Come on people!!!

It's so obvious the bible was written by a bunch of delinquent male chauvinist pigs, whom self-servingly twisted the whole story around, so they could better exercise their 'power trip' over women?!?!?
And of course THEY had to twist the story into this totally absurd thing where they come first, and women have a man's 'rib' as an ancestor!!! What a bunch of cluts!!!

I mean come on! We all know men are easy to figure out. We all know where the first one of us came from.

I mean there is no mystery with men, ... ever!!!

All the bloody last bunch of us have come out of the womb of a 'woman', because that's simple like men are. End of story.

There has never been, and never will be anything mysterious about men. From the womb of a woman. Thats all.

And besides, what man in his right mind would have wanted it any other way!!!

As for the rest, it's aboundantly clear that GOD IS A WOMAN.

Listen up!!!

God said herself that she works in mysterious ways, ...

... and added that she created humans in her image!!!

MYSTERIOUS!!!

IN HER IMAGE!!!

HELLO!!!

Need we say more!!!

Get that old book re-edited quick before THE TRUTH spreads!!!

We won't get 'rid' of that 'rib' story one minute too soon!!!

... a 'mysterious' male 'rib'??? Gimme a break.

THERE COULDN'T HAVE EVER BEEN ANY SUCH THING !!!

Your explosive rant amuses me, voileazur. You seem rather eccentric.

Nice. Nice. Very...So, where'd the first woman come from then?

Oh. Yes. Never mind. Mankind evolved from an ape-like creature (NOT A MONKEY, OBVIOUSLY!!! PLEASE, OH, PLEASE DON'T CALL IT A MONKEY!!!), right?

Let's compare, shall we?

Christianity's explanation of man's origin: God created man.
Evolution's explanation of man's origin: After a massive explosion that brought the universe into being and over the course of billions of years inanimate matter evolved due to a series of billions of stimuli which caused them to mutate from simple cells into complex human beings without any external direction.

I don't know. Which one seems simpler to you?

Depends on your fancy!!!

But if you fell for the cluts' story, where men came from dust, and a 'blow' of god's hot breadth through the nostril, just reverse it, and you got yourself the first ever Woman!!!

The most perfect creature, made in god's image!!! I say!!!

I find the evolution story more believable and my why of this will not be pleasant as I tend to offend when I say it but here goes, I cannot buy the incestuous beginning of man in the bible. I have a big problem with this concept. Man could not have come from two beings without incest after said being had offspring. This is less believable to me then evolution is.
Sorry.

Dragoness,

Well, no matter which explanation you prefer, methinks, incest would need to be involved at some point between the first "humans" to progress the species, regardless of how those original humans came to be there. Also, that has nothing to do with proving the veracity of either view; as disturbing as that prospect is to us today, 'twas necessary for the furtherance of mankind.

Edit: Sorry how off-topic this has become. My bad, mostly. =)

Flowers and smiling faces from god's original and most perfect creature! (or is it creation?!?!? Nevermind?!?!?)

This is truly a 'divine' confirmation from god herself!!!

Flowers and smiling faces from god's original and most perfect creature! (or is it creation?!?!? Nevermind?!?!?)

This is truly a 'divine' confirmation from god herself!!!

*Puts hands accusingly on hips and smiles in a '50's-sitcom-like way*

Are YOU TWO in love?

UH OH!

*Audience laughs*

Either explanation does not constitute incest. In an evolutionary theory more than two would have existed to mate. Not saying with an animal mind set that it would not have happened but it would have been less likely. With the bible story it is not a possibility but an inevitability and that is not excusable at any level. We should not teach our children that incest is allowable for the furtherment of the human race.

And yes this is off subject a bit.

I still do not think that an omnipotent being would represent one sex over an other.

She is black, with fantastic eyes, a great smile and a wonderful body.

One of the beautiful things about writing fiction is that you can make your characters any way you want them to be -- short/tall, thin/fat, white/black, male/female....

You can have them do whatever you want them to do -- build a building, invent time travel, create a universe....

If the story is sufficiently well-written, if the target audience is susceptible enough, if enough time passes, well, some people will believe it's true....once the "suspension of disbelief" kicks in, it's all over. Myth becomes "fact."

I recently heard about a survey in which a significant percentage of people believed that Sherlock Holmes was a real person. Give him a few hundred years, and he may have his own religion....

Sherlock Holmes wasn't real?

A nubian goddess

All of that lex and little converting violence and terror and whala, a religion. I thought sherlock holmes was real when I was a kid but I grew up.

He was a fictional character, disappointing huh?