- The signature likeness of Creator God is Singularity in diversity.
“And God (singular) said,
- Let us (plural)
- make man[kind] / Adam (both singular and plural, like “sheep”)
- in our image, (plural)
- after our likeness: (plural)
- and let them have dominion (plural)
- So God created the man / ha-Adam (singular)
- in his own image,
- in the image of God created he him; (plurality of phrasing signals plurality of “he” and “him”)
- male and female created he them (indicates plural nature of the singular “he” exactly as designed “in the image of God“)
- And the LORD God (diversity in one)
- formed man of the dust of the ground – body
- and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life – God’s spirit
- and man became a living soul.
the man (singular) whom he had formed.” (Genesis 1:26-27, 2:7-8)
Are you catching the significance of what is otherwise a confused jumble of plural and singular designations for the same person?
Just as “God” is one singular entity in diversity, so man was created to be one singular entity with the Singularity in diversity.
It is assumed from the statement “male and female created he them” that God created one of them with male reproductive organs and the other with female reproductive organs. But the sequence of events laid out indicates that God formed the first from dust then later cloned the second from bone – in his own image –singular – as male and female, i.e. as hermaphrodites.
“And the LORD God…took one of his ribs, and…made / cloned he a woman. And Adam said…she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man...one flesh. vv 29-24
Are you aghast at this idea? This actually has startling implications for understanding our current sexually chaotic social situation.
Think about it. Even if God had created two sexes as we know them, where did the woman get femininity if not from God?
“…in the image of God created he…female…” (Genesis 1:27)
Have we overlooked references to God’s female characteristics, beginning with the most obvious?
“And Adam said…Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife.” (Genesis 2:24)
Who was Adam’s mother if not God? Aren’t we wresting scripture to fit our limited understanding if we insist that this verse in Genesis doesn’t really apply to Adam, only future men?
“Out of whose womb came the ice? and the hoary frost of heaven, who hath gendered it?” (Job 38:29)
It is interesting that the Hebrew word yalad (Strong’s Concordance Hebrew 3205)” applies equally to mothers bearing children and fathers begetting children.
The documentation of the event of the creation of Adam’s help-meet in Genesis 2 gives the translation of the word “woman” as it was intended to be understood at that time, not as it is understood by contemporary readers.
“And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man [הָֽ-אָדָ֜ם] – reading backwards in Hebrew: ha adam] should be alone; I will make him an help[er] meet [appropriate] for him…And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon [the man] Adam [הָֽאָדָֽם ha-adam], and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from the man [הָֽאָדָֽם ha-adam] made he Wo-man [אִשָּׁ֔–ה / Ishsh-ah or Iss-ah].” (Same Hebrew word, Strong’s Concordance number 802, just different dialects as also found in English.) (Genesis 2:18-24)
Following through on the translation of the Hebrew “ha / ah” as “the”, we recognize that Ish-ah is translated as “the woman”, right? God created “the man” and “the woman.”
However, we can’t assume that this reference to “woman” indicates an individual with female body parts as we define the word “woman”. The use of the term “woman” at this point in the narrative is a literary devise called “prolepsis” or “flash forward” to a future condition that hasn’t yet happened, but makes the flow of the narrative smoother if used at that point.
That future condition is Adam naming this creation, not God. So taking a close look at the text instead of our Sunday School pictures, we find the description of characteristics that Adam used to name the second human.
And [the human] Adam [הָֽאָדָֽם ha-adam] said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: this [זֹ֣את zot] shall be called “Wo-man” [אִשָּׁ֔–ה Is-ah or Ishsh-ah], because this one [וַיֹּאמֶר֮ la-zot] was taken “out of human” [מֵ-אִ֖ישׁ meh-is] .” (Genesis 2:23)
At this point in the narrative this individual is not called “Eve”, and the attribution of “she” referencing this individual is another prolepsis in the English translation of the Hebrew word. The accurate translation is by the Bible’s use of this term in multiple other occasions as “this” or “likewise”. This individual doesn’t become the mother we know and love today until the fruit incident, but let’s not jump ahead. Stay on track with me.
Ancient traditions validate this literal interpretation of the Bible by likewise attributing composite male and female characteristics to their creator god, such as Ardhanarishvara in Hindu tradition. Shakti, the female principle of God, is inseparable from (or the same as, according to some interpretations) Shiva, the male principle of God. “The union of these principles is exalted as the root and womb of all creation.”
In the Egyptian creation myth, the creator god Atum was both male and female. He self-produced two offspring, Shu and Tefnut. The sun god Ra also had double-gender nature with the female counterpart Rat. Agdistis was a deity of Anatolian, Greek, Roman and mythology, possessing both male and female sexual organs.
The Mesoamerican text Popol Vuh, drawn from ancient lost sources, reports this gender duality as “twin” gods. This can be understood to be a confused attempt to understand a concept lost in the mists of time, just as it has been to Christianity.
Almost at the beginning we encounter a pair of masculine-feminine beings of a type nearly hermaphroditic, named Xpiyacoc and Xmucane…These, we will remember, appeared in the myth of Vukub-Cakix and elsewhere. The first appears to apply to the paternal function, whilst the name Xmucane is derived from words signifying “feminine vigour.” The Mexican equivalents of these gods were probably Cipactonatl and Oxomoco, the “father and mother gods.”…
The chief gods took counsel; they were Hurakan, [transliterated into English exactly as it sounds, meaning wind or spirit] Gucumatz, the serpent covered with green feathers, and Xpiyacoc and Xmucane, the mother and father gods…
Xpiyacoc and Xmucane, the father and mother deities, had two sons, Hunhun-Ahpu [Enlil / Adam] and Vukub-Hunahpu [Enki / Lucifer], the first being, so far as can be gathered, a bi-sexual personage. He had by a wife, Xbakiyalo, two sons, Hunbatz [Cain] and Hunchouen [Abel],“
Because the Bible – alone among the ancient religious documents – is so lengthy, we can use its internal variations in translation as a reliable thesaurus. (No, that’s not a kind of dinosaur.) And we find that “Is / Ish” is, most significantly, also translated as “to show oneself to be a man.”
“[The false gods / lords] Bel boweth down, Nebo stoopeth…[like a woman in labor], they bow down together; they could not deliver the burden, but themselves are gone into captivity [standard practice for conquering gods to bring the conquered gods and parade their helplessness in their failure to save their people.]
Hearken unto me…[In contrast to the false gods, Almighty Creator God does the carrying] which are borne by me from the belly, which are carried from the womb...I have made, and I will bear; even I will carry, and will deliver you. Remember this, and shew yourselves men / ish …” (Isaiah 46, Jeremiah 4:22-31)
- Bel goes by many names including the common translation Baal, i.e. Lord. He first earned this title when Mrs. Adam chose him as her authority.
- God is reminding his readers of his oath to “deliver you” both metaphorically and in a very real new birth, given at the very beginning of time through the mysterious Seed of the Woman.
- YHVH Creator God attributes both male and female characteristics to himself, therefore, logically, also to his single-parented offspring, both angelic and human.
- This passage is contrasting the rebel angels / false gods with humanity when he exhorts them to “shew yourselves men / Ish”.
God himself uses the Hebrew word for wife – Ish – to refer to himself as a marriage partner.
“The word of the LORD that came unto Hosea….Plead with your mother [Israel], plead: for she is not my wife, neither am I her husband: let her therefore put away her whoredoms out of her sight, and her adulteries from between her breasts…for she said, I will go after my lovers…And she shall follow after her lovers, but she shall not overtake them; and she shall seek them, but shall not find them: then shall she say, I will go and return to my first husband; for then was it better with me than now…And it shall be at that day, saith the LORD, that thou shalt call me Ish-i [my equal marriage partner]; and shalt call me no more Baali [my fearful lord]…And I will betroth thee unto me for ever…and thou shalt know [be one with] the LORD…” (Hosea 1-2)
The translation of “אִשָּׁ֔–ה Is-ah” in Exodus 26 is an identical “one” coupled with another (different Hebrew word) “אַחַ֖ת one”.
“every one of the curtains shall have one measure [be identical]…coupled together one / is-ah to another.”
Both humans – the one formed from the dust of the ground and the one formed from that one’s bone – were genetically identical.
But! you protest, Adam and his wife were told to multiply before they ate the fruit, so they must have had the ability to do so.
Not a problem.
The hydra “accomplishes the feat of apparent immortality by reproducing through budding rather than mating.”
This is how God reproduced himself in the first Adam, how he reproduced the second human from the first, and how redeemed humans are born again in the likeness of Jesus Christ.
He splits off some of his inexhaustible supply of Spirit / energy / power / dunamis.
“But as many as received him, to them gave he power [to act / exhousia “physical and mental power; the ability or strength with which one is endued, which he either possesses or exercises”] to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.” (John 1:12-13)
And here we find reliability in the account of diversity in singularity.
The account in Genesis of God creating an entire human being from a piece of bone has been validated by science. Dolly the sheep was just the first of many cloned – identical – animals. Scientists are now turning stem cells into almost every tissue in the body. One source of stem cells is bone.
The biblical account of the woman being cloned from the first human’s bone tissue has been faithfully transmitted for thousands of years by people who believed what God said despite not understanding all the details. Why? Because he has proven his word to be true is so many other accounts, and has never been proven to be false. That’s called faith. How much proof does science give before we believe its claims? That’s called bias.
Setting aside all the Sunday School images and our assumptions, a straightforward explanation of scripture leads to the conclusion that gender differences, human sexuality and the reproductive process as we know it resulted from genetic mutations triggered by a substance in the fruit. The Bible states as a fact that woman’s reproductive functions were changed as a result of incorporating a toxic substance into her body.
“And the LORD God said unto the woman…Because thou hast done this…I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children…” (Genesis 3:13-16)
Contrary to our casual use of the name, the woman is not called Eve until after genetic changes occurred from eating the fruit. This is because this is the name – not “woman” – that defines her maternal, female characteristics.
“And Adam called his wife’s name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.” (Genesis 3:20)
The images below of male Brad Pitt and his remarkably similar daughter Shiloh give an impression of physical differences resulting from genetic changes. The next set of images shows a male who experienced feminization resulting from hormone changes in gender reassignment therapy.
OK, you say, grudgingly beginning to accept that the two first humans were identical, but! Adam was the “son” of God, so they are male, not hermaphrodites.
Not so. The understanding of “sonship” as permanent relationship with benefits vs gender goes without saying in the Bible. I am a female, but I become a “son” of God according to every verse referencing the new birth and adoption.
“…as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name.” (John 1:12)
To further prove the point on biblical “gender fluid”, all human sons of God, men and women, become the bride of Christ, the corporate body preparing to unite with Jesus at the end of time/mortality.
“I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches…And the Spirit and the bride say, Come.” (Revelation 22:167-17)
Moving on in the thesaurus, we discover that Is / Ish is predominantly translated wife or a woman engaged in sexual activity, married or otherwise. This is consistent with Adam naming his partner as being united with him. And this is utterly consistent with God’s ideal of total unity in marriage.
“Therefore shall a man…cleave unto his wife: בְּ-אִשְׁ-תּ֔וֹ [ba-is-tow] and they shall be one flesh.” (Genesis 2:24)
“Husbands, love [unite with, identify with] your wives…so ought men to love their wives as their own bodies…For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. This is a great mystery…“(Ephesians 5:15-33)
How thoroughly is a man joined to his wife? How does a man love his own flesh when he loves his wife’s flesh? What flesh is this as the text plainly states, the joining of two into one?
Scientifically, there is a known, nature condition of a single individual being both male and female.
The trans-formation of fallen human back to perfected humans accords with the account of the formation of the original perfect woman which states plainly that the woman and man are genetically identical. The record also states that in the new birth / resurrection this is neither male nor female as we know it.
“For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ…is neither…male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:27-28)
Jesus’ notice that in the resurrection / restoration to original mint condition there will be no sexual activity supports the understanding that the prototype Adam combines the attributes of perfect masculinity and perfect femininity in one.
“Then come unto him the Sadducees…Now there were seven brethren: and the first took a wife, and dying left no seed…And the seven had her, and left no seed…In the resurrection therefore, when they shall rise, whose wife shall she be of them?…And Yahweh’s Savior/Yeshua/Jesus answering said unto them, Do ye not therefore err, because 1) ye know not the scriptures, 2) neither the power / inherent nature of God? For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven.” (Mark 12:18-25)
Which scripture – must be Old Testament because it was available to the Sadducees before the New Testament was written – tells us that, when we rise from the dead, i.e. are fully redeemed from the power of sin and death to return to the pure likeness and image of God, that we don’t marry, i.e. raise up seed through sexual intercourse? The only one I know is to understand Genesis 1:27 as stating that God made the first two humans both male and female, and that they were split into separate male and female only after the fall.
The Greek word dunamis means that this individual has some ‘inner strength that does not depend on outward things.’ In other words, the nature of God is to be 100% self-sufficient. This is so obviously the fundamental truth how do we ignore its application to God and the children made in his likeness as having both paternal and maternal characteristics?
Once we understand that Singularity is the preeminent likeness God granted to his human children, this should make perfect sense.
And with this understanding of the hyper dimensional / energy / spirit dimension, the current transgender movement should be recognized as a specific gnostic, New Age strategy. This lie claims that humans tapping into their own godhood – i.e. dunamis – will experience the power of both genders. Same sex marriages deny the inherent lack of human completeness in any individual found only in bisexual unions, and ultimately, the lack of completeness found only in Creator God.
We should recognize that spirits who yearn to express the fullness of their own hermaphroditic being are driving the thoughts and behaviors of humans under their control.This is the basic lie of the serpent, twisting the Creator’s truth. Only through connection with Creator God can we express perfect union with another human, which is self-sacrificing love resulting in permanent union, not self-gratifying sexual exploitation forsaking one individual after another.