View Full Version : Message of Equality
If I were asked to state what I thought the single most important message I could share with the world was, my unequivocal answer would be 'women’s rights are human rights'. Down through the centuries women have been denied equal human rights with men solely because of their gender. Some of the biggest perpetrators have been institutions founded on the Abrahamic religions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. The doctrines promoted by these religions teach that women are to be in subjection to the men, who in turn deny women the basic human rights that they themselves enjoy. These doctrines deny women the right to be educated as men, or to even be able to teach men. They teach the idea that women were made by God for the pleasure of men and must be subject to him, when in reality men are created from woman.
1Cor.11:7-9 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.
Gen.2:23 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.
Instead of woman being flesh and bone of the man as the Bible teaches, all humans come from and are literally part of the flesh and bone of the woman. A good comparison is that of constructing a building, both male and female contribute to the plans or 'blueprint' (DNA) of the building, but it is the woman who supplies all the materials (flesh, and blood) to construct the building.
As long as lies concerning the equality of women are taught as God given doctrines by men, women will continue to be denied their equal rights as humans. The message that 'women’s rights are human rights' is a message that needs to be preached from every pulpit and spoken from every mouth, until we live in world where all humans are treated equally regardless of race or gender.
Rose
If I were asked to state what I thought the single most important message I could share with the world was, my unequivocal answer would be 'women’s rights are human rights'. Down through the centuries women have been denied equal human rights with men solely because of their gender. Some of the biggest perpetrators have been institutions founded on the Abrahamic religions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. The doctrines promoted by these religions teach that women are to be in subjection to the men, who in turn deny women the basic human rights that they themselves enjoy. These doctrines deny women the right to be educated as men, or to even be able to teach men. They teach the idea that women were made by God for the pleasure of men and must be subject to him, when in reality men are created from woman.
1Cor.11:7-9 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.
Gen.2:23 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.
Instead of woman being flesh and bone of the man as the Bible teaches, all humans come from and are literally part of the flesh and bone of the woman. A good comparison is that of constructing a building, both male and female contribute to the plans or 'blueprint' (DNA) of the building, but it is the woman who supplies all the materials (flesh, and blood) to construct the building.
As long as lies concerning the equality of women are taught as God given doctrines by men, women will continue to be denied their equal rights as humans. The message that 'women’s rights are human rights' is a message that needs to be preached from every pulpit and spoken from every mouth, until we live in world where all humans are treated equally regardless of race or gender.
Rose
But it is the sperm from the male that decides if the baby born is male or female. Male sperm contains either a Y chromosome or an X chromosome. Female egg only have X chromosome. If it is a Y sperm that merges with the egg then the fetus becomes a male i.e. with XY chromosome. If it is an X sperm that merges with the egg then the fetus becomes a female i.e. XX chromosome. It reminds me of the story in Genesis in which God took a rib from Adam (XY) to form Eve (X). The rib from Adam probably contains the X chromosome which resulted in female being given the extra X chromosome and thus XX. As such, woman came from man. There is a man in the woman i.e. the X chromosome from the male merges with the X chromosome in the female.
God blessed us all male or female equally.:pray:
But it is the sperm from the male that decides if the baby born is male or female. Male sperm contains either a Y chromosome or an X chromosome. Female egg only have X chromosome. If it is a Y sperm that merges with the egg then the fetus becomes a male i.e. with XY chromosome. If it is an X sperm that merges with the egg then the fetus becomes a female i.e. XX chromosome. It reminds me of the story in Genesis in which God took a rib from Adam (XY) to form Eve (X). The rib from Adam probably contains the X chromosome which resulted in female being given the extra X chromosome and thus XX. As such, woman came from man. There is a man in the woman i.e. the X chromosome from the male merges with the X chromosome in the female.
God blessed us all male or female equally.:pray:
So, what does that have to do with what I was speaking of in my post? A female can be cloned from a female, no male is needed.
So, what does that have to do with what I was speaking of in my post? A female can be cloned from a female, no male is needed.
So can a male cloned from a male, no female is needed. Cloning can be done on both gender. I do wish Rose be cloned into a male so that she can see from the male perspective, And then she can enjoy all the biased male privileges.:winking0071:
Just for curiosity sake, it is much easier to clone a male (XY) to a female (XX) because the male has a X chromosome but to clone a female (XX) to a male (XY) is difficult, if not impossible, where does the female (XX) got the Y chromosome from to turn into a male (XY)? Therefore, the Bible is right, Adam (XY) can produced Eve (XX) but not Eve (XX) to produce Adam (XY) because Eve don't have a Y chromosome.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/OppositeSexClone
God Blessed us all. :pray:
So can a male cloned from a male, no female is needed. Cloning can be done on both gender. I do wish Rose be cloned into a male so that she can see from the male perspective, And then she can enjoy all the biased male privileges.:winking0071:
Just for curiosity sake, it is much easier to clone a male (XY) to a female (XX) because the male has a X chromosome but to clone a female (XX) to a male (XY) is difficult, if not impossible, where does the female (XX) got the Y chromosome from to turn into a male (XY)? Therefore, the Bible is right, Adam (XY) can produced Eve (XX) but not Eve (XX) to produce Adam (XY) because Eve don't have a Y chromosome.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/OppositeSexClone
God Blessed us all. :pray:
Hey there my friend Cheow, I think I need to educate you on how cloning works.:D First one must start with an egg cell which is a totipotent cell that only comes from the female, then the nucleus is removed. After that a nucleus is taken from a normal cell having the full number of chromosomes and implanted into the egg cell which causes the egg cell to start developing into a fetus which must be implanted into a surrogate mother. Now, because females only have X chromosomes, all life that is cloned from a female is always female, so conceivably there could be a world of all females.
The reason that a male cannot be cloned from a male, is because males do not have egg cells, and without egg cells you can't reproduce life.
Remember Dolly the sheep?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39BbcZVCx8I
Rose
Hey there my friend Cheow, I think I need to educate you on how cloning works.:D First one must start with an egg cell which is a totipotent cell that only comes from the female, then the nucleus is removed. After that a nucleus is taken from a normal cell having the full number of chromosomes and implanted into the egg cell which causes the egg cell to start developing into a fetus which must be implanted into a surrogate mother. Now, because females only have X chromosomes, all life that is cloned from a female is always female, so conceivably there could be a world of all females.
The reason that a male cannot be cloned from a male, is because males do not have egg cells, and without egg cells you can't reproduce life.
Remember Dolly the sheep?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39BbcZVCx8I
Rose
I must also educate you Rose my friend that female cloning is old news. Males have been successfully cloned since 1999. The egg was cleared of all chromosomes, As such, I see no reason why an egg will be required in future cloning. Soon cloning will be done in test tubes.
http://www.nature.com/news/1999/990603/full/news990603-2.html
There are studies to show the Y chromosome is not going extinct:
http://www.zmescience.com/medicine/genetic/y-chromosome-not-diminishing-men-extinct-0312934/
God Blessed us all.
Richard Amiel McGough
03-21-2012, 11:03 AM
I must also educate you Rose my friend that female cloning is old news. Males have been successfully cloned since 1999. The egg was cleared of all chromosomes, As such, I see no reason why an egg will be required in future cloning. Soon cloning will be done in test tubes.
http://www.nature.com/news/1999/990603/full/news990603-2.html
God Blessed us all.
You totally missed the point. From which MAN did you get the EGG you used in your little cloning experiment? :doh:
Also, your assertion that we won't need eggs for cloning indicates you know nothing of biology. It is the EGG that grows into the adult.
You totally missed the point. From which MAN did you get the EGG you used in your little cloning experiment? :doh:
Also, your assertion that we won't need eggs for cloning indicates you know nothing of biology. It is the EGG that grows into the adult.
In your evolution theory, which comes first, the chicken or the egg?
Did Adam requires an egg to form Eve?
God Blessed.:pray:
Richard Amiel McGough
03-21-2012, 11:30 AM
In your evolution theory, which comes first, the chicken or the egg?
Did Adam requires an egg to form Eve?
God Blessed.:pray:
I'll answer you after you admit your error concerning cloning from males without a female egg.
In your evolution theory, which comes first, the chicken or the egg?
Did Adam requires an egg to form Eve?
God Blessed.:pray:
If the chicken came first it had to be a hen, because only hen's produce egg cells that form the eggs we enjoy so much for breakfast. :lol:
Adam didn't form Eve silly boy, don't you know the Garden story is a myth. All humans must come from an egg cell which only females produce, so there is no way a female can come from a male. A normal human cell cannot be turned into an egg cell, they can only be created in a female body.
Rose
[QUOTE=Rose;42432]If the chicken came first it had to be a hen, because only hen's produce egg cells that form the eggs we enjoy so much for breakfast. :lol:
If the hen came first, where is the cock (male chicken) to fertilize the egg? An unfertilized egg is only good for food. It goes to show that both gender needs each other to breed.
Adam didn't form Eve silly boy, don't you know the Garden story is a myth. All humans must come from an egg cell which only females produce, so there is no way a female can come from a male. A normal human cell cannot be turned into an egg cell, they can only be created in a female body.
If the Garden Story is a myth, so is the Bible and so is the BibleWheel because it referenced from the Bible. You haven't known the power of stem cells, it can turn cells into any cells. You are living in a female-biased-egg-cell box.
May God Blessed the Human race. :pray:
If the hen came first, where is the cock (male chicken) to fertilize the egg? An unfertilized egg is only good for food. It goes to show that both gender needs each other to breed.
Well, conceivably hens could be cloned from other hens, and all that's needed for food and eggs is hens, so cocks would be superfluous. :lol:
If the Garden Story is a myth, so is the Bible and so is the BibleWheel because it referenced from the Bible. You haven't known the power of stem cells, it can turn cells into any cells. You are living in a female-biased-egg-cell box.
May God Blessed the Human race. :pray:
The validity of the Bible Wheel has nothing to do with whether or not the Garden Story, or the Bible is a myth.
Don't you know where stem cells come from? They come from embryos, which are fertilized egg cells. :D
Rose
[QUOTE=Rose;42435]Well, conceivably hens could be cloned from other hens, and all that's needed for food and eggs is hens, so cocks would be superfluous. :lol:
Obviously, even if you have eggs but without the male sperm, no one male or female could be conceived. That is equality in which each gender plays its part in the breeding process.
The validity of the Bible Wheel has nothing to do with whether or not the Garden Story, or the Bible is a myth.
Don't you know where stem cells come from? They come from embryos, which are fertilized egg cells. :D
Stem cells can be obtained anywhere in the body of which the 3 main sources are from bone marrow in the thigh and iliac crest, from adipose tissue and from umbilical cord blood. Some came from dead fetus (from abortions of course). No wonder God took a rib from Adam to form Eve. God may have used the stem cells from the bone marrow in Adam's rib, and Adam's rib contains the male XY chromosome to form the female XX chromosome......brilliant. See wiki on stem cells:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell
Stem cells are biological cells found in all multicellular organisms, that can divide (through mitosis) and differentiate into diverse specialized cell types and can self-renew to produce more stem cells. In mammals, there are two broad types of stem cells: embryonic stem cells, which are isolated from the inner cell mass of blastocysts, and adult stem cells, which are found in various tissues. In adult organisms, stem cells and progenitor cells act as a repair system for the body, replenishing adult tissues. In a developing embryo, stem cells can differentiate into all the specialized cells (these are called pluripotent cells), but also maintain the normal turnover of regenerative organs, such as blood, skin, or intestinal tissues.
There are three sources of autologous adult stem cells: 1) Bone marrow, which requires extraction by harvesting, that is, drilling into bone (typically the femur or iliac crest), 2) Adipose tissue (lipid cells), which requires extraction by liposuction, and 3) Blood, which requires extraction through pheresis, wherein blood is drawn from the donor (similar to a blood donation), passed through a machine that extracts the stem cells and returns other portions of the blood to the donor. Stem cells can also be taken from umbilical cord blood.
God wisdom amazes me. :pray:
Richard Amiel McGough
03-21-2012, 08:57 PM
[QUOTE]
Obviously, even if you have eggs but without the male sperm, no one male or female could be conceived. That is equality in which each gender plays its part in the breeding process.
Say what? It would be easy to clone with only females. What do you think we've been talking about? :doh:
Obviously, even if you have eggs but without the male sperm, no one male or female could be conceived. That is equality in which each gender plays its part in the breeding process.
That's the whole point of cloning, all you need is an egg cell from the female (totipotent cell) that has its nucleus removed and the nucleus from a normal cell inserted into it...no male sperm needed.
The sperm supplies the missing half of the chromosomes in the Egg cell, but if a complete nucleus from a normal cell is inserted into the Egg cell then no sperm is needed.
Stem cells can be obtained anywhere in the body of which the 3 main sources are from bone marrow in the thigh and iliac crest, from adipose tissue and from umbilical cord blood. Some came from dead fetus (from abortions of course). No wonder God took a rib from Adam to form Eve. God may have used the stem cells from the bone marrow in Adam's rib, and Adam's rib contains the male XY chromosome to form the female XX chromosome......brilliant. See wiki on stem cells:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell
Stem cells are biological cells found in all multicellular organisms, that can divide (through mitosis) and differentiate into diverse specialized cell types and can self-renew to produce more stem cells. In mammals, there are two broad types of stem cells: embryonic stem cells, which are isolated from the inner cell mass of blastocysts, and adult stem cells, which are found in various tissues. In adult organisms, stem cells and progenitor cells act as a repair system for the body, replenishing adult tissues. In a developing embryo, stem cells can differentiate into all the specialized cells (these are called pluripotent cells), but also maintain the normal turnover of regenerative organs, such as blood, skin, or intestinal tissues.
There are three sources of autologous adult stem cells: 1) Bone marrow, which requires extraction by harvesting, that is, drilling into bone (typically the femur or iliac crest), 2) Adipose tissue (lipid cells), which requires extraction by liposuction, and 3) Blood, which requires extraction through pheresis, wherein blood is drawn from the donor (similar to a blood donation), passed through a machine that extracts the stem cells and returns other portions of the blood to the donor. Stem cells can also be taken from umbilical cord blood.
God wisdom amazes me. :pray:
Here are the different kinds of stem cell and where they come from. Only Totipotent cells (egg cells) can become a living organism. A cell taken from Adams rib would not have been a Totipotent cell, so a living organism could not have been formed from it.
Totipotent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totipotency) (a.k.a omnipotent) stem cells can differentiate into embryonic and extraembryonic cell types. Such cells can construct a complete, viable organism.[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell#cite_note-Schoeler-3) These cells are produced from the fusion of an egg and sperm cell. Cells produced by the first few divisions of the fertilized egg are also totipotent.[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell#cite_note-4)
Pluripotent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluripotency) stem cells are the descendants of totipotent cells and can differentiate into nearly all cells,[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell#cite_note-Schoeler-3) i.e. cells derived from any of the three germ layers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germ_layer).[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell#cite_note-5)
Multipotent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multipotency) stem cells can differentiate into a number of cells, but only those of a closely related family of cells.[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell#cite_note-Schoeler-3)
Oligopotent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligopotency) stem cells can differentiate into only a few cells, such as lymphoid or myeloid stem cells.[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell#cite_note-Schoeler-3)
Unipotent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unipotency) cells can produce only one cell type, their own,[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell#cite_note-Schoeler-3) but have the property of self-renewal, which distinguishes them from non-stem cells (e.g., muscle stem cells).
Rose
[QUOTE=CWH;42437]
Say what? It would be easy to clone with only females. What do you think we've been talking about? :doh:
I am trying to stay within the topic of thie thread which is equality. My stand is that there is no distinct advantage of any one gender in the breeding process. In other words, male has no breeding advantage over female and vice versa. A child born will have 50% of his/her genes from the father and another 50% gene from his/her mother. This is what I call equality.
As far as equality is concern, cloning of males is proven equally possible not just the cloning of females. It may be easier to clone females than to clone males and it doesn't matter if the female egg have to be used in the process. The time will come in the future when an artificial external environment simulating the female egg could be used in cloning. That includes tweaking stem cells to work like egg cells. As such, no female is needed.
As cloning is a new technology and no human that I know of was cloned, we do not know what will be the effects of human cloning physically or genetically. I do not see any female superiority over male as Rose seems to imply in regards to breeding or cloning.
I know you don't believe in God unlike most of us here do. But let's take for once that you believe the account in Genesis is true, we should ask ourselves why would God took a rib from Adam (XY) and create Eve (XX). We know that a rib from Adam (XY) was a good source of bone marrow which carries stem cells and the XY chromosome which is essential in cloning another human being male (XY) or female(XX). If female(XX) to female (XX) cloning is ok then why create male (XY) in the first place? Might as well create humans to breed asexually like earthworms. We know that such male (XY) and female (XX) breeding is common and necessary throughout the animal kingdom and if female to female breeding is possible then why create the male? And if XX breeding is possible then what so special about the Y chromosome?
We know that female cloning will only results in female clones as they don't have a Y(male) choromosome. But cloning is not natural and the only thing nearest to cloning is asexual reproduction which is for lower animals. The XY chromosome probably comes into play so that breeding becomes natural and spontaneous. In other words, without the male (XY) there can be no natural breeding; female to female reproduction naturally is impossible neither is natural male to male reproduction possible. As such, there is no superiority of female over male in the reproduction process; both are equal in playing their parts in ensuring reproduction.
God Blessed. :pray:
[QUOTE=Rose;42439]That's the whole point of cloning, all you need is an egg cell from the female (totipotent cell) that has its nucleus removed and the nucleus from a normal cell inserted into it...no male sperm needed.
The sperm supplies the missing half of the chromosomes in the Egg cell, but if a complete nucleus from a normal cell is inserted into the Egg cell then no sperm is needed.
The whole point is that cloning is not natural and thus do not requires a male and female reproduction system. As I have answered RAM if an external artificial stimulated egg cell environment is created, then no egg cell at all or female is needed. Male cloning is already proven possible since 1999 and it doesnt matter if it uses an egg cell or empty egg cell.
Here are the different kinds of stem cell and where they come from. Only Totipotent cells (egg cells) can become a living organism. A cell taken from Adams rib would not have been a Totipotent cell, so a living organism could not have been formed from it.
Totipotent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totipotency) (a.k.a omnipotent) stem cells can differentiate into embryonic and extraembryonic cell types. Such cells can construct a complete, viable organism.[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell#cite_note-Schoeler-3) These cells are produced from the fusion of an egg and sperm cell. Cells produced by the first few divisions of the fertilized egg are also totipotent.[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell#cite_note-4)
Pluripotent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluripotency) stem cells are the descendants of totipotent cells and can differentiate into nearly all cells,[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell#cite_note-Schoeler-3) i.e. cells derived from any of the three germ layers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germ_layer).[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell#cite_note-5)
Multipotent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multipotency) stem cells can differentiate into a number of cells, but only those of a closely related family of cells.[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell#cite_note-Schoeler-3)
Oligopotent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligopotency) stem cells can differentiate into only a few cells, such as lymphoid or myeloid stem cells.[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell#cite_note-Schoeler-3)
Unipotent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unipotency) cells can produce only one cell type, their own,[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell#cite_note-Schoeler-3) but have the property of self-renewal, which distinguishes them from non-stem cells (e.g., muscle stem cells).
The whole point is that stem cells can be tweaked to work like egg cell and there is no limit as to how it can be tweaked to produce whatever organs or cell...heart cells, brain cells, skin cells, adipose tissue, ears etc. are now possible with stem cell technology. I think we have divert ourselves from the topic of the thread which is equality. My stand is that each gender plays equal parts in the natural reproduction process. The male requires the female and the female requires the male in order to breed.
God Blessed us all.
I am trying to stay within the topic of thie thread which is equality. My stand is that there is no distinct advantage of any one gender in the breeding process. In other words, male has no breeding advantage over female and vice versa. A child born will have 50% of his/her genes from the father and another 50% gene from his/her mother. This is what I call equality.
God Blessed. :pray:
If you will recall, you are the one who introduced the idea of the feasibility of the woman coming from Adam, I merely countered your proposition and pointed out its errors. :p
I totally believe in human equality, why do you think I started this thread? To point out how biased the Bible is when it comes to equal rights amongst women and men.
Rose
David M
03-23-2012, 05:36 AM
Hello Rose
I did not think I would get involved in this discussion, but on reflection since the subject might have gone off topic a little and since the subjet is now involving reproduction, I thought I would add some thoughts to this thread stemming from points I have made elsewhere. I am not an expert on this subject, I am just contributing my own opinions/observations/thoughts.
So then, on this subject of cloning and reproduction of humans.
In general God created animal kinds of both sexes at the same time. In the case of humans, the pattern of creation is changed and man is created alone to begin with. This first man (Adam) was created; he was not born. We cannot know the forces involved by which God created all things. In the case of Adam, God had to bring matter/material together. He had to manipulate atoms to become molecules to form cells and so on etc. I have not thought about this until now, and so what I am thinking is, how was Adam made? How did the all separate molecules (trillions of complex molecules come together). This is such a complex question, I do not think we can ever know or be able to understand.
Was the formation of Adam (in the way God brought the molecules together), starting from the point where God first made a fertilized egg (albeit not within a woman)? Once you have the fertilized egg, growth of the man or woman starts from there by cell division. All the information is contained in those first few cells to produce the adult. For growth, the addition of air and food is required; was this stage in making Adam by-passed? Could the process of cell division have been used in the creation of Adam? Looking at how complex each cell is with its complex DNA molecules etc, this subject of making man is so mind-blowing as to be outside the limits of human understanding.
At a much simpler level, accepting God made Adam, God did not make the female counterpart at the same instance as God appears to have done with the animals. Besides Adam being made in the image of God, man is separated from the animals by introducing a time lapse and a slighly different arrangement. In the animal kingdom, God created male and female at the same time (more or less) but the order in which they were created is defined by the expression "male and female". If there is a bias in this, then it is a bias whereby God is consistent and I expect there is a reason for God making the male first.
In the case of Adam and Eve (the first woman) a time period off some unknown length occurs between the making of Adam and Eve. I appreciate the Bible is not a scientific book and is giving us facts in a way that anyone can understand. That is why the Bible uses language in which "it appears" something is like it is. For example, from our perspective on the earth, the sun, moves around the earth, but from the perspective of outer-space, the Earth moves around the sun.
The Bible gives us the simple reason that it is not good for man to be alone. The point is made that the male in humans needs a partner (a help meet). The female of human kind is more than an object for reproduction. There is this element of loneliness to consider. God had given Adam the power of speech and language and without a woman, Adam could not communicate with another person. God is highlighting the fact that woman was indespensible to Adam; woman was necessary for more than reproduction. God could have made woman (Eve) just as he did Adam, but instead we are told that Eve was given the rib of Adam. Adam lost a rib and in the process of creating Eve she had a rib inserted. The rib of Adam, I do not consider was necessary to derive Y chromosones (as has been suggested), because God would have already built in the genetic factors into all the other cells making up Eve.
From our perspective, we are given the creation of man and woman taking place on the sixth day and in this sixth day, we have a lot happening. God first of all says, "let us create man" who appears to be singular, but in the same verse says, "and let them".... This cannot refer to multiple men, for there is no way for men only to reproduce. "Them" must refer to male and female. I know when I use the word man, I am incorporating woman. In the day God creates Adam, he is assigned the task of naming the animals, supporting the fact that God had given him dominion over the animals. In the space of this sixth day, God causes Adam to fall into a sleep and then God creates Eve. Adam now has a partner who is a human of the opposite sex. Adam was made aware that one of his ribs was used. This whole episode confirms the order set in creation whereby male is created first and female second. Male and female are of equal value and importance. Man and woman are to be regarded as a partnership of one. In terms of their rights, man and woman have equal rights in the sight of God. In terms of salvation, both have equal opportunity.
From the reproductive side, is there a bias to produce more males than females? If there is a bias to produce more males, why is this? I do not have the statistics to back this up and leave this question to be answered. Knowing from the accounts in history, it is the male who goes to war and gets killed. The male population gets reduced in time of wars. If men (males) did not go to war, and lived in harmony and respected women as they should do, we would not be having this discussion. Human Rights is a man-made problem. Male bias in reproduction, or as it might appear in the Bible, is not a "human rights" problem. The male of the human species has caused the inequality of the human rights of women. God knowing the end from the beginning has had to allow for this in bringing about His purpose and the balance will be restored as all things will be restored when Jesus returns and sets up the kingdom of God on earth.
The next thought I want to add to this highly controversial and emotive subject is to do inter-breeding between Angels and humans. I suggest this is a fabricated myth, based on taking words at face value and not looking for an alternative explanation. A modicom of reasearch into what the Bible teaches, shows up the weakness of this man-made myth. The balance of evidence found in the Bible does not support it. The most important thing to understand why this could never happen, is that Angels have no gender. (Matt 22:29) Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. 30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.
It is very evident, Angels do not marry, there is nothing to suggest that Angels are of any sex or can have sexual relations. Angels made to appear on the earth are given the appearance of men. Because Angels appeared to be men, we cannot conclude they have a gender. The Holy Angels of God are described as "ministering spririts" and God can create His Holy Angels to have the appearence of men, however, they are still of a different kind to man. The principle of creation as supported by the evidence, is that breeding between different kinds does not produce offspring. Beastiality can take place, and for an example, it is not possible for a dog to bread with a woman, so why should sex with an Angel (of which the sex act was an impossibility) be thought to produce offspring which were all human?
And finally, one further controversial thought. God caused Jesus (God's only begotten Son) to be born. To say that Jesus was born of the Holy Spirit and therefore Jesus was part man and part Holy Spirit (God) makes no sense and is an impossibility. God is not creating confusion; man is creating the confusion. God has clearly set out the principles and God is true to those principles. Why, when God can make Adam and Eve, is it difficult to consider that God by His power (Holy Spirit) cannot introduce the Y chromosone into the egg of the virgin Mary? God could have made the whole of the individual fertilized egg or just the sperm required to fertilize the egg. The most important point to this is; the egg in Mary had the required XY chromosones and in the making of the Y chromosone, God built in the required characteristics. The one example of this we know about is the genetic charactersitics making up the external appearance of Jesus. Jesus was not made to be the most handsome man that has ever lived; quote; (Isa 53:2)"there is no beauty that we should desire him".
In every detail the embryo that was inside Mary was that of a man. No hybrid combination of God and man. In every respect, Jesus was born a man and grew and developed as a man. Jesus had the same sexual urges as a man. There was nothing about Jesus to say that he was not a man. Jesus was a man and not a woman and in respect to Son of God, Jesus is a one-off. The female type of Jesus was not necessary. Jesus was male, because the male was made first and God did not produce an only begotten daughter because it was unnecessary. These are my reasons (based on reproduction) for saying; Jesus is not God. Jesus was later given a divine nature, the same nature as promised to those who believe and are counted faithful. I am not saying that Jesus does not have a divine nature; he has now.
As the only offspring produced by God using a virgin, Jesus is very special to God. God caused Jesus to be born precisely at the time in history he was required, and who God needed in order to fulfil His purpose.
These have been my thoughts related this subject of reproduction and Message of Equality. It is inevitable that these thoughts will cross with other threads. I hope this gives food for thought in this thread.
David
If you will recall, you are the one who introduced the idea of the feasibility of the woman coming from Adam, I merely countered your proposition and pointed out its errors. :p
I totally believe in human equality, why do you think I started this thread? To point out how biased the Bible is when it comes to equal rights amongst women and men.
Rose
Precisely, Eve came from Adam as the Bible said. There is a man (XY) in the woman(XX) and there is a man (XY) in every man(XY). But when woman came from man it does not mean man is superior over woman. So far nothing in the story of the Garden suggests Adam was superior over Eve.
Equality does not mean if woman can breastfeed so can man; it doesn't mean if man have a penis so can woman; it doesn't mean if woman can give birth so can man. That is not equality. It doesn't often mean if man can so can woman or vice versa. Equality is like a rock band, you played the piano, I played the guitar and he played the drums, all working within their own ablity towards a common goal of producing good beautiful music harmoniously. Eve was created as a helper to Adam does not mean she was subservient to him but that she worked together harmoniously as co-partner with Adam to achieve a common goal. Let's look at the passages:
15 The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. 16 And the LORD God commanded the man, 'You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.'
18 The LORD God said, 'It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.'
19 Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. 20 So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals.
But for Adam[f] no suitable helper was found. 21 So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs[g] and then closed up the place with flesh. 22 Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib[h] he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.
23 The man said,
'This is now bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
she shall be called ‘woman,’
for she was taken out of man.'
24 That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.
As can be seen Eve was cloned from Adam as a helper for 3 reasons:
1. To help Adam work and take care the Garden of Eden (Garden of Eden means the world/environment that Adam lives then)
2. As a companion in which he could interact so that he won't be alone and be bored to death
3. To help Adam procreate so that he can have more people (his children) to help him work and take care of the Garden of Eden.
(Note regarding why God took a rib instead of any other bone to clone Adam is that the rib is the only bone in the human body that can regenerate i.e. grow another rib as a replacement. But why not create Eve from the dust of the earth? That would be creating another human that do not have almost the whole replica of Adam and thus not have "the bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh").
May God Blessed mankind.:pray:
Hello Rose
At a much simpler level, accepting God made Adam, God did not make the female counterpart at the same instance as God appears to have done with the animals. Besides Adam being made in the image of God, man is separated from the animals by introducing a time lapse and a slighly different arrangement. In the animal kingdom, God created male and female at the same time (more or less) but the order in which they were created is defined by the expression "male and female". If there is a bias in this, then it is a bias whereby God is consistent and I expect there is a reason for God making the male first.
In the case of Adam and Eve (the first woman) a time period off some unknown length occurs between the making of Adam and Eve. I appreciate the Bible is not a scientific book and is giving us facts in a way that anyone can understand. That is why the Bible uses language in which "it appears" something is like it is. For example, from our perspective on the earth, the sun, moves around the earth, but from the perspective of outer-space, the Earth moves around the sun.
Good morning David, :yo: Glad to see you back in the conversation.
If the Bible had stuck with the first creation story in Genesis 1 where male and female were created equally in God's image, I'm sure biblical history would have been far different; instead the extremely male biased story of Genesis 2 got inserted. What was positive and gender equal in Genesis 1 suddenly changed to a negative unequal balance between the human male and female which is highly indicative of its male authorship, which is the foundation for my thesis of male-bias.
From our perspective, we are given the creation of man and woman taking place on the sixth day and in this sixth day, we have a lot happening. God first of all says, "let us create man" who appears to be singular, but in the same verse says, "and let them".... This cannot refer to multiple men, for there is no way for men only to reproduce. "Them" must refer to male and female. I know when I use the word man, I am incorporating woman. In the day God creates Adam, he is assigned the task of naming the animals, supporting the fact that God had given him dominion over the animals. In the space of this sixth day, God causes Adam to fall into a sleep and then God creates Eve. Adam now has a partner who is a human of the opposite sex. Adam was made aware that one of his ribs was used. This whole episode confirms the order set in creation whereby male is created first and female second. Male and female are of equal value and importance. Man and woman are to be regarded as a partnership of one. In terms of their rights, man and woman have equal rights in the sight of God. In terms of salvation, both have equal opportunity.
Genesis 2:24 speaks of man and woman being one flesh only in the context of woman being taken from the flesh of man, not in the partnership context. One extremely unbelievable part of the Garden Story is where Adam is told by God to find a helpmate from among the animals (what's up with that?), which he is instructed to name. Starting in chapter three of Genesis after the curse, men and women are no longer equal in any sense, because from that point on man is given rulership over her causing woman's rights to go downhill. :eek:
I'm not sure what you consider equal rights to be, but I can assure you the Bible does not give women equal human rights with men! I have gone over many, many passages in Scripture that blatantly deny women human rights given to men, so I will not list them out here again. By the pain text of what is written in the Bible there can be no denying that it is extremely biased toward the male!
Your post was long so I only addressed parts of it in my post for now.
Talk more later,
Rose
Rose
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.