.png)
Assumption 616: Courageous Jewish scholars
It has been 3,500 years since courageous Jewish scholars compromised with the rest of the writers of the Holy Scriptures. There were two creation stories of which the first was about outcrossing (Genesis 1: 26-31) and the second about inbreeding (Genesis 2: 20-24). The story of Adam and Eve was originally an inbreeding myth from the time of Homo erectus (2.2 Mya; 900cc) or before. Conservative scholars wanted to place this myth called "Eve as Adam's rib" near the Garden of Eden.
But young progressive scholars insisted that the outbreeding narrative in which male and female are equivalent should also be published. As a compromise, it was agreed that this myth would be posted first, but without much publicity. This was agreed because genetic diversity did indeed come before 'the rib of Adam', which is genetic monoculture. Because Inbreeding is only a derivative of the law of nature: Outcrossing.
As a result, young progressive Jewish scholars have let us know to be fully aware of what Human Religion is really all about: HR = f(SR). Human Religion is a function of Breeding, Inbreeding and/or Outbreeding.
.jpg)
God's first creation: man and wife are equivalent (or is a hermaphrodite)
.jpg)
Note: Polytheism means more gods, more sexual roles lived empathetically in the conscious. It also means female gods and that is why women are no objects but subjects. Only then Vanilla-dyad develops. Of course, animals naturally subjugate their females, but there is a huge difference from human inbreeding, because females choose their males in freedom of genetic diversity.
.jpg)
I
.jpg)
.jpg)
It is not surprising that God’s first creation is based on the genetic diversity of the original alpha male who fertilized every female he encountered (20 million years ago). But our narrative handles about humans, what means that Gods first creation possibly originates from West and Central African Peoples (200.000 years ago). But it might also be millions of years older originating from Homo erectus who invented the abstraction of reincarnation into animals, by which tribal inbreeding became unnecessary and women were allowed to have sexual relations outside the tribe:
Chimps and bonobos exchange juvenile females with other tribes, just like hunter-gatherers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ki3rWqtAf8o
(40:41/1:22:30)
http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Genesis-Chapter-1/
God's second creation: Adam subdues Eve
.jpg)
Note: Monotheism means a single god, whereby only one sexual role is admitted to the conscious. Mostly, this god means male heterosexuality whereby women are spineless objects. Only SM-dyad develops. In human inbreeding women get their males in arranged marriages of the prison of genetic monoculture.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
Note: The actual sadistic god of Islamic culture is not Allah but are tribal gods from Paradise culture. In the beginning Allah was intended as an escape from male sadism just like with the Christians. This worked through Jesus in exogamous cultures, but failed due to endogamy among Muslims. Allah, the women god from the SUPER EGO and tribal gods of the ID were contaminated and clashed on the level playing field of the EGO of Muslims.
.jpg)
What is now experiencing as Allah in the Koran and Sharia is a failed women god, which has been occupied by men. Hence Islam psychologically knows a male Allah who is dominant and a female Allah who describes the inner life of women. This all because in monotheism there can be only one God. Allah must be understood as a multiple personality in Islamic culture. This is the cause of the schizophrenic imbalance between man and wife: SM-dyad.
Out of Africa started 62 thousand years ago. Numerous versions of Paradise Myths are known, because creation stories about inbreeding wells up from the dark caves and caverns of the collective unknown of endogamous man. It is a completely testosterone driven process based on the inbreeding instinct. Therefore speech is not essential.
.jpg)
22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.
God's second creation: Inbreeding:
Analysis of God's creations by abstractions of eternal life
For those who have followed this blog it is clear that human religion is the conscious quest for eternal survival:
Assumption 4: Human religion is the search for eternal life.
Human religion is definitely not the search for God, because God is only the medium to attain eternal life. A mortal God would be ridiculed and was worshipped by nobody. So people misuse God as Deus ex machina to heaven.
Assumption 4:This is an important conclusion because it changes our religious objective. Now we are looking for abstractions of eternal life and rank order them on difficulty. Then we get an outline of human religious evolution.Human religion is the search for God.
Concepts of immortality are bounded by human capacity to form abstractions, what means that intellectual progress is the main determinant of the evolution of human religion. We found three forms of increasing abstraction in eternal life:
A: Genetic immortality by inbreeding and incest (9 mya)
B: Reincarnation into the (earthly) universe (3 mya)
C: Reincarnation into the parallel universe (200.000 ya)
Because human religion is conditioned on abstract
insight we know fairly well how human evolution must have been evolved:
Why two creations?
Of course, ever there existed countless creation stories. Hence, there must be a reason why the editors of the Tanakh just highlighted these two. And these stories are also completely different. How easy would it have been to offer two identical stories. But would that make any sense? No, of course not.
Hence, the opposed setting of these narratives is not without meaning. In our view, God's first creation story concerns exogamy and the second of Adam and Eve describes endogamy. It is our conclusion that the story of Adam and Eve wins value when opposed to God's first creation.
Therefore, the stories had to be well connected in the desired order. And to place exogamy before endogamy is one of the reasons why the editors let God create the world in that order. But we think this order is wrong.
Though ethnic or religious endogamy is not literally inbreeding, it remains endogamy because in some cultures like Islam, women are expelled or killed if they do not marry a Muslim. Hence, since the Homininae, Islamic culture is still selecting sadistic men against masochistic women just like tribal endogamy.
In general, Western exogamic cultures are powerless and have no binding force,
degenerating into multidimensional atheistic individualism. That would be a life dangerous development in those days. We therefore conclude that Jewish editors looked for a binding force among tribes, clans and families. Therefore they were looking for endogamy.
The editors gave the impression that endogamous societies were at a higher level than God's first creation. They believed also that the second creation of Adam and Eve was a differentiation of the first. In the sense, that men and women are not equivalent, because God in second thought decided men as rulers over women.
But that cannot be the real reason of the deliberate contradiction between these stories. The Jewish editors gave men a weapon to enforce endogamy on women who are instinctively focusing on genetic diversity.
Of course, ever there existed countless creation stories. Hence, there must be a reason why the editors of the Tanakh just highlighted these two. And these stories are also completely different. How easy would it have been to offer two identical stories. But would that make any sense? No, of course not.
Hence, the opposed setting of these narratives is not without meaning. In our view, God's first creation story concerns exogamy and the second of Adam and Eve describes endogamy. It is our conclusion that the story of Adam and Eve wins value when opposed to God's first creation.
Therefore, the stories had to be well connected in the desired order. And to place exogamy before endogamy is one of the reasons why the editors let God create the world in that order. But we think this order is wrong.
Though ethnic or religious endogamy is not literally inbreeding, it remains endogamy because in some cultures like Islam, women are expelled or killed if they do not marry a Muslim. Hence, since the Homininae, Islamic culture is still selecting sadistic men against masochistic women just like tribal endogamy.
In general, Western exogamic cultures are powerless and have no binding force,
degenerating into multidimensional atheistic individualism. That would be a life dangerous development in those days. We therefore conclude that Jewish editors looked for a binding force among tribes, clans and families. Therefore they were looking for endogamy.
The editors gave the impression that endogamous societies were at a higher level than God's first creation. They believed also that the second creation of Adam and Eve was a differentiation of the first. In the sense, that men and women are not equivalent, because God in second thought decided men as rulers over women.
But that cannot be the real reason of the deliberate contradiction between these stories. The Jewish editors gave men a weapon to enforce endogamy on women who are instinctively focusing on genetic diversity.
The editors were sincere and really believed in God and had the best intentions to lift their tribes, clans and families to higher levels of integration and assimilation and to avoid further autosomal recessive diseases. And to be honest, they succeeded very well.
The first creation story is about the equivalence of man and woman as in the Enlightenment. Both, man and woman dominated the world in perfect equivalence. But as said, such a multidimensional society, where both man and woman were subjects, had no binding force and was doomed to atheistic individualism.
Therefore and in sharp contrast, tribal societies had the magic ability to unify people. But their power was fragmented over numerous tribes. Furthermore it looked like Sodom and Gomorrah with a lot of hereditary diseases. Polytheism had to be broken.
Monotheism meant the reduction of the number of sexual roles. The space of gods in the archetype of God was truncated on male heterosexuality and Sodom and Gomorrah were pushed into the collective unconscious:
.jpg)
Further, the editors diluted tribal endogamy with ethnic and religious endogamy. In fact, they weakened the divine power of tribal patriarchs (now Muslim males). And therefore Genesis describes a pure tribal endogamy to start with:
.jpg)
And then they put the base for the Holy Grail, the transition from tribal Paradise culture to monotheism, partly based on ethnic and religious endogamy:
.jpg)
Nowhere in Genesis have we found a description of reincarnation, while God lived also on earth. And without reincarnation our Sexual Theory of Religion would be incomplete and confusing.
As said earlier, the two creation stories had to be well connected in the desired order. And that's why God created the world in that order; just to place exogamy before endogamy.
.jpg)
What we see hereafter in legislation, is how they actually threw a lot of heavily dependent sexual roles (gods) out of the overdetermined space of gods. Roles that are more or less the same look like vectors with small angles in an ever smaller space. Because, also the sexual space of six dimensions had to shrink:
.jpg)
.jpg)
Eventually they forced all sexual roles on the only remaining monotheistic component. This main factor we call sadomasochism. It is the principal dimension of the human power space, the sexual space or the space of gods. It is SM-dyad:
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
The fight against total incest by ethnic and religious endogamy
We here see the monotheistic fight against autosomal recessive disorders of Paradise culture. The inverse or the mirror image of following laws shows Paradise culture. These laws were not enacted for nothing and were taken up in almost all cultures:
God and his creations in the evolution
.jpg)
Animals that are separated from their fellow species by natural barriers reproduce by inbreeding and incest. The same was true for the first Homininae who migrated in little groups over long distances and were prevented from regular sexual contacts with others.
They must have perceived that forced saturation of their genes in the offspring led to a purer genetic projection in eternity, e.g. their children became better look-alikes and furthermore, inbreeding settled a holy band and emphasized tribal identity.
.jpg)
They discovered the first abstraction of immortality (genetic immortality). This is also the first (unspoken) tree of life of the Paradise Myth (see figure further below).
.jpg)
They discovered the first abstraction of immortality (genetic immortality). This is also the first (unspoken) tree of life of the Paradise Myth (see figure further below).
Two million years ago Homo erectus invented the abstraction of 'reincarnation' and converted also family clans into large tribal structures.
.jpg)
Homo erectus discovered the world in bigger groups because they did not want to extinct. But to sustain an inbreeding culture, family ties had to stay sufficient stable within tribal structures across generations, what is a precondition. We learn that inbreeding cultures only exist within stable societies. Therefore Islam is a rigid society for already 1400 years.
Out of Homo sapiens, 200.000 years ago, West African and East African Peoples developed. East African Peoples migrated all over the world in well-organized clans which preserved inbreeding across generations. But West African Peoples lacked order and regularity for timeless inbreeding and 'regressed' to genetic diversity:
.jpg)
West African Peoples did not quite evolve into Vanilla-dyad because of the mutilation of their females with FGM (Female Genital Mutilation). For a true Vanilla-dyad equality and equivalence between men and women are necessary:
.jpg)
East African Peoples went methodically and organized stable societies across generations. They were able to set up advanced inbreeding and incest cultures. And they did:
.jpg)
.jpg)
Homo erectus discovered the world in bigger groups because they did not want to extinct. But to sustain an inbreeding culture, family ties had to stay sufficient stable within tribal structures across generations, what is a precondition. We learn that inbreeding cultures only exist within stable societies. Therefore Islam is a rigid society for already 1400 years.
Out of Homo sapiens, 200.000 years ago, West African and East African Peoples developed. East African Peoples migrated all over the world in well-organized clans which preserved inbreeding across generations. But West African Peoples lacked order and regularity for timeless inbreeding and 'regressed' to genetic diversity:
East African Peoples went methodically and organized stable societies across generations. They were able to set up advanced inbreeding and incest cultures. And they did:
.jpg)
.jpg)
Paradise culture first stage (inbreeding and incest):
1: The first tree of life originates from the Homininae and concerns genetic immortality.
.jpg)
The Paradise story of 'Adam and Eve' definitely stems from these Homininae, because reincarnation is not expressed in the original myth. Additionally in our model, reincarnation for Homininae is not required. Hence, it might be 2 to 5 million years old. Speech is not essential.
Paradise culture second stage (inbreeding and incest with earthly reincarnation):
.jpg)
2: The second tree of life originates as early as possible from Homo erectus, because the second tree meant earthly reincarnation into tribal inbred bodies. It might be 2 to 3 million years old. Speech is not immediately necessary.
Paradise culture third stage (inbreeding and incest with mixed reincarnation):
.jpg)
3: And the third tree of life is discovered by Homo sapiens who developed the parallel universe. This is too difficult, now speech becomes essential. (Development of speech: 50.000 - 500.000 years).
How old is the Paradise Myth?
This myth is an exponent of the male inbreeding instinct in endogamous cultures and bubbles up from the deepest depths of male sexuality since Homininae. Language is not necessary.
As said, the Paradise Myth in question (Adam and his sister Eve) must have been changed numerous times in human evolution. It was an initiation rite for young males to enforce endogamy on their sisters cousins.
.jpg)
All cultures started with genetic immortality and later projected their own advanced eternal dimensions in the myth.
All cultures started with genetic immortality and later projected their own advanced eternal dimensions in the myth.
There are no signs of reincarnation in the Myth of Adam and Eve and there is also no parallel universe because 'heaven' is still meant as the ceiling of the world:
http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Genesis-Chapter-2/
http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Genesis-3-8/
Now, we see how old this myth really must be, because 5000 years ago the Egyptians already believed in reincarnation and the parallel universe was well known. But their afterlife on the stars was still in the universe.
But a simple explanation could be that no culture likes to talk about reincarnation, because It would make this myth but hopelessly complicated.
Now, we see how old this myth really must be, because 5000 years ago the Egyptians already believed in reincarnation and the parallel universe was well known. But their afterlife on the stars was still in the universe.
The version of the parallel universe probably stems from East African Peoples, possibly mutations. Then it will not be older than 200.000 years (Homo sapiens). But this version with the parallel universe had to wait until monotheism became the most powerful sexual dictatorship ever on earth.
.jpg)
http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/8166/jewish/Chapter-2.htm
God’s first creation
Bereishit - Genesis - Chapter 1
26. And God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness, and they shall
rule over the fish of the sea and over the fowl of the heaven and over the
animals and over all the earth and over all the creeping things that creep upon
the earth."
27. And God created man in His image; in the image of
God He created him; male and female
He created them.
Rashi's Commentary:
Show Hide
male and female He created them: Yet further (2:21) Scripture states: “And He took one of his ribs, etc.”
The Midrash Aggadah (Gen. Rabbah 8:1, Ber. 61a, Eruvin 18a) explains that He originally created him with two faces,
and afterwards, He divided him. The simple meaning of the verse is that
here Scripture informs you that they were both
created on the sixth [day], but it does not explain to you how they were created, and it explains [that] to you elsewhere. — [from Baraitha
of the Thirty Two Methods , Method 13]
((BD. Ed.): the assumption here is that God’s first creation is the general statement in a deduction,
wherein both man and woman subdue the earth, but that God’s second creation is the deduced conclusion: men subdues more than women. In fact
God meant: men subdues women.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%203&version=KJV
Gen 3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.))
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%203&version=KJV
Gen 3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.))
28. And God blessed them, and God said to them, "Be
fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and
subdue it, and rule over the fish of the sea and over the fowl of the sky
and over all the beasts that tread upon the earth. "
and subdue it: The“vav” [in וְכִבְשֻׁהָ is missing, [allowing the word to be read וְכִבְשָׁה, the masculine singular imperative] to teach you that the male subdues the female that she should not
be a gadabout *(Gen.
Rabbah 8:12), and it is also meant to teach you that the man, whose way it is to subdue, is commanded to propagate, but
not the woman (Yev. Yev. 65b).
* Gadabout = a habitual
pleasure-seeker.
((BD. Ed.): There was no God, but there had been a much older exogamous culture of outbreeding in which women were respected (homo erectus (2 mya; 900cc)).
((BD. Ed.): There was no God, but there had been a much older exogamous culture of outbreeding in which women were respected (homo erectus (2 mya; 900cc)).
29. And God said, "Behold, I have given you every
seed bearing herb, which is upon the surface of the entire earth, and every
tree that has seed bearing fruit; it will be yours for food.
30. And to all
the beasts of the earth and to all the fowl of the heavens, and to everything
that moves upon the earth, in which there is a living spirit, every green
herb to eat," and it was so.
it will be yours for food. And to all the beasts of the earth: He equated cattle and the beasts to them [to man]
regarding the food [that they were permitted to eat]. He did not permit Adam and his wife to
kill a creature and to eat its flesh; only every green herb they were all
permitted to eat equally. When the sons of Noah came, He permitted them to
eat flesh, as it is said (below 9:3): “Every creeping thing that is alive,
etc.” Like the green herbs, which I permitted to the first man, I have given
you everything. — [from Sanh. 59b]
(BD: In this comment Rashi deliberately processes God’s second creation (Adam and Eve) into the first. It is well done if God really exists. But otherwise Jewish editors are explaining an artificial opposition inserted by themselves. Then it would be circle reasoning. )
31. And God saw all that He had made, and behold it was
very good, and it was evening and it was morning, the sixth day.
Bereishit - Genesis
http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/8166/jewish/Chapter-2.htm
God’s second creation
Bereishit - Genesis - Chapter 2
1. Now the heavens and the earth were completed and all
their host.
2. And God completed on the seventh day His work that
He did, and He abstained on the seventh day from all His work that He did.
3. And God blessed the seventh day and He hallowed it,
for thereon He abstained from all His work that God created to do.
7. And the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground, and He breathed into his nostrils the
soul of life, and man became a living
soul.
8. And the Lord God planted a garden in Eden from the
east, and He placed there the man whom He had formed.
from the east: Heb. מִקֶּדֶם. In the east of Eden, He planted the garden (Midrash
Konen).
Now if you ask:
It has already been stated (above 1:27): “And He created man, etc.!”
I saw in the Baraitha of Rabbi Eliezer the son of
Rabbi Jose the Galilean concerning the thirty-two principles by which the Torah
is expounded, and this is one of them [method 13]:
A general statement followed by a specific act, the latter constitutes a
specific [clarification] of the first [general statement].
“And He created man.” This is a general statement. It left
obscure whence he was created, and it left His deeds obscure [i.e., how God
created man].
The text repeats and explains: “And the Lord God
formed, etc.,” and He made the Garden of Eden grow for him, and He placed him
in the Garden of Eden, and He caused a deep sleep to fall upon him.
The listener may think that this is another story, but it is only the
detailed account of the former.
Likewise, in the case of the animal, Scripture repeats
and writes (below verse 19): “And the Lord God formed from the ground all the
beasts of the field,” in order to explain, “and He brought [them] to man” to
name them, and to teach about the fowl, that they were created from the mud.
Comment BD: What Rashi want to tell:
Comment BD: What Rashi want to tell:
Deductive
argument within God’s first story:
1: Humans subdue the earth.
2: Women are humans.
3: Women subdue the earth.
But if God’s first creation story is the general statement and the
second narrative (Paradise Myth) is a differentiation (deduction), then the
conditions of the first story must hold in the second. What means that the
Paradise Myth is a subset of the first creation story.
Rashi is right,
when he claims:
Deductive
argument:
1: Humans subdue the earth.
2: Women are humans.
3: Women subdue the earth but not in equivalency nor in equality.
(In fact Adam is subduing Eve in the Paradise Myth).
The conclusion only holds for as far subduing power of women is not nullified.
What is the reason that women in paradise story had virtually no power left? In God's first creation story men and women were seen as equivalent subjects. But in paradise story women were relegated to inert objects. That’s because women will never participate voluntary in a genetic monoculture, which must be enforced at the expense of their natural rights.
What is the reason that women in paradise story had virtually no power left? In God's first creation story men and women were seen as equivalent subjects. But in paradise story women were relegated to inert objects. That’s because women will never participate voluntary in a genetic monoculture, which must be enforced at the expense of their natural rights.
In the Sexual
Theory of Religion:
1: Male and female subdue the earth in genetic diversity.
2: But Eve is a woman in a genetic monoculture.
3: Hence, Eve subdues the earth in genetic diversity but not in a genetic monoculture.
Again, the genetic monoculture is a specialization of genetic variation. That's correct. However, the power of men over women is not given by God, but man denied women their own identity, admirably illustrated by degrading her as a rib taken from his body.
Original Text:
ר' אלעזר בשם רבי יוסי בן זמרה וכבשוה וכבשה כתיב, האיש מצווה על פריה ורביה אבל לא האשה, ר' יוחנן בן ברוקה אומר אחד האיש ואחד האשה על שניהם הוא אומר ויברך אותם אלהים וגו', וכבשוה וכבשה כתיב, האיש כובש אשתו שלא תצא לשוק, שכל אשה שיוצאה לשוק סופה להכשל
Translation:
Rabbi Eleazar in the name of Rabbi Yose ben Zimra [says: Be fruitful and
multiply and fill the earth and] ‘you [plural] subdue it’ (kivshuha) is read, but ‘subdue her’ (kivshah) is written. [This means that] the man is commanded to ‘be fruitful and multiply’ and not the
woman. Rabbi Yohanan ben Beroka says both the man and the woman are meant [since it is
written]: ‘And God blessed them (both) saying “Be fruitful and multiply . . .”’ [The reason that there is a
difference between the read and written forms of ] kivshuha and kivshah is because the
man subdues his wife so that she does not go seeking in the marketplace.
[Translation by Rabbi Steve Greenberg]
Suggested Discussion Questions:
1. It appears here and elsewhere that there was some controversy regarding
a woman's duty to reproduce and related challenges of female sexuality. Why should it make sense not to obligate women to reproduce? Is there an
argument for making reproduction an equal duty that makes sense to you?
2. Note: Rabbi jose ben Zimra uses the written from of "subdue"
in the singular to refer not to subduing the earth but in relation to the
phrase earlier "be fruitful and multiply." Rabbi Yohanan ben Beroka
instead sees both sexes as obligated to reproduce but that
husbands are called upon to subdue their wives desire in order to prevent them
from looking for satisfaction elsewhere. In either case
females, like the earth need to be subdued by men. What
about female sexuality do you think challenges men even today?
13. And the name of the second river is Gihon; that is
the one that encompasses all the land of Cush (Ethiopië).
15. Now the Lord God took the man, and He placed him in
the Garden of Eden to work it and to guard it.
16. And the Lord God commanded man, saying, "Of every tree of the garden you may
freely eat.
17. But of the
Tree of Knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat of it, for on the day that
you eat thereof, you shall surely die."
18. And the Lord God said, "It is not good that man is alone; I shall make him a helpmate
opposite him."
19. And the Lord God formed from the earth every beast
of the field and every fowl of the heavens, and He brought [it] to man to see
what he would call it, and whatever the man called each living thing, that was
its name.
20. And man named all the cattle and the fowl of the
heavens and all the beasts of the field, but for man, he did not find a
helpmate opposite him.
21. And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon
man, and he slept, and He took one of
his sides, and He closed the flesh in its place.
22. And the Lord God built the side that He had taken from man into a
woman, and He brought her to man.
23. And man said, "This
time, it is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh. This one shall be called
ishah (woman) because this one was taken from ish (man)."
24. Therefore, a
man shall leave his father and his mother, and cleave to his wife, and they
shall become one flesh.
25. Now they were both naked, the man and his wife, but
they were not ashamed.
29. And God said, "Behold, I have given you every
seed bearing herb, which is upon the surface of the entire earth, and every
tree that has seed bearing fruit; it will be yours for food.
30. And to all the beasts of the earth and to all the
fowl of the heavens, and to everything that moves upon the earth, in which
there is a living spirit, every green herb to eat," and it was so.
it will be yours for food. And to all the beasts of the earth: He equated cattle and the beasts to them [to man]
regarding the food [that they were permitted to eat]. He did not permit Adam and his wife to kill a creature and to eat its
flesh; only every green herb they were all permitted to eat equally. When
the sons of Noah came, He permitted them to eat flesh, as it is said (below
9:3): “Every creeping thing that is alive, etc.” Like the green herbs, which I
permitted to the first man, I have given you everything. — [from Sanh. 59b]
Monotheism,
reincarnation and inbreeding
Note that especially Abrahamic religions put humans above animals. They condemn also homosexuality. Monotheism only
accepts heterosexuality as a single god dimension. Bestiality and homosexuality
are two god dimensions in the five dimensional sexual space of the Sexual
Theory of Religion. They were quite normal in polytheism:
.jpg)
Monotheism was threatened by exogamous polytheistic cultures, which replaced reincarnation into the offspring by reincarnation into other living beings, e.g. animals. Worshiping of animals was forbidden because then earthly reincarnation was espoused instead of reincarnation into the parallel universe, the only weapon of monotheism. But reincarnation into the offspring undermined also monotheism. But there were many more complications (Appendix 1). Further, in exogamous cultures women would become free subjects living in genetic diversity (Christianity) and no longer could be subdued by men:
Monotheism was threatened by exogamous polytheistic cultures, which replaced reincarnation into the offspring by reincarnation into other living beings, e.g. animals. Worshiping of animals was forbidden because then earthly reincarnation was espoused instead of reincarnation into the parallel universe, the only weapon of monotheism. But reincarnation into the offspring undermined also monotheism. But there were many more complications (Appendix 1). Further, in exogamous cultures women would become free subjects living in genetic diversity (Christianity) and no longer could be subdued by men:
and subdue it: The“vav” [in וְכִבְשֻׁהָ is missing, [allowing the word to be read וְכִבְשָׁה, the masculine singular imperative] to teach you that the male subdues the female that she should not
be a gadabout *(Gen.
Rabbah 8:12), and it is also meant to teach you that the man, whose way it is to subdue, is commanded to propagate, but
not the woman (Yev. Yev. 65b).
We see that the only chance for pure monotheism like Islam is as a cuckoo egg placed in an endogamous nest. Later we will show how monotheism conquered tribal cultures. Christianity escaped monotheism by exogamy into polytheism.
Assumption 180: Abraham and heaven. There is no heaven called in Genesis other than as ceiling of the earth. Also there is no mention of reincarnation into the earthly or in the parallel universe. And there is no evidence that Abraham, Isaac or God ever existed. But we do know that the evolution of human religion follows logical laws. Which means the level of abstraction of eternal life determines human religious development. Therefore, we interpret the myth of Abraham at best as the transition from earthly reincarnation to reincarnation into the parallel universe. The parallel universe is the final abstraction of eternal existence discovered by man.
In the myth of Abraham, God was intolerant against earthly reincarnation of Abraham in the offspring of his son Isaac. At first he urged Abraham to kill his only tribal begotten (!) son.
But on second thought God was wise and expected that inbreeding would fuse with reincarnation into the parallel universe in the long run. This happened indeed but gave wrong results because tribal heads identified with God. Meanwhile God forbade worshiping of idols (statues of animals (!) and tribal patriarchs (gods)), though inbreeding with cousins was permitted.
The miscalculation of God
Rationally it is beyond doubt that the first religious 'human' culture was based on inbreeding and incest of the Homininae. This because genetic immortality has the lowest degree of abstraction of eternal life:
.jpg)
This means that the second myth of Adam and Eve has to come before and not after de first myth of Enlightenment. Only in the animal world goes genetic diversity before genetic monocultures.
.jpg)
Further did God not mention 'reincarnation' in Adam and Eve. But we demand reincarnation as a precondition for human Enlightenment. Hence, Enlightenment is of a higher abstraction level and comes after Adam and Eve.
.jpg)
Enlightenment developed after freeing women from inbreeding and incest, because men preferred reincarnation into animals and wild and beautiful exogamous women. Hence, God's 'first' creation definitely developed out of Paradise culture of the Homininae. That God did not mention 'reincarnation' is not important. Here we only permit rational criteria of abstract reasoning:
We conclude that though in the animal world inbreeding and incest is a deduction of genetic diversity, it is not for human sexuality. Because of psychological circumstances human sexual cultures started in the evolution as genetic monocultures.
The fight between SM-dyad and Vanilla-dyad of the editors of the Tanakh
SM-dyad and Vanilla-dyad are always fighting for power. We tried to demonstrate that the editors of the Tanakh possibly deliberately changed the creation stories because inbreeding after Enlightenment might have been a better strategy for unification of their tribes. But of course they did not know about our crazy theories.
The fight between SM-dyad and Vanilla-dyad:
Assumption 67: Fourth assumption:
.jpg)
Rationally it is beyond doubt that the first religious 'human' culture was based on inbreeding and incest of the Homininae. This because genetic immortality has the lowest degree of abstraction of eternal life:
This means that the second myth of Adam and Eve has to come before and not after de first myth of Enlightenment. Only in the animal world goes genetic diversity before genetic monocultures.
Further did God not mention 'reincarnation' in Adam and Eve. But we demand reincarnation as a precondition for human Enlightenment. Hence, Enlightenment is of a higher abstraction level and comes after Adam and Eve.
Enlightenment developed after freeing women from inbreeding and incest, because men preferred reincarnation into animals and wild and beautiful exogamous women. Hence, God's 'first' creation definitely developed out of Paradise culture of the Homininae. That God did not mention 'reincarnation' is not important. Here we only permit rational criteria of abstract reasoning:
We conclude that though in the animal world inbreeding and incest is a deduction of genetic diversity, it is not for human sexuality. Because of psychological circumstances human sexual cultures started in the evolution as genetic monocultures.
The fight between SM-dyad and Vanilla-dyad of the editors of the Tanakh
SM-dyad and Vanilla-dyad are always fighting for power. We tried to demonstrate that the editors of the Tanakh possibly deliberately changed the creation stories because inbreeding after Enlightenment might have been a better strategy for unification of their tribes. But of course they did not know about our crazy theories.
The fight between SM-dyad and Vanilla-dyad:
Assumption 67: Fourth assumption:
Because equivalence is against male nature, Vanilla-dyad remains subordinate to SM-dyad. It is and will remain a substitute for the male sexual instinct. Which means that SM-dyad in the background is always present, always searching for new ways to self-realization. SM-dyad will always restore the primal relation between male and female.
Circular reasoning
Proving that God exists
because of the apparent logic in God’s creations is circular reasoning.
If God exists then indeed there
must be a logical connection between the creation stories. That’s because God
is infallible. Then the second Paradise story must be seen as a deduction of the
first Enlightenment story. Or to put it in another way, oppression of women
becomes a special case of the Enlightenment by the will of God.
Because men believed in God
they chose especially these two creation stories out of a lot of narratives to
underline their innate belief, their inbreeding instinct that men has to
subdue women. The Enlightenment story is meant as prelude to the Paradise
myth. It enlarges the effect of male superiority.
But if God does not exist
there is no other connection among those stories than testosterone. Creation
stories are the mirror of male sexual lust. Creation stories about inbreeding
wells up from the dark caves and caverns of the collective unknown of endogamous man. It
is a completely testosterone driven process based on the inbreeding instinct.
Now, neglecting male
hormones for the moment, there is still another logical connection between
creation stories and that is their sequence in time, a sequence mainly
dependent on the degree of abstraction of concepts of immortality.
Man only needs a simple underlying
theory to explain this relation. Now, animal genetic diversity implicitly
pursues animal immortality by sexual reproduction. Supposedly animals do not
have an abstraction of the afterlife. Therefore this is the baseline in our
sequence of abstractions of concepts of immortality. Hence animal genetic
diversity always goes before human genetic monocultures. Also humans have been evolved later in time. But as said for humans it is the other way round: genetic diversity comes after genetic monoculture because of psychological complications.
Hence, it is our view that animal
genetic diversity preceded human genetic monocultures in the evolution. In
other words it means that animal religion preceded human religion. Therefore we conclude that only in the animal world genetic monocultures are special cases of genetic diversity. But in the human world genetic diversity is a special case of genetic monocultures.
Appendix 1.
Assumption 18: The dilemma presented to Abraham was not so much the choice between polytheism and monotheism, between earthly idols and the only God in the parallel universe, but between primary and secondary reincarnation, between reincarnation into the (earthly) universe and into heaven of the parallel universe. Because, who can arrange his own reincarnation has absolute power over the afterlife and does not need the parallel universe of monotheism any longer.
Both, reincarnation into the offspring by inbreeding and incest and reincarnation into earthly living beings undermined the power of monotheism, what's only weapon was reincarnation into the parallel universe.
But monotheism (the God in the Myth of Abraham) was wise and realized that tribal cultures easier abandoned reincarnation into animals than that they gave up their instinct of inbreeding.
By killing his only tribal begotten (!) son Abraham would indeed cut off reincarnation into earthly descendants, but he would not lose his faith in earthly afterlife.
That’s because we assume that inbreeding is an instinct in endogamous cultures. Hence, the external projection of the patriarch as a God himself would be destroyed by the kill of his only son, but his internal projection on a continued tribal afterlife remained intact. Just to say that you can’t tell a tribal head (a Muslim male) that his inbreeding instinct does not exist any longer.
The same applies to the prohibition of idols (animals). External projections of gods (statues) can be forbidden, but internal representations remain. Therefore one cannot change a multi-dimensional god-space into a single dimension with a pen-stroke. Neither polytheism, nor earthly reincarnation has been removed by monotheism.
.jpg)
Thousands of years later, this estimation error of monotheism yet resulted in a ban on earthly reincarnation by Islam. As a result, Muslims suppress every connection between inbreeding and earthly reincarnation. But that's a different story.
This work is licenced under a Creative Commons Attibution-Non Commercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International Licence.
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}