Just admit it already!

[Ramseys]

Even Sheep Need Love




The idea that "Adam" diddled the animals is based on a reading of the Hebrew phrase employed in Gen 2:18 and 2:20: 'ezer kenegdo [עֵזֶר כְּנֶגְדֹּֽו].




Gen 2:18: Then the Lord God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper ('ezer kenegdo) as his partner.” 




Gen 2:20: The man gave names to all cattle, and to the birds of the air, and to every animal of the field; but for the man there was not found a helper ('ezer kenegdo) as his partner.




'ezer kenegdo translates in a variety of ways, but they all circle the same idea: "A helper corresponding to him." "A sustainer beside him." "A suitable helper." In other words, someone that was appropriate to the man in a way that the animals were not. So far, so good. But where does the sex come into play?




 




The argument goes as follows: the man was alone and YHWH saw it was not good, so the animals were made. YHWH paraded all of the animals in front of man, a creature with sexual desires, and the man had sex with each animal. This reading posits bestiality was not a sin prior to The Fall of Man. Which is not as far fetched as the current taboo might have you believe. Part of The Fall is a stark separation between humanity and the rest of nature. This could have been one of those separations. Furthermore, the Torah does not record bestiality as being a sin until the Moses received that word on Sinai (Exodus 22:19). In any event, this take on the story says that the man had intercourse with Mr. and/or Mrs. Sheep, Goat, Orangutan and all the other cute and ugly creatures, but found that none "corresponded," "fit," or was a "suitable helper" (depending on your translation) to his body. 




In this reading of the tale, when YHWH presents woman, and the man says, "this at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh" (Gen 2:23), it is because after all his experimenting he has found something/someone he, uhm, fits. In light of this interpretation, verse 23 could be paraphrased to read, "Finally! Something my body corresponds/responds to!"




This might also explain why the man was so quick to throw his wife under the bus after God questioned them over the whole incident with The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil: the man blames God for giving him the woman, in essence saying (as one of our seminary professors once quipped), "Look man: I was happy with the sheep: this woman you gave me — and the serpent you made — screwed everything up." (Gen 3:12)








https://www.agameforgoodchristians.com/b...enesis-220




 




In the Talmud (in Yebamoth) it is claimed that Adam had sex with all the animals in the Garden of Eden.




"I do not have a moral dilemma with the story of Adam and Chava having sex with the animals because of how I interpret the Adam and Eve story. I see them as like bonobos or Austrolopithicines that are not yet fully human. Animals have no moral sense. If a coyote steals your neighbor’s chicken, it is just its nature. If you steal your neighbor’s chicken, you are a thief because you are supposed to know better.




Before eating of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil (evolving a moral sense), humans were like animals that should not be blamed for their actions. As such, if they had sex with other hominids or apes, it might be a waste of effort evolutionarily, but it was not morally wrong. After they became human, they knew they were naked, knew that they had to direct their sex drive. They became creatures with a moral sense."




https://www.quora.com/In-the-Talmud-in-Y...ve-Judaism




 




While this doesn't prove anything as to our discussion, it is fun to read about Adam shagging all the animals. 

[Bear28]

Love this Rammy. We all know that humans have been shagging animals sense the start.  Cross species breeding is nothing knew, even if people didn't want to admit it because it didn't fit their twisted views of religious morality. As to neanderthals not going extinct but them and humans becoming a hybrid that modern humans are now. There were many who thought that while both lived in the same areas they never breed with each other. it wasn't until we cracked DNA that we see that not only did we but modern humans wouldn't be where we are today without such a mix. they just recently discovered that the old idea that African's not having much if any neanderthal dna was wrong. this is making use have to rethink human and neanderthal migration pasterns.




 




here is a link to the articale on it.




https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/30/africa/af...index.html

[Ramseys]

Gorillas Gave Humans 'The Crabs'



Humans caught pubic lice, aka "the crabs," from gorillas roughly three million years ago, scientists now report.




Rather than close encounters of the intimate kind, researchers explained humans most likely got the lice, which most commonly live in pubic hair, from sleeping in gorilla nests or eating the apes.




"It certainly wouldn't have to be* what many people are going to immediately assume it might have been, and that is sexual intercourse occurring between humans and gorillas," explained researcher David Reed of the Florida Museum of Natural History. "Instead of something sordid, it could easily have stemmed from an activity that was considerably more tame."




Humans are unique among primates in that we host two different kinds of lice—one on our heads and bodies (Pediculus), the bane of many schoolchildren, and pubic lice (Pthirus). In comparison, chimpanzees have only head lice and gorillas only pubic lice.




* But he's not saying it wasn't.




 




https://www.livescience.com/1342-gorilla...crabs.html

[cervids]

On 1/26/2020 at 5:21 PM, Ramseys said:




In this climate, do you think any thinking animal fucker would ever admit to doing the deed with a critter, to anyone?




I don't care if he was wearing a lab coat and had a clipboard.

You are aware of the online surveys, right?  They get participants.

[Ramseys]

1 hour ago, cervids said:




You are aware of the online surveys, right?  They get participants.

Oh yes, very aware. I also know that many 'On Line' zoos don't participate in those surveys. And their are more than a few zoos stay far away from the on line zoo community.




I personally know of one example of this. My friend used to be big in the on line zoo community back in the ASB days. But you'll not find him on any form, or group chat about zoo today.




However my basic point was that pre internet days, getting an accurate number would be quite difficult. Even today there are areas that, may not condone it, but bestiality doesn't carry the stigma that other places do. (Columba and donkeys come to mind)




I'm not saying that your great great grandpa shagged the family cow. But I'll bet he knew someone that did.

[heavyhorse]

16 hours ago, Ramseys said:




I'm not saying that your great great grandpa shagged the family cow. But I'll bet he knew someone that did.

Or the cow knew someone who did...  




 




 




...animals are great at keeping family secrets... 

[Bear28]

Reminds me of an old joke about a ventriloquist. 




ventriloquist: mind if i talk to your sheep.




Farmer: Them sheep are liars!

[Ramseys]

[cervids]

On 2/22/2020 at 0:56 PM, Ramseys said:




Oh yes, very aware. I also know that many 'On Line' zoos don't participate in those surveys. And their are more than a few zoos stay far away from the on line zoo community.




I personally know of one example of this. My friend used to be big in the on line zoo community back in the ASB days. But you'll not find him on any form, or group chat about zoo today.




However my basic point was that pre internet days, getting an accurate number would be quite difficult. Even today there are areas that, may not condone it, but bestiality doesn't carry the stigma that other places do. (Columba and donkeys come to mind)




I'm not saying that your great great grandpa shagged the family cow. But I'll bet he knew someone that did.

You said "any."

[cervids]

On 2/23/2020 at 11:37 AM, Ramseys said:

And hear I am wondering why Saddam Hussein became a farmer...