starting to comprehend the stuff. At fertilisation life is as fragile as can be, it's not just tossing some genes into an empty cell and that's it. The chance for success has been limited, but we're getting there. There probably walk living working human clones around on this planet as I'm writing. First successful clone was a frog back in the fifties. Officially. Don't even dare to think about what the nazis figured out in those dreadful camps and laboratories during the War. Lebensborn, twin-research, Mengele and millions of humans to experiment on. Stuff of nightmares and dread.

reply to post by Utnapisjtim


Thanks for good post and useful information on this.

According to my understanding , our alien forefathers experimented on and created three (pre-flood) human prototypes which biblical texts refer to as Adamas. The first two prototypes were androgynous (or hermaphrodites) and further experimentations of these prototypes was eventually abandoned. The third version (or prototype) was the first version the aliens eventually considered successful. They were called “Man of law” (or “Creature of Earth”) as we can read in the text called “On the origin of the world”.

gnosis.org...

“Now the first Adam, (Adam) of Light, is spirit-endowed and appeared on the first day. The second Adam is soul-endowed and appeared on the sixth day, which is called Aphrodite. The third Adam is a creature of the earth, that is, the man of the law, and he appeared on the eighth day .”

The first pair (belonging to the Third Version) as mentioned in Genesis was called Adam and Eve. They were not created androgynous, but were created as “one” (like Siamese twins) and had to be separated by surgery. We can learn this in the book called “The legends of the jews” as we can read

www.sacred-texts.com...

“The woman destined to become the true companion of man was taken from Adam's body, for "only when like is joined unto like the union is indissoluble." The creation of woman from man was possible because Adam originally had two faces, which were separated at the birth of Eve.”

Thus Adam and Eve became the first pair that was created individually as man and woman and thus was able to reproduce by themselves and create children in their own image. This was probably a breakthrough because in the text called “On the origin of the world” we can read that the aliens was very satisfied when they watched them have intercourse, as we can read:

gnosis.org...

“Once the rulers had seen him and the female creature who was with him erring ignorantly like beasts, they were very glad. Perhaps this is the true man”

Seth thus became the first child ever born by natural means and thus Seth inherited the genes of his father (Adam) and his mother (Eve), as we can read in a book called “The book of the generations of Adam” :

www.thepearl.org...

“His appearance was like that of his Fathers, for he could be distinguished from me only by his age.”

Shortly before (and after) the great flood, the forth and the final version of Adamas was created. This is the race that is still around, and which mainstream scientist calls “Homo Sapiens”.

helius
reply to post by Utnapisjtim

 

Thanks for good post and useful information on this.

According to my understanding , our alien forefathers experimented on and created three (pre-flood) human prototypes which biblical texts refer to as Adamas.

Adama means earth in Hebrew, as in red henna clay.

The first two prototypes were androgynous (or hermaphrodites) and further experimentations of these prototypes was eventually abandoned. The third version (or prototype) was the first version the aliens eventually considered successful. They were called “Man of law” (or “Creature of Earth”) as we can read in the text called “On the origin of the world”.

gnosis.org...

“Now the first Adam, (Adam) of Light, is spirit-endowed and appeared on the first day. The second Adam is soul-endowed and appeared on the sixth day, which is called Aphrodite. The third Adam is a creature of the earth, that is, the man of the law, and he appeared on the eighth day .”

The first pair (belonging to the Third Version) as mentioned in Genesis was called Adam and Eve. They were not created androgynous, but were created as “one” (like Siamese twins) and had to be separated by surgery. We can learn this in the book called “The legends of the jews” as we can read

www.sacred-texts.com...

“The woman destined to become the true companion of man was taken from Adam's body, for "only when like is joined unto like the union is indissoluble." The creation of woman from man was possible because Adam originally had two faces, which were separated at the birth of Eve.”

Thus Adam and Eve became the first pair that was created individually as man and woman and thus was able to reproduce by themselves and create children in their own image. This was probably a breakthrough because in the text called “On the origin of the world” we can read that the aliens was very satisfied when they watched them have intercourse, as we can read:

gnosis.org...

“Once the rulers had seen him and the female creature who was with him erring ignorantly like beasts, they were very glad. Perhaps this is the true man”

Seth thus became the first child ever born by natural means and thus Seth inherited the genes of his father (Adam) and his mother (Eve), as we can read in a book called “The book of the generations of Adam” :

www.thepearl.org...

“His appearance was like that of his Fathers, for he could be distinguished from me only by his age.”

Shortly before (and after) the great flood, the forth and the final version of Adamas was created. This is the race that is still around, and which mainstream scientist calls “Homo Sapiens”.

The gnostic and pseudepigrapha extensions of Genesis turns the Bible into a soap opera in my mind. Interesting reads though. While this ATS embargo on all religious discussions lasted, I read through On the Origin of the World in a new translation by Marvin Meyer I just bought off Amazon containing the complete Nag Hammadi library. It kindof turns the game upside down, saying the devil and his beast are the good guys, Eve was not really Eve, but a lookalike who subsequently end up being raped by the gods and getting the blame for it all. These things and more is what both intrigues me and irritates me about Gnosticism, everything must be dualistic and oposite, the lie is the truth sort of thing.

If you're going to accept that the Bible was accurate to begin with, then it was a rib, not a cell. You're not allowed to play fast and loose with the translations, or you might as well just throw the whole thing out.

But I'm kind of a fan of blasphemy anyway, so go ahead.

reply to post by Utnapisjtim



The translations and assertions of the OP are wildly inaccurate.

Firstly, the Hebrew used in Genesis 2:21 makes no mention of cells nor ribs.

כא. וַיַּפֵּל יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהִים | תַּרְדֵּמָה עַל הָאָדָם וַיִּישָׁן וַיִּקַּח אַחַת מִצַּלְעֹתָיו וַיִּסְגֹּר בָּשָׂר תַּחְתֶּנָּה

The Hebrew מִצַּלְעֹתיו means "of his sides." The whole rib thing is a guess (because your ribs are on your sides) that has been included in various translations because it sounds less puzzling than "took [one] of his sides" which is the most literal translation. This has nothing to do with Hebrew or Latin for chamber or cells.

Here's simple proof: this word is used elsewhere in the Torah for the same purpose: to refer to the side of a given object. It is used in Exodus 26:20 to refer to "...the side of the tabernacle" (וּלְצֶלַע).

No amount of hand-waving or tenuous references to phonetics or Latin can begin to compare to the fact that this word is used more than once in the Torah to refer to a "side."

The cell concept of the OP is utterly baseless. The bizarre claims about "the flesh under her" are similarly baseless.


OP: regarding the koran: you might be trying to recall something along the lines of "man starts as a blood clot and develops therefrom." I don't recall the sura specifically, but if you search internets for koran blood clot you'll find at least that much.


Regarding OP's last claim: "Anyway, Genesis 2:21 in it's original language has way more to tell us about the creation of Eve than King James or any other modern translator has been able to provide us with. Why does none of our modern translations contain more info of what I discribe in this OP, at least in a footnote or two?"

What I have just written is well known to Jewish studies and has been the accepted meaning to educated Jews (and Christians too I reckon) for many centuries. It is clearly understood that Adam is made to sleep, something is then taken from his side, and the site of removal is closed back up. The material taken from this side is then used to create Eve.


Literal translation of Genesis 2:21,22: "And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon man, and he slept, and He took one of his sides, and He closed the flesh in its place. And the Lord God built the side that He had taken from man into a woman, and He brought her to man."

Even though the Torah is not a science textbook, and should not be approached nor understood as such, it is still quite interesting to ponder these two verses.

Consider: women truly are of man.

We all have 22 pairs of autosomal chromosomes.

(Fun fact: there are 22 letters in the Hebrew alphabet!)

And then there is the pair of sex chromosomes. Two X chromosomes for women, one X and one Y for men.

Remove the influence of that Y chromosome and what do you get? A woman!


One might say there was a fifty-fifty chance, but it is interesting to note that only in the past few decades has "science discovered" that women are quite literally derived from what makes men.

One other amusing observation:
Consider the Hebrew word for man: אּישׁ
Consider the Hebrew for woman: אִשָּׁה

What is the first letter of both?
Aleph (א).

Consider the sex chromosomes.
Women are XX.
Men are XY.

What do they have in common?
X.

So what is common to both?
Aleph and the X chromosome.

Incidentally, the X chromosome bears a striking resemblance to aleph:

Oh darn. I'd post an image of an X chromosome here, but alas the '"insert an image from your library" function doesn't seem to be working.

Consider aleph: א

And then check out the X chromsome, such as this representation (based on electron microscopy data).

sometimes i don't get the question. why would anyone or anything or a "creator" that can snap it's fingers or tentacles or beak or whatever and cause a Universe to leap into existence, need to remove anything from anything to produce a desired result? i suppose it could have been a cell, or a rib, or an atom, or an electron from adam for that "matter". I really get an iffy feeling when there is a question of something that is verifiable via science (genetics/cloning) being applied to the capabilities of a "diety". unless of course your saying it was some advanced civilization that was messing with angry monkeys, then it makes sense, because then they wouldn't be a God who can do anything it wants, anytime it wants for any reason it wants (sorta like congress) without there being any verifiable proof or methodology involved. what if the "cell" was removed from eve? what if eve actually came first and some profit got pissy about that? not like humans aren't pissy sometimes or self centered. get a hold of dr who and bizz back to the begining of life on earth and let us know will ya ? and again, i have to ask a question. why would God need to leave post-it notes ? it's God right ? why would anyone take the word of a human being that said "oh yeah, God talked to me the other day and told me to jot this down" ????? I get faith. I really do. But the more I look at the bible, the more QUESTIONS i get than answers. Not questioning the mysterious hand of the divine. just questioning all these cats that say they get "personal fors" from God in they're in-box, in other words, ow much can you really trust a "prophet" ? ! but just for fun, riddle me this? why did the mysterious hand of the divine put spooky action at a distance in the bible, way before einstien came up with it ?

reply to post by Trender


The Hebrew word Tsela, the Latin word Cella, the Norse Kellari and the English word Cellar all have the same origin and are cognates of eachother. They all discribe a room in a building. However, in Hebrew it also means side and/or rib, and in Genesis 2:21 God creates a woman with one of them, while Adam is in narcosis. Below is the definition given in the Theological Word Book of the Old Testament:

Definition
side, rib, beam
rib (of man)
rib (of hill, ridge, etc)
side-chambers or cells (of temple structure)
rib, plank, board (of cedar or fir)
leaves (of door)
side (of ark)

King James Word Usage - Total: 41
side 19, chamber 11, boards 2, corners 2, rib 2, another 1, beams 1, halting 1, leaves 1, planks 1

(The Hebrew lexicon is Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius Lexicon; this is keyed to the "Theological Word Book of the Old Testament." These files are considered public domain.)

www.biblestudytools.com...

Adam (אדם) means human being or person.

Adam is also related to the words "red" and "earth."
'Adama' (אדמה) is earth
'adom' (אדום) is red
Adam (אדם) literally means man.

They're all spelled similarly in Hebrew but have different pronunciations.
(Ad´am) [Earthling Man; Mankind; Humankind; from a root meaning "red"].

By the way I like the X and Aleph similarity. Also note blood is "red"

Two creation stories. First he makes man and woman together then he makes man and separates woman out? Of course Jewish stories like to say the first woman was not Eve but was Lilith and she wanted to be above man and this could not be. She was banished then the creator sought a way to make her submissive to man, hence Eve.

reply to post by favouriteslave


Yes, Adam was named after the 'adama', the red henna clay he was made from. If we're to believe the Talmud and other commentaries to Genesis, the soil in Eden was that of red henna clay. The red pigment in question is iron oxide, same as in human blood. Hence the taste and smell of iron vampires complain about.