Who was the First woman?

[Monk Of Reason]

Biblically in Genesis 1:27

27 So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.

It seems that god had created man and woman. But Adam later in Genesis 2...

22 Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib[h] he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.

23 The man said,

“This is now bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
she shall be called ‘woman,’
for she was taken out of man.”

So was Eve the first woman or was she simply another woman? Is there validity to the tale of Lilith from a biblical standpoint? I know that she was omitted from the cannon. The story of lilith was from one of the earliest stories in the Babylonian Talmud.

Thoughts?

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Biblically in Genesis 1:27

27 So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.

It seems that god had created man and woman. But Adam later in Genesis 2...

22 Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib[h] he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.

23 The man said,

“This is now bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
she shall be called ‘woman,’
for she was taken out of man.”

So was Eve the first woman or was she simply another woman? Is there validity to the tale of Lilith from a biblical standpoint? I know that she was omitted from the cannon. The story of lilith was from one of the earliest stories in the Babylonian Talmud.

Thoughts?

I have no idea about these two shown except for what you said in this post. So, sorry if this answer doesn't work.

Couldn't 1:27 be describing the general scenario and 2 describe the actual process? I've seen examples of this in literature.

As in, explaining that God created them and later on explaining the actual, detailed scenario.

 

[columbus]

The first two chapters of Genesis are different stories from different places and times. They are mutually contradictory.

What I take away from this is that the redactors of Genesis were giving a heads up to more sophisticated audiences. "These are old stories. Don't take them literally as history."

Tom

 

[Desert Snake]

.......Eve.

 

[outhouse]

The first woman concept is factual mythology.

She never existed.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

The first woman concept is factual mythology.

She never existed.

Really? Everything has a first time. No matter what, somewhere down the line there was a being which was the first to match the standard description of female.

 

[Amechania]

Or theyre the ordInary, soulless, run-of-the-mill humans that are
the result of the natural processes of evolution or the children of the specially created Adam and Eve. Godkind.

 

[Skwim]

Who was the first woman?

Homo Habilis
​

The first hominid to use tools was the evolution of the australopithecine, Homohabilis.
And almost all scientists now agree that he was the source for the biblical story of Adam
and Eve– a busy body who, not happy with an ideal paradise of lush jungle and lowland
savannah, picked up a rock and decided to create the first tool.
source

 

[Desert Snake]

Or theyre the ordInary, soulless, run-of-the-mill humans that are
the result of the natural processes of evolution or the children of the specially created Adam and Eve. Godkind.

The Bible doesn't state that at all.

 

[s2a]

Mrs. George Washington?

 

[Amechania]

The Bible doesn't state that at all.

Doesn't it?

 

[Desert Snake]

Doesn't it?

Hmm I'll check. I don't think so.

 

[Desert Snake]

Genesis 2 5-9 would seem to indicate that Adam (hence Eve as well), were the first, though,, could be a stretch, but one could interpret it as spiritual beings, I suppose.

That's some text acrobatics however, imo.

 

[roger1440]

There has been an ongoing debate for many, many years if the creation story of mankind in the book of Genesis is the same story told two different ways or two separate creation stories.

The story of Lilith is a little involved. Her story has evolved in different directions.

 

[Amechania]

I don't think it's acrobatic at all. At best a barrel roll

 

[Desert Snake]

I don't think it's aromatic at all. At best a barrel roll

Religionists generally view Scripture as interpretive, so, no argument from me.

 

[outhouse]

Really? Everything has a first time. No matter what, somewhere down the line there was a being which was the first to match the standard description of female.

Lets ask this a way you might understand.


Was there ever a first homo sapien? man or woman?



Or was a TOTAL population that slowly changed by evolutionary process????

 

[Desert Snake]

Or was a TOTAL population that slowly changed by evolutionary process????

Unlikely. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

 

[outhouse]

There has been an ongoing debate for many, many years if the creation story of mankind in the book of Genesis is the same story told two different ways or two separate creation stories.

.

There is only debate between the uneducated people who are clueless of how genesis was collected and redacted over hundreds of years.

There is no real debate here about genesis being a redacted compilation.

 

[Amechania]

Funny. Yeah you can't which makes the Bible less than useless on its own. I could come up with any scenario and call it biblical and any number of idiots might fellow me. Its easy to corrupt faith. If you don't have a tradition that you consider holy then mere words can easily become the work of the devil.