Today, with women bishops and clergy and with feminist voices abounding, a lot of lies get told about the Bible and its patriarchal almost pathological hate for women's rights.  It is papered over.  Distortion is rife. A lot of the lies start with Christians, while they are not feminists, who still assert that the Bible God protects women.  Pathological lying is no response to the pathological misogyny of the Bible God.  Lies from women give the patriarchy ammunition. 

The Genesis story is where the rot sets in and it only gets worse.

God supposedly made man and woman in his own image.  It does not say however that they were made at the one time.  Man can be the image of God and woman can be the image of God as in reflecting the man so this tells us nothing about equality.

If you are made in the image of God you can fail to live up to it.  So being made in his image means you have to let him let you be what you were always meant to be, a virtuous member of society, one who makes God present in society.  God has no hands but the ones you give him.  The image of God thing says he decides who you are not you.

God making you in his image does not mean you cannot erase that image.  The image of God idea is used to create arguments such as that concerning the right to life being inviolable.  It does not work.  What if you deface that image?  The liberal use of capital punishment by God later, everybody was stoned to death for non-sins, seems to suppose that those people broke with God and their link with him and so they ceased to be like him in any meaningful way.

Another creation account in Genesis has God making Adam and THEN he makes animals.  He decides Adam is in a bad state for he is alone.  Now we learn that evil and suffering happened before Adam and Eve took of the forbidden tree.  We can dispel the lie that evil did not come in until they did so.  So Adam needs a companion and then God brings all the animals and Adam refuses them.  So if God wants Adam to marry an animal and copulate we get an endorsement of bestiality here.  That would not be strange for the gods were portrayed as animals of sorts.  And bestiality was regarded as sacred and necessary in fertility rituals.

 So now as an afterthought, God finally makes Eve. 

Adam is put to sleep.  God takes a rib from him to make it grow into a woman.  Instead of Adam doing this himself and using God's power to make her God does it for him.  She is his clone his twin.  God changed this male twin's gender or sex.  This is not only incest but extreme incestuous depravity. Also Adam sees himself in her so it is narcissism too.  It makes it all about the man.

Interestingly Adam was never asked for his consent regarding this rib donation.

Anyway you have Adam and Eve then who Jesus said set the model for marriage, that it is for one man and one woman for life who form their bond for God.  They define marriage.  Jesus clearly had no problem with the sickness in the account.  He validated it and said it was true!  He ordered strict belief in it.  Read Matthew 19:4-6 where he speaks of God being behind the first marriage, the one marriage that is the definition and measure of all true marriages.  He took this literally as he was clear that there were no myths or lies in the Bible (Matthew 5:17-19/John 10:35).

In Genesis, they are told not to eat of a tree under pain of death.  The tree is the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.  Heaven is the direct experience of God and full union with him.  You are as holy there as he has made you.  The saints in Heaven supposedly know both but choose the good.  So God not wanting them to get the fruit is clearly about barring them from Heaven.

Anyway a talking snake argues for eating of the tree and they do it.  God turns against them and abandons them.  He does not forgive.  Worse, the sin is described as eating the fruit that gives knowledge of good and evil.  What on earth would God have against that?  Why this tree?  Why could he not pick some ordinary tree to test them?

Eve eats first and shows no sign of being different.  No wonder Adam doubted God's threats and decided to eat the fruit as she advised. 

Upon finding what they have done, God tells him to rule her implying that she was so defective the power of the fruit was not able to work in her.  So it was latent in her.  So she is being portrayed as less than developed and less than human for being female.

Anyway, so far, the sin is not really to blame for the bad things that resulted.  God's lack of mercy is the real culprit and the real evil.

However "loving" Christianity teaches that this sin brought terrible harm, the fall, to all the human race.  Adam and Eve are referred to as our First Parents.  First Scapegoats more like!

The fall of humankind from God is attributed to Adam even though it was Eve who sinned first. She committed a sin and then another one by asking Adam to take the fruit in defiance of God. Clearly the only reason Adam counts is that God wants Adam to be responsible for Eve as she was made for him and he is her leader. She means nothing in comparison.

God says to Adam that because “you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you, I curse you and curse the ground because of you.” Why does God mention that Eve asked him to do it?  Because it is another sin.  Notice the biggest sin here is Adam letting her have a say. God complains about it first and then mentions the tree.  After cursing Eve as well, God has a guard set at the tree of eternal life to keep them away.

If Adam and Eve didn’t know good and evil how did they know that if they touched or ate from the banned tree that God’s warning, “If you eat you shall die” counted? How did they know it meant something bad? Ironically when they revolted against God they did not die.

God finds out that they broke his rule to eat whatever fruit they wanted just not from that tree. We know there is a tree of eternal life there. So they ate from the wrong tree! He didn’t ban them from eating of it.  It is strange that they did not think of taking the eternal life fruit first so that they would not die when they ate of the fruit of the tree of knowledge. It is too strange so the story is just nonsense.

And why didn't the snake tell them to eat of the tree of knowledge first and then outwit God by becoming immortal?  Surely if they sold themselves to evil he would want them to live forever?

So Adam and Eve supposedly brought destruction and distance from the proper care of God to the very good creation by taking the forbidden fruit. Is it the act of eating the forbidden fruit that caused all the harm? Is it the fruit itself that did it? Did the fruit have some magical property? It would need to have. The name the tree had, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, is clearly occult.

What if Adam and Eve had committed some other kind of disobedience such as robbing a bird’s nest? If they had we would not imagine that being to blame for all the subsequent damage and evil. The sin was not the only problem then.  It was not sin that brought evil into the human race but this specific sin. And the sin did not do it alone. I repeat, the magic God put into the fruit did nearly all or most of it.  God brought the evil in and used the fruit as a means to do it.

We need to remember too that if God created the evil in the fruit he also did something to the sin to make it truly deeply evil.  It was just too bad.  A God would need to do something to you to make sure that when you steal a chocolate bar it is the greatest sin of all time.  He puts magic into the sin too.  He makes the sin and is worse than Adam and Eve.

The Genesis story may say that God made Adam and Eve in his own image and in his own image he made them.  Despite what modern Churches say, we end up having to but what has that to do with equality?  No two paintings of your still life are going to be equal.  One can go above the fancy fireplace and the other into the junk room.

The Genesis story, we are told, has Eve being made by God for Adam as a last resort. Adam sure enough is made first. Then animals. Then Eve. God makes her from a rib taken from Adam when he was asleep. Adam glows that he has finally got something of his own flesh. He only wants her for what he sees in her of himself. Narcissist.  She is a sex changed clone. She is for sex.  Yet Jesus invalidated this sick incestuous patriarchal tale.

Incredibly the Church lies and maintain that Eve was made from Adam’s rib to show she belongs by his side as his companion and support. The text does not say that. That is something read into the it. God would have split him in two and built in the missing half. Using a mere dispensable rib signifies that she is of no importance. It is a hideous patriarchal fancy.

Adam and Eve supposedly lost the joys of Paradise when they sinned.  The idea is that Eden was full of God and his love and that was why it was so harmonious and incredible.  This would fit in with the God of Christianity who excludes sin for he cannot consort with it.  But they remained there for a unknown amount of time.  And far from Eden being saturated with God, God has to come down and walk in the garden and then speak to them.  He only then finds out about their sin.  In response, he imposes curses on them.

The text says that Adam and Eve brought evil on us by their action.  They sinned.  The Church says this sin affects us, their offspring, and causes us to be born without God being present in us. So we need this absence of God fixed by water baptism.  This sacrament gives us new birth.  The text says nothing about this "sin" being just a sin.  It may be different for males than for females.  What if one had sinned?  Would that be enough to pass the damage on?  The idea of Adam and Eve having to sin individually makes it possible that original sin is gendered.  Males tend to violence and females tend to be very manipulative.  The Netflix 2021 movie, The Catholic School, has males being taught that being violent is inevitable and part of the male condition.  This taught some of the students the notion that evil needs an outlet.  This led to terrible consequences for two girls they picked up.  The boys laughed at the torture they inflicted on them.  The movie is a true story, don't forget that.

I don't know what to say to somebody who argues that he can hit women for as they gaslight and deceive they are somehow to blame and are making it look like they are not. I will say that religion is implying a dangerous endorsement to that idea.

We have identified much patriarchal misogyny in Genesis but the alleged link with Jesus and by extension Mary will only amplify it.  God tells Adam and Eve of his promise that one day the seed of the woman will crush the head of the serpent.  Catholic tradition says this refers to Jesus coming from Mary to end Satan's power.  Regardless, the toxic Genesis tale led to more poison down the line.

Mary with her pre-marriage pregnancy would have been thought to have been raped. Did Joseph claim to have raped Mary? Her wedding was grossly underage as was her pregnancy.

Mary was not told when she was pregnant so when she went to Elizabeth she was hailed as the mother of the Lord. The gospels do not say if Mary believed she was pregnant. The story is rife with patriarchy with Joseph making all the decisions and deciding she was with child. God treats her as an incubator.

She was suspected of adultery and could have got in trouble over God's rule in Numbers 5.  A later gospel ascribed to St James says that did happen.  There a rite for harming a woman's body and her pregnancy if she is guilty of adultery spelled out in Numbers.  This is not a hint of God being fine with a woman's right to choose.  It is about a patriarchy, a theocracy, forcing a condition and an illness and a possible miscarriage on a woman without her consent.  This shows what God really thought of Eve.  The Bible says she was the model of woman, the symbol as well as real person.  The symbol of woman.  She was all-woman.

The Bible God ordered and forced virgins to marry their rapists. Very young girls were normally forced to wed so these girls must have been too young for wedlock even in those terrible times for marriage. So if a girl was raped she had to wed even if she was a lot younger than the average child bride. Yet Jesus in a culture where rape was rife banned these brides from divorcing. They could not divorce but he was taking no chances and prohibited female initiated divorce.  In Matthew 18, he asked that a report against anyone coming from the victim only must be thrown out.  This in a rape culture where female children were treated as sex objects!

What about the women who were at the tomb Jesus had risen from the dead in?  The angel and Jesus tell them to tell the apostles he is alive again.  The women were only treated like servants for they had to inform the apostles Jesus supposedly rose and they did not see his resurrection. They left the tomb alarmed and confused. They were only carriers of a message they knew nothing about and which came from men.  It was the men's message not their's.  This makes sense in a culture that argued they can give a message but it is to be considered in the light of women being supposedly unreliable. The women were not preachers. They did not preach to anybody so feminist nonsense that they were the first to minister to the apostles is just that, desperate nonsense.  The confusing of the women was deliberate.  All they could do then was indicate that there was a message and as they were confused the apostles had to go and find the message for themselves.  They were not really messengers in a sense.

A feminist who becomes a priest or bishop is a charlatan.  Nothing excuses running after a faith with such hatred for women.

Christian feminist is an oxymoron. 


In Mormonism, Adam and Eve are innocent and that for some reason stops them obeying God’s command to reproduce. The Book of Mormon is clear on that. 2 Nephi 2:23, "And they would have had no children, wherefore they would have remained in a state of innocence, having no joy, for they knew no misery, doing no good, for they knew no sin."  So they have to break his rule not to eat of the forbidden tree. This is the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. They eat and the result is how their eyes open up and now they can reproduce. As with mainstream Christianity, the magic fruit is blamed for bringing evil into the world. But who put the magic in it?

The Book of Mormon is getting all that from how Genesis says Adam and Eve needed the tree of knowledge of good and evil to get their eyes opened.  The BOM denies that their joy was real joy and that they were really made good.  They were made neutral and stupid and innocent.  This raises alarm bells for the idea that God made them in his own image and that all his creation was really good.  Whatever you get from that it is not equality of the sexes.  The text refers to animals being made all good as well.  The BOM makes an extremely good point.  By implication if Jesus could not sin he could not be truly good either.  Incidentally, Mormon Prophet Smith held that God himself used to be a mere man so clearly God one time needed his sins taken away.

Mormon doctrine is clear that Adam and Eve were forced to sin. The real sinner then is God.

Even Genesis says he entrapped them and even gave the serpent the power to speak to them to entice them to consume the fruit.

It was very perceptive of the early Mormon faith to claim that God exploited and abused Adam and Eve. He told them to have children which the Book of Mormon says is impossible if you are sin-free. So they had to sin to obey the command to reproduce. Either way this evil God was going to call them sinners. That is anything but fair or sensible.  Christianity hints at trickery to get them to sin and God accuses them of sin when they acted without knowing what good and evil were.   It teaches entrapment too in a different way to the Mormons but it is there.



No Copyright