females are not women

Genesis chapter 1:27
"so God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him: male and female created he them. "

Genesis 2:21-23
"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 thereof
22 And the rib which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman and brought her unto the man.
23 And Adam said, this is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman because she was taken out of Man. "

help me understand this

that thing called Ribs is the DNA.

The bible is just a fairy tale.

meaning Adam and the woman DNA were matching ama

Am trying to understand the narrative from the author’s point of view

Say Eve was male and get out of the closet alright. Otherwise understand that a language translated across 6000 years with changing regimes won’t lack inconsistency.

-Adam: made of clay (created from soil)
-Eve: made of Adam (created from Adams flesh)
-Adam & Eve: both bear (created in) the image of God
male and female created he them [in His own image]

No sir. Am not in any closet. I believe the people you are referring to failed to understand the definition of male/female and their roles therefore a corruption of being.

keep your atheistic bullshit to yourself


the Bible , the Torah , the Quran are fictional all books - you can never ever understand them , a’ght

Yes, God created man(Gen 1) and then formed man(Gen 2). The creator first created man mentally(His Image) and spiritually(His likeness). This being was androgynous that is consisting masculine and feminine quality.
After several generations of refining his creation He formed a man of dust that is He gave this being a physical body. He transfered this spiritual being from his mind through His breath to nostrils of the dust formation(physical body). So a man of dust became a living being. Later, he took part of the man of dust(ribs) and formed another physical body. However, this second physical body differed slightly from the first. The first physical body was the image of God i.e. the active force while the second one was image of Creation i.e. the passive force. Active force provides the seeds for creating while the passive receives these seeds. You cannot create without the two forces.

Very interesting perspective, just like this hypothesis:

as well as this:

Interesting coz they they tend to spark more questions than provide satisfactory answer to the reader. Such hypotheses are stemmed from the presumption that the creation account as recorded in Genesis is a coded narrative.

If Gen 1 and 2 have deeper meanings:
[li]Which other chapter in Genesis is symbolic? The flood, is it also symbolic? Cain killing Abel? Is the entire Genesis metaphorical? How do you draw the line?[/li][/ul]
My take: the creation accounts in Genesis 1 and 2 are as literal as recorded and thus do not require deeper analysis for interpretation. Man was created from soil, literally, then woman formed out of his ribs, literally–both of them bearing the image of the creator.


Which one is this now?

I agree. But not on your conclusion. My take is that Adam was/had a female wife that bore Eve whom he called Woman.

the one they don’t want you reading

It is good to read history. The history of biblical accounts.