I try to understand the reason behind things like this NC law. I thought it might be inspired for religiousreasons and I found an issue that I hadn’t looked at in detail … the differences between Genesis 1 and Genesis 2. Comparison of Genesis 1 & Genesis 2Genesis 1: Order of Events1) heavens and earth created2) light shines on earth3) light divided from darkness4) firmament divided5) land separated from waterGenesis 2: Order of Events1) heavens and earth created2) plant life appears3) man (male only) created4) animal life created5) woman made from man’s side6) plant life appears7) sun, moon, and stars appear8) animal life created9) man (male and female) created
http://www.tedmontgomery.com/bblovrvw/Creation/Genesis1vs2.htmlSome scholars offer the following androgyne explanation which fits for those who believe it is a literal translation:“Among those supporters of Androgyne Adam are the oldest Hebrew scholars, the writers of the Talmud. When I first searched for Adam in the Talmud I was shocked not only that the writers believe Adam was an androgyne, but I was also shocked at how normal it was. The Talmud is famous for debating minor details and giving multiple, conflicting views on the same topic on purpose. But the Earthling’s gender was not debated. They believed the Earthling an androgyne and no reason to make a fuss over it or defend the idea. Their historical context must have been unanimous on the subject. There are two explanations for this: The Hebrews believed in Androgyne Adam since Genesis was written and the talmudic writers followed; when Christianity blossomed, Gentiles did not bother studying Talmud and assumed if the Earthling died a man, he was born a man too. Or, the same as above except there was also a major shift of interpretation of the androgyne sometime between the origin of Genesis and the origin of the Talmud. Occam’s razor suggests the simpler, first explanation. It is rather silly to believe in something we have no evidence for, just because it fits our modern, unproven assumptions.”http://www.transchristians.org/book/hijra-to-christ/adamAs this is not accepted by the majority but not 100% of scholars, it would seem logical that we follow Jesus’ suggestion that we love all of mankind, so, while I’m not really convinced that the law was inspired by religion, I’m trying to be positive, and respect and understand their point of view..
I try to understand the reason behind things like this NC law. I thought it might be inspired for religiousreasons and I found an issue that I hadn’t looked at in detail … the differences between Genesis 1 and Genesis 2. Comparison of Genesis 1 & Genesis 2Genesis 1: Order of Events1) heavens and earth created2) light shines on earth3) light divided from darkness4) firmament divided5) land separated from waterGenesis 2: Order of Events1) heavens and earth created2) plant life appears3) man (male only) created4) animal life created5) woman made from man’s side6) plant life appears7) sun, moon, and stars appear8) animal life created9) man (male and female) created
http://www.tedmontgomery.com/bblovrvw/Creation/Genesis1vs2.htmlSome scholars offer the following androgyne explanation which fits for those who believe it is a literal translation:“Among those supporters of Androgyne Adam are the oldest Hebrew scholars, the writers of the Talmud. When I first searched for Adam in the Talmud I was shocked not only that the writers believe Adam was an androgyne, but I was also shocked at how normal it was. The Talmud is famous for debating minor details and giving multiple, conflicting views on the same topic on purpose. But the Earthling’s gender was not debated. They believed the Earthling an androgyne and no reason to make a fuss over it or defend the idea. Their historical context must have been unanimous on the subject. There are two explanations for this: The Hebrews believed in Androgyne Adam since Genesis was written and the talmudic writers followed; when Christianity blossomed, Gentiles did not bother studying Talmud and assumed if the Earthling died a man, he was born a man too. Or, the same as above except there was also a major shift of interpretation of the androgyne sometime between the origin of Genesis and the origin of the Talmud. Occam’s razor suggests the simpler, first explanation. It is rather silly to believe in something we have no evidence for, just because it fits our modern, unproven assumptions.”http://www.transchristians.org/book/hijra-to-christ/adamAs this is not accepted by the majority but not 100% of scholars, it would seem logical that we follow Jesus’ suggestion that we love all of mankind, so, while I’m not really convinced that the law was inspired by religion, I’m trying to be positive, and respect and understand their point of view..