An atheist riffs on the Bible (New International Version): Genesis 2

Regular paragraphs are the verses as written in the Bible.
Indented italicized paragraphs feature my comments on the previous paragraph.
Note that I might appear especially nitpicky and I know that some of these verses are not taken literally by everybody; I'm just having some fun basically.
Why the New International Version or NIV? Why not? The Bible has already been translated countless times before and I can't read or speak the original languages in which it was written, which is why it is stupid in the first place to assume that a divine being would communicate with us through a book.

New International Version

Genesis 2

¹ Thus the heavens and the earth were completed in all their vast array.

Yet humanity has found ways to make it much better in all those years.

² By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested ^[a] from all his work. ³ And God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done.

So God has to rest? Funny, I didn't picture him like that. Well, I didn't picture him at all in fact, but still it's kind of weird to think that God has to rest.

Adam and Eve

⁴ This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created.
When the LORD God made the earth and the heavens- ⁵ and no shrub of the field had yet appeared on the earth ^[b] and no plant of the field had yet sprung up, for the LORD God had not sent rain on the earth ^[c] and there was no man to work the ground, ⁶ but streams ^[d] came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground- ⁷ the LORD God formed the man ^[e] from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.

So that's how he implanted souls in the human body back then/now (and how is it other animals live if they don't have souls like people usually say, unless souls don't exist)? You know, when doctors resuscitate you, they use electricity, not breath through the nostrils, and they haven't found that soul thing. Also, from now on I don't want to meet the Christian who tells me about other people's wacky beliefs when his book says people were magically made from dust (whether he believes that or not).

⁸ Now the LORD God had planted a garden in the east, in Eden; and there he put the man he had formed. ⁹ And the LORD God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground—trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food. In the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

Sounds like a nice place! Can I go there? Sounds strange that a tree contains the knowledge of good and evil though, but whatever...

¹⁰ A river watering the garden flowed from Eden; from there it was separated into four headwaters. ¹¹ The name of the first is the Pishon; it winds through the entire land of Havilah, where there is gold. ¹² (The gold of that land is good; aromatic resin ^[f] and onyx are also there.) ¹³ The name of the second river is the Gihon; it winds through the entire land of Cush. ^{[g] 14} The name of the third river is the Tigris; it runs along the east side of Asshur. And the fourth river is the Euphrates.

OK, getting boring, can we move on? Wait, ASShur? !!!

¹⁵ The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. ¹⁶ And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; ¹⁷ but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die."

How come a God who knows all in advance puts man in charge of the Garden of Eden? We're not particularly good with nature. And why did he put the tree of knowledge there if it was dangerous? Anyway, he already knew the outcome, didn't he? Sounds like a bad, not subtle movie plot to me. Oh well, I just hope our hero is intelligent and he will eat from the more promising tree of life.

¹⁸ The LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him."

At least God sounds nice in this verse. Don't get used to it though.

¹⁹ Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. ²⁰ So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds of the air and all the beasts of the field.
But for Adam ^[h] no suitable helper was found. ²¹ So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man's ribs ^[i] and closed up the place with flesh. ²² Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib ^[j] he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.

Phew! We barely avoided zoophilia territory just now. Am I understanding correctly that animals were made before man in Genesis 1, but after man in Genesis 2? Get your story straight, God! By the way, God was the first surgeon and seeing as how he was able to create a man from dust and a woman from one of the man's ribs (why didn't he just create her out of nothingness or dust, he's supposed to be able to do that isn't he), I have to say this guy is unfuckingbelievable! (Anyone who heard and believes the myth about man and woman not having the same number or ribs is mistaken, all I can say is that yes we can live with less ribs than we currently have.)

²³ The man said,
"This is now bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
she shall be called 'woman, ^[k] '
for she was taken out of man."

"This is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh": hey, it's true that when you look at it this way, she probably shares his DNA, so she's actually his daughter in some odd way (or clone or twin sister). Spoiler alert: they have children, which means they have sexual relations. Man! Only 2 out of 1189 chapters yet we've already talked about zoophilia and incest, among other nonsensical/odd/unscientific things.

²⁴ For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.

Wow, this one sounds weird. I guess it's what we call marriage and sex, but not everybody follows this model. I don't even see the logic that man gets one rib removed and then for this reason it will be in his nature to do that.

²⁵ The man and his wife were both naked, and they felt no shame.

This verse makes it sound like they should. We only feel shame because we don't live in a nudist society. Animals feel no shame being nude, we're born nude. So I guess it's one for nudists then! Well, time to wrap up this part now. I've already found many flaws, at least too much for something that was divinely inspired (there should be no flaws I guess if that was the case). See you all in the next part for many more flaws and weirdness!

Footnotes:

a. Genesis 2:2 Or ceased ; also in verse
b. Genesis 2:5 Or land ; also in verse
c. Genesis 2:5 Or land ; also in verse
d. Genesis 2:6 Or mist
e. Genesis 2:7 The Hebrew for man (adam) sounds like and may be related to the Hebrew for ground ( adamah it is also the name Adam (see Gen. 2:20).
f. Genesis 2:12 Or good ; pearls
g. Genesis 2:13 Possibly southeast Mesopotamia
h. Genesis 2:20 Or the man
i. Genesis 2:21 Or took part of the man's side
j. Genesis 2:22 Or part
k. Genesis 2:23 The Hebrew for woman sounds like the Hebrew for man.