April 8, 2011
-
How Krisko Reads Genesis
Everybody knows some of the broad themes of Genesis: God creates earth, the Garden of Eden, the story of Noah, etc. Here are some things that may not have been brought to your attention in Sunday School. Yes, I understand I’m only highlighting certain passages that fit my agenda. But isn’t that what a preacher does as well? I’m highlighting these because most “Christians” have never read the Bible, the backbone of their religion. If you’re going to subscribe to a faith, shouldn’t you know exactly what you’re signing up for?
~ God creates day and night on the first day, but doesn’t create the sun or the stars until the 4th. (Genesis 1:3-5, 16-19)
~ God repeatedly refers to himself as “us,” though why (and why only in Genesis) is never explained. (Genesis 1:26, 3:22, 11:7) [NOTE: This becomes obvious if you read the Bible keeping the documentary hypothesis in mind, which I will write about at a later date.]
~ Adam was not kicked out of the Garden of Eden for eating the forbidden fruit. God became nervous that his newly-enlightened creation would also eat fruit from the tree of life and become immortal. (Genesis 3:22-23)
~ Cain killed Abel because God liked Abel more. Why? Because as a farmer, Cain could only sacrifice plants to God. Abel was a herdsman, and so could sacrifice animals. (Genesis 4:2-5)~ God’s sons come down from the heaven to have sex with earth women. (Genesis 6:1-2, 4)
~ “There were giants in the earth in those days” isn’t an accurate translation. The word translated into giants was “Nephilim”, which nobody actually knows how to translate. (Genesis 6:4)
~ Noah gets drunk on wine from his vineyard and passes out with his genitals exposed. Ham, his son, accidentally sees this. When Noah wakes up, he punishes Ham by making his youngest son a slave. (Genesis 9:20-27)
~ God makes a covenant with Abraham and demands that he and all his descendants become circumcised. God never explains why cutting off the foreskin is important, but it seems quite contradictory to all the other laws about never exposing one’s genitals. What good is a distinguishing self-mutilation that nobody is allowed to see? (Genesis 17:10)
~ Rachel and Leah battle for Jacob’s favor by giving him their maids as sex partners. (Genesis 30:1-11)~ God has a wrestling match with Jacob and loses. To honor the occasion, God changes Jacob’s name to Israel. (Genesis 32:24-30)
~ The “sin of Onan” is not masturbation. Onan wasn’t punished because he “spilled his semen on the ground” but because he didn’t impregnate his sister-in-law. God kills Onan. (Genesis 38:1-10)
Comments (23)
Genesis… book of fail.
O.o whaaa….
I still have a lot of commentary to write on Genesis. I’m falling behind. I’ve only just now gotten up to the flood, and I completely agree with many of your points of contention.
I’d love to say some things regarding a few of these claims, you may or many not know them already –
The thing about Cain and Abel is that God had made it pretty clear that he wanted an offering of meat. This was part of Hebrew tradition too, this is why God favored Abel more. Not because of circumstance, but because Cain did not listen.
Ah, the Nephilim, lots of debate, here’s an interesting article, don’t know if I believe it or not – http://www.godandscience.org/doctrine/nephilim.html
Regarding Jacob’s “wrestle” with God… many people believe that this event occured to teach us lessons, not because God could not have won. It is a picture of ourselves and how if we persist, we can overcome. At no point, does the bible really say that Jacob “won” just that God stopped him to talk. There are also some who would claim that this “wrestling” match was actually spiritual. As Christians, we often say, “I wrestle with,” or “I struggle with” (such and such sin) – and that he did not actually physically wrestle with God (although I do not quite believe that, it would appear that God is there) – The overall idea is that God WANTED Jacob to fight with Him, until Jacob said what he wanted, so that God could give it to him. Not that they were fighting just to fight and that God “lost”…
Rachel and Leah DO battle for Jacobs affection with maid servants, HOWEVER, Rachel was barren, and in these days, a barren would was “better dead” (or so some believed) and many people don’t know that it was actually a common practice to send the maid servant to have a child with the husband if you were barren. Also – in these days, sex “WAS” marriage, hence, Jacob now actually has “four” wives.
But, these are just my thoughts.
Thanks for sharing.
I had to read bits of the Bible for one of my classes last semester, and my thoughts were along the lines of “Really? *This* is what everyone’s flipping their shit about?”
Genesis is a comic book. Much the same as the Book of Mormon. If the Bible is true, it MUST be ALL true. Since Genesis doesn’t pass any historical test concerning truth, the Bible MUST be ALL false. Turn out the lights, the party’s over.
@LKJSlain - Could you cite where you say God makes it clear to Cain and Abel that they were to offer meat? I have always been curious about this. I just reread Gen. 3 and 4 and nowhere there does God tell them what he wants. The brothers just make the sacrifices and Cain’s isn’t accepted. It seems the traditional interpretation simply infers that God told Cain and Abel he wants blood sacrifice…
The Bible is so funny.
@TheBillion - I am sorry, you are correct
There is no actual “passage” that says what it is that God wants. However, more, what you said is probably more accurate, we can see throughout the bible that God ALWAYS makes His wishes and intentions know perfectly, so, we have to assume at some time that God revealed to either the brothers, or to Adam and Eve, that sacrifices were to be animal sacrifices. Also, this fits with the following of Jewish traditions and blood sacrifices. 
Also, there are scriptures after this, in which God speaks with Cain, and due to the wording, we have to assume that God had told them what He wanted. He bascically says, “Why are you sad? If you do well then you will be accepted.” (I am like REALLY paraphrasing here, so I’m going to give you the scripture)
But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell. And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen? If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.
This verse really speaks the way that a father speaks to his child when he’s touched fire… “Didn’t I tell you that if you touched the fire you’d be burned?” etc…
Forgive me if I came off as “Know it all-y” I simply worded it wrong XD
@LKJSlain - nope, you didn’t come off like a know-it-all, and i’m glad you worded it that way. perfect opportunity to ask a question that’s been in the back of my mind for a while
i appreciate your answer!
@TheBillion - thank you darling.
@TheBillion - @LKJSlain - In describing the offerings, there’s a distinction made that Abel gave of the “firstlings” and Cain didn’t. The implication is that Abel sacrificed the best from the flock, while Cain didn’t sacrifice the best.
@musterion99 - I remember that.
@LKJSlain - @musterion99 - Great point. However, I looked up some of the different English translations of the Bible, and ASV, KJV, NKJV and NIV versions all use the word “also” very interestingly:
“And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD.
4And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof.”
A large number of the English translations hold to your implication, musterion. Unfortunately I can’t read Hebrew, so I can’t source the original text. But I think, given the statement “Abel, he *also* brought of the firstlings of his flock,” it’s possible to interpret that as implying Cain brought the “firstlings” of his crop and *also* Abel brought the firstlings of his flock. I believe this means we can at least question that it was the chronological quality of the crop that made God refuse Cain’s offering……..just thinking out loud here
If only I could read Hebrew, then the answer would be right there.
@TheBillion - :) There are places that you can go where you can get contexts, etc…
I remember doing a study on this once, but it was sooo frikkin long ago and I’m not sitting here with the bible scholar that I took the lesson from. 
It was awesome though, I remember that. Anyways, interesting thoughts there. 
@TheBillion@LKJSlain - - I believe the “also” is referencing that Abel also brought an offering, not that Cain also brought firstlings. It wouldn’t make sense. But it does make sense if Cain didn’t bring his best offerings, which is why God said to him that if he does well, he will also be accepted as Abel was.
We would hope that Krisko reads Genesis like any 3rd grader.
But we must all strive to understand Genesis with the meaning God gave it.
110% of what you do here is redefinition with intent to destroy, not the pursuit of truth.
@musterion99 - How wouldn’t it make sense?
@TheBillion - Because if they both brought firstlings, then there’s no reason why God wouldn’t respect Cain’s offering. However, the other way makes sense, especially when God said to Cain that if he does well, his offering will also be accepted like Abel’s was. Therefore, the implication is that the “also” logically refers to the offering, not the firstlings.
@TheBillion - The best translations of the OT into English, according to my Bible Studies professor, are the JSB and the NSRV, both of which were created to make the most authentic-to-the-Hebrew translation, and use the earliest available manuscripts to do this translation from. I find the Jewish Study Bible is a bit easier to read, but I like having the New Standard Revised Version for when I need to read the NT.
I was baptised, took communion, comfirmed in Christ, but I’m still not even sure what’s out there. I’ve had numerous disputes with people at my church and they all shoot me down.
@filthyminds - That was a big reason for me starting down the road to lose my faith. People at my church didn’t want to discuss anything that could be construed as questioning my faith. Eventually it made it seem like they were hiding things from me.
I wouldn’t have time to try to explain all of these or at least what I’ve learned and accepted as a reasonable interpretation but just a couple of simple ones…for your first one about the sun or stars being created on the 4th day, what I’ve learned is that the Hebrew word describing the luminaries is translated as the source of light referring to the first day being discernible to the naked eye. For the “us” part, God is referring to…Jesus, well his pre-human existence, the first of creation believe it or not. And I’m not referring to the Trinity doctrine. I don’t subscribe to that. I know most will disagree with me on this point but I can base this on later scriptures.