*The probability is that God did not use Adam’s rib
to create Eve, but rather, used Adam’s baculum , or penis bone. No
OK. It’s just a story, I know. Not real. Never happened. But we should
at least get the story right, don’t you think?
The Hebrew word “tsela” was used in the bible 42 times and only twice
translated as “rib”. Both times in the Genesis creation story. And
both times it is footnoted down to “part”.
It was generally translated as “side”, but also as “appendage” and
“limb”. Now what ‘appendage’ or ‘limb’ on man does not have a bone?
Only one I can think of.
The use of “rib” is conflicting to the story, rather than in
concordance. Either God made Adam with one additional rib, or Adam
had to live with one less rib. Either way, it is never addressed, and
actually provides a problem rather than an etiological explanation.
Genesis is the etiological chapter of the bible. That is, it provides
explanations for things, reasons for beginnings of things.
There is no particular symbolic meaning for the rib. And besides, both
men and women have 24 ribs, 12 on each side. It explains nothing.
The baculum, however, would fit right in with the etiological nature
of the story, explaining why man, unlike many if not most mammals,
does not have a penis bone.
And taking the bone from the generative organ adds to the symbolism.
Supporting evidence for this theory is found in Genesis 2: 21
concerning God “closing up with flesh” the site where the “tsela” was
Here is another opportunity for etiology. Yet there is no scar or
evidence of any kind near the male rib cage.
There is, however, what looks very much like a scar right in the area
where the penis bone would have been located- the perineal raphe.
It is a solid case that can be made for the baculum to have been meant
as the “bone of Adam” which God removed and out of which God made
And all this time a meaningful part of the creation story was hidden
from us because of a simple mistranslation.