Gênesis 2
Warren Wiersbe · Citado em PreceptAustin
Gênesis 2
Wiersbe - Bible history begins with a beautiful garden in which man sinned, but the story ends with a glorious "garden city" (Rev. 21-22) in which there will be no sin. What brought about the change? A third garden, Gethsemane, where Jesus surrendered to the Father's will and then went forth to die on a cross for the sins of the world. (See context in The Wiersbe Bible Commentary) Nature is content with a little, and that which is most natural; grace with less; but lust craves everything, and is content with nothing. -- Matthew Henry Matthew
Gênesis 2
Wiersbe quips "Fortunately, it isn't necessary to master ancient geography in order to understand the spiritual lessons of these early chapters in Genesis." (Ibid) NET NOTE - Eden is portrayed here as a source of life-giving rivers (that is, perennial streams). This is no surprise because its orchard is where the tree of life is located. Eden is a source of life, but tragically its orchard is no longer accessible to humankind. The river flowing out of Eden is a tantalizing reminder of this. God continues to provide life-giving water to sustain physical existence on the earth, but immortality has been lost. EDEN [SMITH] (pleasure; delight). The first residence of man, called in the Septuagint Paradise. The latter is a word of Persian origin, and describes an extensive tract of pleasure land, somewhat like an English park; and the use of it suggests a wider view of man's first abode than a garden. The description of Eden is found in (Ge 2:8-14) In the eastern portion of the region of Eden was the garden planted. The Hiddekel, one of its rivers, is the modern Tigris; the Euphrates is the same as the modern Euphrates. With regard to the Pison and Gihon a great variety of opinion exists, but the best authorities are divided between (1) Eden as in northeast Arabia, at the junction of the Euphrates and Tigris, and their separation again, making the four rivers of the different channels of these two, or (2), and most probably, Eden as situated in Armenia, near the origin of the rivers Tigris and Euphrates, and in which same region rise the Araxes (Pison of Genesis) and the Oxus (Gihon). One of the marts which supplied the luxury of Tyre with richly-embroidered stuffs. In (2Ki 19:12) and Isa 37:12 "The sons of Eden" are mentioned with Gozan, Haran and Rezeph as victims of the Assyrian greed of conquest. Probability seems to point to the northwest of Mesopotamia as the locality of Eden. BETH-EDEN, "house of pleasure:" probably the name of a country residence of the kings of Damascus. (Amos 1:5) (See lengthy discussion in the ISBE). John Hall - A river went out of Eden to water the garden. A pure river of water of life … proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.—Rev. 22:1. The Bible is a circle, in describing which the Divine hand begins in Paradise and ends there. In Genesis God dwells with men, and He does so in Revelation. In Genesis man is in Eden, with the river that watered the garden, and the trees yielding their pleasant fruits, and in Revelation man is in the garden of God once more, with this advantage, that no serpent is there to beguile, and no forbidden fruit to allure. Genesis 2:11 The name of the first is Pishon; it flows around the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold. BGT ὄνομα τῷ ἑνὶ Φισων οὗτος ὁ κυκλῶν πᾶσαν τὴν γῆν Ευιλατ ἐκεῖ οὗ ἐστιν τὸ χρυσίον KJV The name of the first is Pison: that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold; NET The name of the first is Pishon; it runs through the entire land of Havilah, where there is gold. BBE The name of the first is Pishon, which goes round about all the land of Havilah where there is gold. CSB The name of the first is Pishon, which flows through the entire land of Havilah, where there is gold. ERV The name of the first is Pishon: that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold; ESV The name of the first is the Pishon. It is the one that flowed around the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold. GWN The name of the first river is Pishon. This is the one that winds throughout Havilah, where there is gold. NKJ The name of the first is Pishon; it is the one which skirts the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold. NAB The name of the first is the Pishon; it is the one that winds through the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold. NIV The name of the first is the Pishon; it winds through the entire land of Havilah, where there is gold. NJB The first is named the Pishon, and this winds all through the land of Havilah where there is gold. NLT The first branch, called the Pishon, flowed around the entire land of Havilah, where gold is found. NRS The name of the first is Pishon; it is the one that flows around the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold; YLT the name of the one is Pison, it is that which is surrounding the whole land of the Havilah where the gold is, LXE The name of the one, Phisom, this it is which encircles the whole land of Evilat, where there is gold. ASV The name of the first is Pishon: that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold; DBY The name of the one is Pison: that is it which surrounds the whole land of Havilah, where the gold is. BHT šëm hä|´eHäd Pîšôn hû´ hassöbëb ´ët Kol-´eºrec ha|Háwîlâ ´ášer-šäm hazzähäb NAS The name of the first is Pishon; it flows around the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold. NIRV The name of the first river is the Pishon. It winds through the whole land of Havilah. Gold is found there. RSV The name of the first is Pishon; it is the one which flows around the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold; RWB The name of the first is Pison: which goest around the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold; WEB The name of the first {is} Pison, which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where {there is} gold; Havilah: Ge 10:7,29 25:18 1Sa 15:7 Genesis 2 Resources - Multiple sermons and commentaries The name of the first is Pishon; it flows around the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold - PISHON; PISON [ISBE] - pi'-shon pi'-son (pishon; the King James Version): A river of EDEN (which see), said to compass the whole land of Havilah where there is gold, bdellium and onyx stone (Gen 2:11), most probably identified with the Karun River (ED: BUT THIS IS A GUESS) which comes down from the mountains of Media and formerly emptied into the Persian Gulf. HAVILAH [ISBE] - hav'-i-la (chawilah; Heuila): (1) Son of Cush (Gen 10:7; 1 Ch 1:9). (2) Son of Yoktan, descendant of Shem (Gen 10:29; 1 Ch 1:23). (3) Mentioned with Shur as one of the limits of the territory of the Ishmaelites (Gen 25:18); compare the same limits of the land of the Amalekites (1 Sam 15:7), where, however, the text is doubtful. It is described (Gen 2:11,12) as bounded by the river Pishon and as being rich in gold, bdellium and "shoham-stone" (English Version of the Bible, "onyx"). The shoham-stone was perhaps the Assyrian samtu, probably the malachite or turquoise. The mention of a Cushite Havilah is explained by the fact that the Arabian tribes at an early time migrated to the coast of Africa. The context of Gen 10:7 thus favors situation on the Ethiopian shore, and the name is perhaps preserved in the kolpos Aualites and in the tribe Abalitai on the South side of the straits of Babel-Mandeb. Or possibly a trace of the name appears in the classical Aualis, now Zeila` in Somaliland. But its occurrence among the Yoktanite Arabs (Gen 10:29) suggests a location in Arabia. South Arabian inscriptions mention a district of Khaulan (Chaulan), and a place of this name is found both in Tihama and Southeast of San`a'. Again Strabo's Chaulotaioi and Chuwaila in Bahrein point to a district on the Arabian shore of the Persian Gulf. No exact identification has yet been made. A. S. Fulton QUESTION - What is the meaning of Pishon in the Bible? ANSWER - The only mention of the word Pishon in the Bible is found in the book of Genesis: “A river flowed out of Eden to water the garden, and there it divided and became four rivers. The name of the first is the Pishon. It is the one that flowed around the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold. And the gold of that land is good; bdellium and onyx stone are there” (Genesis 2:10-12). It’s only when we compare the richness and beauty of the river to that of the Garden of Eden itself, that we are really able to discern the meaning of Pishon. Besides the lone biblical reference, Pishon is mentioned in Sirach 24:25 of the Apocrypha. It is probably connected with the Hebrew root puwsh, which means “scatter, press on, break loose, or spring forward.” The River Pishon most likely originated from a spring and formed a delta. The Jones' Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names defines Pishon as “Great Diffusion.” It is virtually impossible to determine where the Pishon River flowed during the pre-Flood era. The same is true for practically any location during that time, including Eden. Some scientists believe that the Pishon could be the Nile, the Indus, or the Ganges. There is simply no modern river that matches the description given in Genesis. Without question, the world’s topography prior to the worldwide Flood (Genesis 6:17) was totally different from what it is today. Although Pishon’s location is obscure, its description and purpose are not. The Garden of Eden that God prepared was not only bountiful, it was lush and beautiful. It was a place rich with life-giving water, a land lavished with precious metals and jewels. The gold and onyx associated with the River Pishon are reminiscent of the tabernacle’s furnishings and priestly garments (Exodus 25:1-9; 1 Chronicles 29:2). Gold overlay finished the sacred furniture of the tabernacle (Exodus 25:11). Particularly important was the onyx stone of the priestly ephod, upon which were inscribed the names of the twelve tribes (Exodus 28:9-14), and the onyx of the high priest’s breastplate (Exodus 28:20). The land of Havilah, ringed by the Pishon, is indicative of the presence and blessing of God. Furthermore, the Pishon and the other three rivers from Eden eventually marked the boundaries of the land pledged to Abraham (Genesis 15:18). As God had prepared and assigned Eden to Adam’s care, the “paradise” of Canaan’s land was given to Abraham and his descendants.GotQuestions.org Genesis 2:12 The gold of that land is good; the bdellium and the onyx stone are there. BGT τὸ δὲ χρυσίον τῆς γῆς ἐκείνης καλόν καὶ ἐκεῖ ἐστιν ὁ ἄνθραξ καὶ ὁ λίθος ὁ πράσινος KJV And the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone. NET (The gold of that land is pure; pearls and lapis lazuli are also there). BBE And the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone. CSB Gold from that land is pure; bdellium and onyx are also there. ERV and the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone. ESV And the gold of that land is good; bdellium and onyx stone are there. GWN (The gold of that land is pure. Bdellium and onyx are also found there.) NKJ And the gold of that land is good. Bdellium and the onyx stone are there. NAB The gold of that land is excellent; bdellium and lapis lazuli are also there. NIV (The gold of that land is good; aromatic resin and onyx are also there.) NJB The gold of this country is pure; bdellium and cornelian stone are found there. NLT The gold of that land is exceptionally pure; aromatic resin and onyx stone are also found there. NRS and the gold of that land is good; bdellium and onyx stone are there. YLT and the gold of that land is good, there is the bdolach and the shoham stone; LXE And the gold of that land is good, there also is carbuncle and emerald. ASV and the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone. DBY And the gold of that land is good; bdellium and the onyx stone are there. BHT û|záhab hä´äºrec hahiw´ †ôb šäm haBBüdöºlaH wü´eºben haššöºham NAS And the gold of that land is good; the bdellium and the onyx stone are there. NIRV The gold of that land is good. Onyx and sweet-smelling resin are also found there. RSV and the gold of that land is good; bdellium and onyx stone are there. RWB And the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone. WEB And the gold of that land {is} good: there {is} bdellium and the onyx-stone. Bdellium is a transparent aromatic gum. The onyx is a precious stone, so called from a Greek word signifying a man's nail, to the colour of which it nearly approaches. onyx: Ex 28:20 39:13 Job 28:16 Eze 28:13 Genesis 2 Resources - Multiple sermons and commentaries The gold of that land is good; the bdellium and the onyx stone are there. GOLD [SMITH] Gold was known from the very earliest times. (Genesis 2:11) It was at first used chiefly for ornaments, etc. (Genesis 24:22) Coined money was not known to the ancients till a comparatively late period; and on the Egyptian tombs gold is represented as being weighed in rings for commercial purposes. Comp. (Genesis 43:21) Gold was extremely abundant in ancient times, (1 Chronicles 22:14; 2 Chronicles 1:15; 9:9; Daniel 3:1; Nahum 2:9) but this did not depreciate its value, because of the enormous quantities consumed by the wealthy in furniture, etc. (1 Kings 6:22) 10 passim ; (Esther 1:6; Solomon 3:9,10; Jeremiah 10:9) The chief countries mentioned as producing gold are Arabia, Sheba and Ophir. (1 Kings 9:28; 10:1; Job 28:16) Click much longer discussion in ISBE. BDELLIUM [ISBE] - del'-i-um (bedholach): The word occurs twice in the Pentateuch: (1) in Gen 2:12, in conjunction with gold and onyx, as a product of the land of HAVILAH (which see), and (2) in Nu 11:7, where the manna is likened to this substance in appearance: "The appearance thereof as the appearance of bdellium." The latter comparison excludes the idea of bedholach being a precious stone, and points to the identification of it with the fragrant resinous gum known to the Greeks as bdellion, several kinds being mentioned by Dioscorides and Pliny. It was a product of Arabia, India, Afghanistan, etc. ONYX [SMITH] (a nail) is the translation of the Hebrew shoham ; but there is some doubt as to its signification. Some writers believe that the "beryl" is intended; but the balance of authority is in favor of some variety of the onyx. ("The onyx is not a transparent stone, but as the color of the flesh appears through the nail (Greek onyx) on the human body, so the reddish mass which is below shines delicately through the whitish surface of the onyx. There are several varieties. White and reddish stripes alternating form the sardonyx; white and reddish gray, the chalcedony. When polished it has a fine lustre, and is easily wrought into a gem of great beauty."-Rosenmiller. Genesis 2:13 The name of the second river is Gihon; it flows around the whole land of Cush. BGT καὶ ὄνομα τῷ ποταμῷ τῷ δευτέρῳ Γηων οὗτος ὁ κυκλῶν πᾶσαν τὴν γῆν Αἰθιοπίας KJV And the name of the second river is Gihon: the same is it that compasseth the whole land of Ethiopia. NET The name of the second river is Gihon; it runs through the entire land of Cush. BBE And the name of the second river is Gihon: this river goes round all the land of Cush. CSB The name of the second river is Gihon, which flows through the entire land of Cush. ERV And the name of the second river is Gihon: the same is it that compasseth the whole land of Cush. ESV The name of the second river is the Gihon. It is the one that flowed around the whole land of Cush. GWN The name of the second river is Gihon. This is the one that winds throughout Sudan. NKJ The name of the second river is Gihon; it is the one which goes around the whole land of Cush. NAB The name of the second river is the Gihon; it is the one that winds all through the land of Cush. NIV The name of the second river is the Gihon; it winds through the entire land of Cush. NJB The second river is named the Gihon, and this winds all through the land of Cush. NLT The second branch, called the Gihon, flowed around the entire land of Cush. NRS The name of the second river is Gihon; it is the one that flows around the whole land of Cush. YLT and the name of the second river is Gibon, it is that which is surrounding the whole land of Cush; LXE And the name of the second river is Geon, this it is which encircles the whole land of Ethiopia. ASV And the name of the second river is Gihon: the same is it that compasseth the whole land of Cush. DBY And the name of the second river is Gihon: that is it which surrounds the whole land of Cush. BHT wüšë|m-hannähär haššënî GîHôn hû´ hassôbëb ´ët Kol-´eºrec Kûš NAS And the name of the second river is Gihon; it flows around the whole land of Cush. NIRV The name of the second river is the Gihon. It winds through the whole land of Cush. RSV The name of the second river is Gihon; it is the one which flows around the whole land of Cush. RWB And the name of the second river is Gihon: the same that goest around the whole land of Cush. WEB And the name of the second river {is} Gihon: the same that compasseth the whole land of Cush. Gihon: The Araxes, which runs into the Caspian sea. Ethiopia: Heb. Cush, The country of the ancient Cussaei. Ge 10:6 Isa 11:11 Genesis 2 Resources - Multiple sermons and commentaries The name of the second river is Gihon; it flows around the whole land of Cush. NET NOTE Cush. In the Bible the Hebrew word כּוּשׁ (kush, “Kush”) often refers to Ethiopia (so KJV, CEV), but here it must refer to a region in Mesopotamia, the area of the later Cassite dynasty of Babylon. See Gen 10:8 as well as E. A. Speiser, Genesis (AB), 20. Gihon [EBD] a stream. Gihon = "bursting forth" (1.) One of the four rivers of Eden (Gen. 2:13). It has been identified with the Nile. Others regard it as the Oxus, or the Araxes, or the Ganges. But as, according to the sacred narrative, all these rivers of Eden took their origin from the head-waters of the Euphrates and the Trigris, it is probable that the Gihon is the ancient Araxes, which, under the modern name of the Arras, discharges itself into the Caspian Sea. It was the Asiatic and not the African "Cush" which the Gihon compassed (Gen. 10:7-10). (See EDEN.) Gihon - Holman Dictionary - Place name meaning, “gushing fountain.” The primary water supply for Jerusalem and one of the four rivers into which the river of Eden divided (Genesis 2:13 ). The river cannot be identified with any contemporary river. Genesis 2:14 The name of the third river is Tigris; it flows east of Assyria. And the fourth river is the Euphrates. BGT καὶ ὁ ποταμὸς ὁ τρίτος Τίγρις οὗτος ὁ πορευόμενος κατέναντι Ἀσσυρίων ὁ δὲ ποταμὸς ὁ τέταρτος οὗτος Εὐφράτης KJV And the name of the third river is Hiddekel: that is it which goeth toward the east of Assyria. And the fourth river is Euphrates. NET The name of the third river is Tigris; it runs along the east side of Assyria. The fourth river is the Euphrates. BBE And the name of the third river is Tigris, which goes to the east of Assyria. And the fourth river is Euphrates. CSB The name of the third river is the Tigris, which runs east of Assyria. And the fourth river is the Euphrates. ERV And the name of the third river is Hiddekel: that is it which goeth in front of Assyria. And the fourth river is Euphrates. ESV And the name of the third river is the Tigris, which flows east of Assyria. And the fourth river is the Euphrates. GWN The name of the third river is Tigris. This is the one that flows east of Assyria. The fourth river is the Euphrates. NKJ The name of the third river is Hiddekel; it is the one which goes toward the east of Assyria. The fourth river is the Euphrates. NAB The name of the third river is the Tigris; it is the one that flows east of Asshur. The fourth river is the Euphrates. NIV The name of the third river is the Tigris; it runs along the east side of Asshur. And the fourth river is the Euphrates. NJB The third river is named the Tigris, and this flows to the east of Ashur. The fourth river is the Euphrates. NLT The third branch, called the Tigris, flowed east of the land of Asshur. The fourth branch is called the Euphrates. NRS The name of the third river is Tigris, which flows east of Assyria. And the fourth river is the Euphrates. YLT and the name of the third river is Hiddekel, it is that which is going east of Asshur; and the fourth river is Phrat. LXE And the third river is Tigris, this is that which flows forth over against the Assyrians. And the fourth river is Euphrates. ASV And the name of the third river is Hiddekel: that is it which goeth in front of Assyria. And the fourth river is the Euphrates. DBY And the name of the third river is Hiddekel: that is it which flows forward toward Asshur. And the fourth river, that is Euphrates. BHT wüšëm hannähär haššülîšî HiDDeºqel hû´ ha|hölëk qidmat ´aššûr wühannähär hä|rübî`î hû´ pürät NAS And the name of the third river is Tigris; it flows east of Assyria. And the fourth river is the Euphrates. NIRV The name of the third river is the Tigris. It runs along the east side of Asshur. And the fourth river is the Euphrates. RSV And the name of the third river is Tigris, which flows east of Assyria. And the fourth river is the Euphrates. RWB And the name of the third river is Hiddekel: which floweth toward the east of Assyria. And the fourth river is Euphrates. WEB And the name of the third river {is} Hiddekel: which floweth toward the east of Assyria. And the fourth river {is} Euphrates. Hiddekel: Da 10:4, The Tigris toward the east of: or, eastward to, Ge 10:11,22 25:18 Euphrates: Ge 15:18 De 1:7 11:24 Rev 9:14 Genesis 2 Resources - Multiple sermons and commentaries The name of the third river is Tigris; it flows east of Assyria. And the fourth river is the Euphrates - TIGRIS [ISBE] - ti'-gris (Tigris, the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew chiddeqel): One of the rivers of Eden going "eastward to Assyria" (Gen 2:14 margin), called the Great River (Dan 10:4), elsewhere mentioned in the apocryphal books, as in Tob 6:1; Judith 1:6; Ecclesiasticus 24:25, called Diglath in Josephus, and Diglit in Pliny, now called in Mesopotamia Dijleh, generally supposed to be a Semitic corruption of Tigra, meaning originally an arrow, which from its rapidity of motion is symbolized. The Tigris rises in the mountains of Armenia, latitude 38 degrees 10 minutes, longitude 39 degrees 20 minutes, only a few miles from the main branch of the Euphrates. After pursuing a tortuous southeasterly course for 150 miles, it is joined by the east branch at Osman Kieui, some distance below Diarbekr. Here the stream is 450 ft. wide and 3 or 4 ft. deep. Passing through numerous mountain gorges for another 150 miles, it emerges into the region of low hills about Nineveh, and a little below into the great alluvial plain of Mesopotamia. Thence in its course to Bagdad it is joined by the Great Zab, the Lesser Zab, the Adhem, and the Diyaleh rivers, bringing a large amount of water from the Zagros Mountains. At Bagdad the overflows from the Euphrates in high water often increase the inundations. The flood season begins early in the month of March, reaching its climax about May 1, declining to its natural level by midsummer. In October and November, the volume of water increases considerably, but not so much as to overflow its banks. Below Bagdad, throughout the region of Babylonia proper, the Tigris joins with the Euphrates in furnishing the water for irrigation so successfully used in ancient times. English engineers are at present with great promise of success aiming to restore the irrigating systems of the region and the prosperity of ancient times. The total length of the river is 1,146 miles. It now joins the Euphrates about 40 miles Northwest of the Persian Gulf, the two streams there forming the Shat el Arab, but in early historical times they entered the Persian Gulf by separate mouths, the Gulf then extending a considerable distance above the present junction of the rivers, the sediment of the streams having silted up the head of the Gulf to that distance. Euphrates [EBD] Hebrew, Perath; Assyrian, Purat; Persian cuneiform, Ufratush, whence Greek Euphrates, meaning "sweet water." The Assyrian name means "the stream," or "the great stream." It is generally called in the Bible simply "the river" (Ex. 23:31), or "the great river" (Deut. 1:7). The Euphrates is first mentioned in Gen. 2:14 as one of the rivers of Paradise. It is next mentioned in connection with the covenant which God entered into with Abraham (15:18), when he promised to his descendants the land from the river of Egypt to the river Euphrates (comp. Deut. 11:24; Josh. 1:4), a covenant promise afterwards fulfilled in the extended conquests of David (2 Sam. 8:2-14; 1 Chr. 18:3; 1 Kings 4:24). It was then the boundary of the kingdom to the north-east. In the ancient history of Assyria, and Babylon, and Egypt many events are recorded in which mention is made of the "great river." Just as the Nile represented in prophecy the power of Egypt, so the Euphrates represented the Assyrian power (Isa. 8:7; Jer. 2:18). It is by far the largest and most important of all the rivers of Western Asia. From its source in the Armenian mountains to the Persian Gulf, into which it empties itself, it has a course of about 1,700 miles. It has two sources, (1) the Frat or Kara-su (i.e., "the black river"), which rises 25 miles north-east of Erzeroum; and (2) the Muradchai (i.e., "the river of desire"), which rises near Ararat, on the northern slope of Ala-tagh. At Kebban Maden, 400 miles from the source of the former, and 270 from that of the latter, they meet and form the majestic stream, which is at length joined by the Tigris at Koornah, after which it is called Shat-el-Arab, which runs in a deep and broad stream for above 140 miles to the sea. It is estimated that the alluvium brought down by these rivers encroaches on the sea at the rate of about one mile in thirty years. See also much longer discussion of Euphrates in ISBE Genesis 2:15 Then the LORD God took the man and put him into the garden of Eden to cultivate it and keep it. BGT καὶ ἔλαβεν κύριος ὁ θεὸς τὸν ἄνθρωπον ὃν ἔπλασεν καὶ ἔθετο αὐτὸν ἐν τῷ παραδείσῳ ἐργάζεσθαι αὐτὸν καὶ φυλάσσειν KJV And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it. NET The LORD God took the man and placed him in the orchard in Eden to care for it and to maintain it. BBE And the Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to do work in it and take care of it. CSB The LORD God took the man and placed him in the garden of Eden to work it and watch over it. ERV And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it. ESV The LORD God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to work it and keep it. GWN Then the LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to farm the land and to take care of it. NKJ Then the LORD God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to tend and keep it. NAB The LORD God then took the man and settled him in the garden of Eden, to cultivate and care for it. NIV The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. NJB Yahweh God took the man and settled him in the garden of Eden to cultivate and take care of it. NLT The LORD God placed the man in the Garden of Eden to tend and watch over it. NRS The LORD God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to till it and keep it. YLT And Jehovah God taketh the man, and causeth him to rest in the garden of Eden, to serve it, and to keep it. LXE And the Lord God took the man whom he had formed, and placed him in the garden of Delight, to cultivate and keep it. ASV And Jehovah God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it. DBY And Jehovah Elohim took Man, and put him into the garden of Eden, to till it and to guard it. BHT wayyiqqaH yhwh(´ädönäy) ´élöhîm ´et-hä|´ädäm wayyannìHëºhû bügan-`ëºden lü`obdäh ûlüšomräh NAS Then the LORD God took the man and put him into the garden of Eden to cultivate it and keep it. NIRV The LORD God put the man in the Garden of Eden. He put him there to work its ground and to take care of it. RSV The LORD God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to till it and keep it. RWB And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to tend it and to keep it. WEB And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden, to dress it, and to keep it. the man: or, Adam, Ge 2:2 Job 31:33 put: Ge 2:8 Ps 128:2 Eph 4:28 Genesis 2 Resources - Multiple sermons and commentaries Then the LORD God took the man (adam) and put him into the garden of Eden to cultivate (abad; Lxx = ergazomai) it and keep (shamar; Lxx - phulasso) it - Note that God gave Adam work in the place of pleasure, the perfect environment. God's assignment of meaningful labor for Adam before the Fall in Genesis 3, clearly indicates that work was not the result of the Fall. In addition in Ge 1:28 God made man steward over the creation declaring to Adam and Eve to “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” After the Fall of man, work continued but now it was toilsome work! The Lord at first had Adam made Out of the dust and clay, And in his nostrils breathèd life, E’en as the Scriptures say. And then in Eden’s paradise He placèd him to dwell, That he within it should remain, To dress and keep it well. Click Gotquestions' note for an excellent discussion on the Garden of Eden. Garden of Eden - 5x in 5v - Gen. 2:15; Gen. 3:23; Gen. 3:24; Ezek. 36:35; Joel 2:3 Keep in this verse is the first use of The first use of shamar is instructive as Adam was placed in the garden (a perfect environment) and was commanded to "keep" it which in the Septuagint is translated with phulasso ( used to translate many of uses of shamar) which means to guard like a military sentinel would at his post. Clearly Adam did not do a good job at "keeping" the garden safe from intruders! And because of this failure he was cast out of the garden and ironically God stationed angels to "guard (Lxx = phulasso) the Garden and prevent him from eating of the tree of life" so that he would not eat of it (Ge 3:24+). Matthew
Gênesis 2
Wiersbe - Obedience to this Word would keep them in the sphere of God's fellowship and approval. All God's commands are good commands and bring good things to those who obey them (Ps. 119:39; Prov. 6:20-23). "And His commands are not burdensome" (1 John 5:3). (See context in The Wiersbe Bible Commentary) Matthew
Gênesis 2
Wiersbe - Since they had never experienced evil, Adam and Eve were like innocent children (Deut. 1:39; Isa. 7:15-16). When they disobeyed God, they became like Him in being able to discriminate between good and evil; but they became unlike Him in that they lost their sinlessness and eventually died. But why did God have to test Adam and Eve? There may be many answers to that question, but one thing is sure: God wanted humans to love and obey Him freely and willingly and not because they were programmed like robots who had to obey. In one sense, God "took a risk" when He made Adam and Eve in His own image and gave them the privilege of choice; but this is the way He ordained for them to learn about freedom and obedience. It's one of the basic truths of life that obedience brings blessing and disobedience brings judgment. (See context in The Wiersbe Bible Commentary) NET NOTE- Or “in the very day, as soon as.” If one understands the expression to have this more precise meaning, then the following narrative presents a problem, for the man does not die physically as soon as he eats from the tree. In this case one may argue that spiritual death is in view. If physical death is in view here, there are two options to explain the following narrative: (1) The following phrase “You will surely die” concerns mortality which ultimately results in death (a natural paraphrase would be, “You will become mortal”), or (2) God mercifully gave man a reprieve, allowing him to live longer than he deserved....SURELY DIE - Heb “dying you will die.” The imperfect verb form here has the nuance of the specific future because it is introduced with the temporal clause, “when you eat … you will die.” That certainty is underscored with the infinitive absolute, “you will surely die.”....The Hebrew text (“dying you will die”) does not refer to two aspects of death (“dying spiritually, you will then die physically”). The construction simply emphasizes the certainty of death, however it is defined. Death is essentially separation. To die physically means separation from the land of the living, but not extinction. To die spiritually means to be separated from God. Both occur with sin, although the physical alienation is more gradual than instant, and the spiritual is immediate, although the effects of it continue the separation. CAN EVOLUTION EXPLAIN ETHICS? Mark Linville Charles Darwin thought that the universal human tendency to think in terms of moral rightness and wrongness, and our wide agreement on the immorality of acts like rape or genocide, could be explained by the evolution of the human species. Given the circumstances of survival and reproduction, he theorized, some behaviors are more adaptive than others; thus, any instinct that prompts adaptive behaviors is favored by natural selection. The flight instinct removes prey from the clutches of predators, increasing the chances that the pursued creature will live to reproduce. Social animals such as bees, wolves, and people come equipped with sets of social instincts that prompt cooperation with the hive, pack, or tribe. The success of the more cooperative group, whether it is competing with other tribes, hunting, or gathering, tends to promote the survival and reproduction of its individual members. To the extent that such cooperative and adaptive behavior is genetically fostered, he believed, it tends to be passed on to offspring: natural selection at work on the human psyche. True, bees seem programmed automatically to act from purely social instincts, but any social animal also endowed with intellectual powers—like those at work in people—would be capable of reflection upon those instincts, too. The female wolf instinctually cares for her cubs without moral reflection because of the evolutionary advantage of such instinctual behavior. The human mother, however, is driven by a similar instinctual impulse that is bolstered by the sense that it would be wrong of her to abandon or neglect her babies: she has a conscience. For Darwin, what is called “conscience” is merely the product of social instincts plus a capacity for rational reflection. In his estimation, then, human morality is the product of natural selection shaping and honing human psychology—which is also influenced by individuals interacting with the circumstances of human culture over the eons. All of this may explain why people have come to believe that there are such things as right and wrong acts, but it utterly fails to explain how there could actually be an objective difference between right and wrong. Indeed, the explanation undermines those beliefs, because given the supposed circumstances of evolution, humans would have believed them whether true or false. Darwin’s theory requires that our moral sense—and its dictates—evolved simply because the behavior it encourages is adaptive. Whether the resulting moral beliefs are also true is beside the point. This has led some proponents of Darwin’s account to observe that ethics is “an illusion fobbed off on us by our genes to get us to cooperate.” What is missing from Darwin’s theory is any reason for thinking that, in addition to being adaptive, human moral faculties aim at producing moral beliefs that are true as they would be were they designed for the purpose of establishing moral truth within the fiber of society. Without that background assumption, which is the sort afforded us in the Genesis creation account, we should all be moral nihilists. In short, when combined with an atheistic outlook, Darwin’s theory does not explain ethics; it explains it away. (See context in CSB Apologetics Study Bible) QUESTION - Why did God put the tree of knowledge of good and evil in the Garden of Eden? ANSWER - God put the tree of knowledge of good and evil in the Garden of Eden to give Adam and Eve a choice to obey Him or disobey Him. Adam and Eve were free to do anything they wanted, except eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Genesis 2:16-17, “And the LORD God commanded the man, ‘You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 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.’” If God had not given Adam and Eve the choice, they would have essentially been robots, simply doing what they were programmed to do. God created Adam and Eve to be “free” beings, able to make decisions, able to choose between good and evil. In order for Adam and Eve to truly be free, they had to have a choice. There was nothing essentially evil about the tree or the fruit of the tree. It is unlikely that the fruit, in and of itself, gave Adam and Eve any further knowledge. That is, the physical fruit may have contained some vitamin C and some beneficial fiber, but it was not spiritually nutritious. However, the act of disobedience was spiritually deleterious. That sin opened Adam’s and Eve’s eyes to evil. For the first time, they knew what it was to be evil, to feel shame, and to want to hide from God. Their sin of disobeying God brought corruption into their lives and into the world. Eating the fruit, as an act of disobedience against God, was what gave Adam and Eve the knowledge of evil—and the knowledge of their nakedness (Genesis 3:6–7). God did not want Adam and Eve to sin. God knew ahead of time what the results of sin would be. God knew that Adam and Eve would sin and would thereby bring evil, suffering, and death into the world. Why, then, did God allow Satan to tempt Adam and Eve? God allowed Satan to tempt Adam and Eve to force them to make the choice. Adam and Eve chose, of their own free will, to disobey God and eat the forbidden fruit. The results—evil, sin, suffering, sickness, and death—have plagued the world ever since. Adam and Eve’s decision results in every person being born with a sin nature, a tendency to sin. Adam and Eve’s decision is what ultimately required Jesus Christ to die on the cross and shed His blood on our behalf. Through faith in Christ, we can be free from sin’s consequences, and ultimately free from sin itself. May we echo the words of the Apostle Paul in Romans 7:24-25, “What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? Thanks be to God—through Jesus Christ our Lord!” GotQuestions.org QUESTION - Did Adam and Eve know what death was when God commanded them not to eat from the tree of knowledge? ANSWER - When God created the first man and first woman, He placed them in the Garden of Eden where they lived in a state of innocence, without sin. God freely gave them the fruit of every tree in the garden but one: the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Do not partake of that tree, God said, “for when you eat from it you will certainly die” (Genesis 2:17). Some people reason that Adam and Eve’s punishment for disobedience was overly harsh, because, before they ate the forbidden fruit, they could not have had knowledge of good and evil; not having that knowledge, they couldn’t really tell right from wrong. In response, we would first point out that the Bible never says that Adam and Eve did not know right from wrong. In fact, Genesis 3:2–3 is clear that they did understand the difference between right and wrong; Eve knew God had instructed her and Adam not to eat the forbidden fruit (cf. Genesis 2:16–17). To take the name of the forbidden tree, “the tree of the knowledge of good and evil” (Genesis 2:9), to mean that Adam and Eve had no understanding of good and evil is a misunderstanding. In the Bible, the word knowledge often means “experience.” It is true that, prior to the fall, Adam and Eve had no experience of evil. But they understood the concept of good and evil perfectly well, or they would not have known what obedience to God’s instructions meant. The point is that Adam and Eve had not yet sinned until they ate from the tree, and their sin was the gateway to firsthand, experiential knowledge of the difference between good and evil. Adam and Eve knew the difference between right and wrong, because they were created with that understanding; it’s just that they hadn’t experienced it personally until they sinned. Their lack of experience doesn’t excuse their actions. God gave a simple, straightforward instruction to Adam and Eve. They both had the understanding and the ability to obey, but they disobeyed anyway. Second, it could be that God gave Adam and Eve an explanation of why they weren’t supposed to eat from the tree, other than “you will certainly die.” There is no such explanation recorded in Scripture, but we should not assume that one was never given. Of course, even if God never fully explained why eating from the tree was wrong, Adam and Eve could still know that it was wrong. The extra information was not necessary to make a moral decision. We can know with great confidence that murder is wrong, without necessarily being able to explain why it is wrong. And even if we can’t explain why murder is wrong, we should still be held accountable for an act of murder we commit. Adam and Eve’s not knowing the exact reason they were forbidden to eat the tree’s fruit has nothing to do with the fact that they clearly knew and understood eating it was wrong. Third, death exists in the world today because of sin, not because of Adam and Eve’s lack of knowledge (cf. Romans 5:12). In other words, God did not punish Adam and Eve with death for simply “not knowing” something but for acting against what they already knew to be right. Death was a consequence of their disobedience, not their ignorance. Likewise, Adam and Eve did not need to have seen death or experienced death firsthand to know that disobeying God’s command was wrong. It’s easy for us today to look at the ugly, horrific nature of sin and death and conclude that such a perspective might have made Adam and Eve more reluctant to disobey God than they were. But that’s speculation. Whether or not such firsthand knowledge might have affected their choice, there is no denying that Adam and Eve directly, intentionally disobeyed a command of God. And, as we read in Romans 6:23, “the wages of sin is death.” Another observation. When people ask how God could punish Adam and Eve (and the rest of us) so harshly for doing something they could hardly have been expected to know was wrong, they seem to assume that Adam and Eve had no more moral intelligence than the average toddler. Thinking of Adam and Eve as harmless, totally naive children certainly makes God’s response seem overblown, like a father who has lost all patience with his kids. Wouldn’t a reasonable God have at least given His beloved children a second chance? Or at least rid the garden of the tree before they could encounter that danger? Why sentence your own creation to death for one “innocent mistake”? Thinking about the sin of Adam and Eve as a naive mistake is off base. Innocence is not the same as ignorance. Consider what we actually know about the first couple: they were created in a perfect world and given dominion and freedom over the entire earth; they knew and spoke face to face with their perfect, loving, and good Creator God (Genesis 2:22). It is difficult to imagine the goodness and benevolence of God being any more fully on display for Adam and Eve to behold. Yet, in spite of all of their blessings—in spite of God’s creating them and providing for them and loving them—Adam and Eve listened instead to the serpent, who directly contradicted what God had told them (Genesis 3:4–5). The serpent had done nothing to provide for Adam and Eve and nothing to love or care for them, and his words only contradicted the goodness of God they had experienced up to that point. Adam and Eve had no reason at all, as far as we know, to trust what the serpent said. Yet trust him they did, even though it meant rejecting what they did know about God’s provision and loving care. Indeed, their reason for rejecting God’s command was not an innocent mistake: Genesis 3:5–6 demonstrates that Adam and Eve saw the fruit as an opportunity to become “like God.” This is truly shocking. Adam and Eve—grown adults, rulers of the earth, perfectly capable of understanding what it meant to obey or disobey the loving God who had given them everything they could possibly need—rejected that same God, in favor of the false promise of a serpent, who had given them not a single reason to trust him over God. This is not the mistake of a child in ignorance; this is the willful, intentional rebellion of the created against the Creator, a mutiny against the rightful Ruler of the universe. Adam and Eve were not artless babes misled into a regrettable choice; they were God’s own intelligent, morally accountable creation committing treason against Him. They knew what they were doing was wrong, and they did it anyway. It is hard to imagine an offense against a holy God that would be more deserving of death than this. In the end, we must come to think of Adam and Eve the way Scripture portrays them: as responsible, comprehending adults who rebelled against the authority of their Maker. They knew and understood that they were disobeying God, yet they ate of the fruit that was “a delight to the eyes, and . . . desirable to make one wise” (Genesis 3:6, NASB). This was not an accident or a mistake; it was a choice. And that is the reason that God was justified in sentencing them—and us—to death. What is even more amazing is that, in spite of the defiance displayed by His own creation, God responded to their disobedience with a promise to redeem them. Genesis 3:15 contains the first expression of the gospel in the Bible, and it comes during the sentencing of the guilty in the garden: to the serpent, God said, “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.” The good news of the gospel is that God has made a way for us to be restored through the work of Christ on the cross. Despite the tremendous evil displayed by Adam and Eve—and that which all of us have displayed ever since—God has reached out to us in love. That is very good news indeed. GotQuestions.org QUESTION - What is the location of the Garden of Eden? ANSWER - The only thing the Bible tells us concerning the Garden of Eden’s location is found in Genesis 2:10-14, “A river watering the garden flowed from Eden; from there it was separated into four headwaters. The name of the first is the Pishon; it winds through the entire land of Havilah, where there is gold…The name of the second river is the Gihon; it winds through the entire land of Cush. The name of the third river is the Tigris; it runs along the east side of Asshur. And the fourth river is the Euphrates.” The exact identities of the Pishon and Gihon Rivers are unknown, but the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers are well known. If the Tigris and Euphrates mentioned are the same rivers by those names today, that would put the Garden of Eden somewhere in the Middle East, likely in Iraq. However, even a small local flood can change the course of a river, and the Flood of Noah’s day was more than a localized flood. The Deluge completely changed the topography of the earth. Because of this, the original location of the Tigris and Euphrates is uncertain. It could be that the modern rivers called the Tigris and Euphrates are simply named after those associated with Eden, in the same way that Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, is named after the town in Judea. If the Middle East region is where the Garden of Eden was, and if crude oil is, as most scientists believe, primarily decayed vegetation and animal matter, then it stands to reason that the Middle East is where we would find the greatest oil deposits. Many people speculate that the vast stores of oil in the Middle East are the result of the decomposition of Earth’s lushest organic materials in the Garden of Eden. While the oil in the Middle East could be the dregs of Eden, but those who promote such ideas are simply theorizing. People have searched for the Garden of Eden for centuries to no avail. There are various spots claimed as the original location of Eden, but no one can be sure. What happened to the Garden of Eden? The Bible does not specifically say. It is likely that the Garden was completely destroyed in the Flood. GotQuestions.org Walter Kaiser - Why Didn’t Adam and Eve Die at Once? Why did not Adam and Eve drop dead the same day that they disobeyed God and ate of the forbidden fruit? Adam lived to be 930 years old according to Genesis 5:5. Was Satan’s word in Genesis 3:4—“You will not surely die”—a more accurate assessment of the real state of affairs than what God had said in Genesis 2:17—“When you eat of it you will surely die”? Is Satan more scrupulously honest than God himself? This hard saying calls for an examination of at least three different concepts embraced within the quotation from Genesis 2:17—(1) the tree of the knowledge of good and evil; (2) the meaning of the phrase “when [more literally, in the day] you eat of it”; and (3) the meaning of the phrase “you will surely die.” First the tree. There are no grounds whatsoever for believing that the tree was a magical symbol or that it contained a secret enzyme which would automatically induce a wide body of knowledge that embraced the whole gamut of good and evil. Instead it is safer to assume that the tree functioned much as the New Testament ordinance or sacrament of the Lord’s Supper or Eucharist does. The tree was a symbol embodied in an actual tree, just as the bread and wine of the Eucharist are symbols embodied in real bread and wine. In a similar way the tree of life was also a real tree, yet it symbolized the fact that life was a special gift given to individuals from God. That is also why participants are warned not to partake of the elements of the Lord’s Supper in an unworthy manner, for when the elements are eaten and drunk in a flippant manner and when a person has not truly confessed Christ as Savior, the unworthy partaking of these rather ordinary elements (ordinary at least from all outward appearances) will cause illness and, in some cases, death (1 Cor 11:30). In the same way, the tree was a symbol to test the first human couple’s actions. Would they obey God or would they assert their own wills in opposition to God’s clear command? To argue that the tree had magical power to confer knowledge of good and evil would be to miss the divine point: the tree was a test of the couple’s intention to obey God. That men and women can attain the knowledge of good and evil is not in itself either undesirable or blameworthy; knowledge per se was not what was being forbidden here. The tree only represents the possibility that creatures made in God’s image could refuse to obey him. The tree served as the concrete expression of that rebellion. It is just as naive to insist that the phrase “in the day” means that on that very day death would occur. A little knowledge of the Hebrew idiom will relieve the tension here as well. For example, in 1 Kings 2:37 King Solomon warned a seditious Shimei, “The day you leave [Jerusalem] and cross the Kidron Valley [which is immediately outside the city walls on the east side of the city], you can be sure you will die.” Neither the 1 Kings nor the Genesis text implies immediacy of action on that very same day; instead they point to the certainty of the predicted consequence that would be set in motion by the act initiated on that day. Alternate wordings include at the time when, at that time, now when and the day [when] (see Gen 5:1; Ex 6:28; 10:28; 32:34). The final concern is over the definition of death. Scripture refers to three different types of death. Often only the context helps distinguish which is intended. There are physical death, spiritual death (the kind that forces guilty persons to hide from the presence of God, as this couple did when it was time for fellowship in the Garden, Gen 3:8) and the “second death” (to which Rev 20:14 refers, when a person is finally, totally and eternally separated from God without hope of reversal, after a lifetime of rejecting God). In this case, spiritual death was the immediate outcome of disobedience demonstrated by a deliberate snatching of real fruit from a real tree in a real garden. Death ensued immediately: They became “dead in … transgressions and sins” (Eph 2:1). But such separation and isolation from God eventually resulted in physical death as well. This, however, was more a byproduct than a direct result of their sin. Spiritual death was the real killer! See also comment on ROMANS 5:12. (See page 60 in HARD SAYINGS BIBLE) Norman Geisler - When Critics Ask (go to page 28) GENESIS 2:17—Why didn’t Adam die the day he ate the forbidden fruit, as God said he would? PROBLEM: God said to Adam, “in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die” (Gen. 2:17). But Adam lived to be 930 years old after he sinned (Gen. 5:5). SOLUTION: The word “day” (yom) does not always mean a 24-hour day. For “one day (yom) is as a thousand years” (Ps. 90:4; cf. 2 Peter 3:8). Adam did die within a “day” in this sense. Further, Adam began to die physically the very moment he sinned (Rom. 5:12), and he also died spiritually the exact instant he sinned (Eph. 2:1). So Adam died in several ways, any one of which would fulfill the pronouncement of God (in Gen. 2:17). Did You Say No? Of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat. — Genesis 2:17 Today's Scripture: Genesis 3:1-7 “Okay, here are the rules,” Marty said. “You can do whatever you want, wherever you want, whenever you want until someone tells you no.” Those were our instructions on our first visit to our friends’ lake house. Marty and his wife, Lynn, who enjoy entertaining, give their guests lots of freedom to enjoy themselves. When we noticed the sailboat next to the paddleboat next to the pontoon boat, we knew we were in for a fun afternoon. Marty told us no only once—when he saw that we were about to feed the swans that swam up next to us. He knew that if the birds were fed once, they would become aggressive if they didn’t get fed the next time. Adam and Eve lived in the most beautiful locale, and they too had lots of freedom. However, when God said no, they resisted (Gen. 3). He told them not to eat from a certain tree, but they thought they knew better. I may not always understand The way that You may lead, But, Lord, in faith I’ll clasp Your hand And trust You for each need. —Dean God may deny our request, but He will never disappoint our trust. Related Resource: Genesis 2:17—“You Shall Surely Die” - Answersingenesis.org Genesis 2:18 Then the LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him." BGT καὶ εἶπεν κύριος ὁ θεός οὐ καλὸν εἶναι τὸν ἄνθρωπον μόνον ποιήσωμεν αὐτῷ βοηθὸν κατ᾽ αὐτόν KJV And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. NET The LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a companion for him who corresponds to him." BBE And the Lord God said, It is not good for the man to be by himself: I will make one like himself as a help to him CSB Then the LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper as his complement." ERV And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. ESV Then the LORD God said, "It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him." GWN Then the LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper who is right for him." NKJ And the LORD God said, "It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him." NAB The LORD God said: "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a suitable partner for him." NIV The LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him." NJB Yahweh God said, 'It is not right that the man should be alone. I shall make him a helper.' NLT Then the LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper who is just right for him." NRS Then the LORD God said, "It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper as his partner." YLT And Jehovah God saith, 'Not good for the man to be alone, I do make to him an helper -- as his counterpart.' LXE And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone, let us make for him a help suitable to him. ASV And Jehovah God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a help meet for him. DBY And Jehovah Elohim said, It is not good that Man should be alone; I will make him a helpmate, his like. BHT wayyöº´mer yhwh(´ädönäy) ´élöhîm lö´-†ôb héyôt hä|´ädäm lübaDDô ´e|`éSeh-llô `ëºzer KünegDô NAS Then the LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him." NIRV The LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper who is just right for him." RSV Then the LORD God said, "It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him." RWB And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. WEB And the LORD God said, {It is} not good that the man should be alone: I will make him a help meet for him. good: Ge 1:31 3:12 Ru 3:1 Pr 18:22 Ec 4:9-12 1Co 7:36 I will: Ge 3:12 1Co 11:7-12 1Ti 2:11-13 1Pe 3:7 Genesis 2 Resources - Multiple sermons and commentaries Related Passages: Genesis 1:31 God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day. MEN NEED A HELPER Then the LORD God said, "It is not good for the man (adam) to be alone; I will make him a helper ('ezer; LXX = boethos) suitable for him - NLT = "a helper who is just right for him." Not good is at the beginning of the Lord's declaration for emphasis. THOUGHT - While we men may bristle at it, the truth is Eve was the solution for Adam’s deficiency. Your (my) wife is the solution God provided for your (my) deficiency! Get over it! We fallen men chafe at this truth, but this is God's Word and He says that without our wife it is not good! This is another reason to assiduously avoid divorce to the one with whom you are one flesh, "for better or worse!" NET NOTE - Heb “The being of man by himself is not good.” The meaning of “good” must be defined contextually. Within the context of creation, in which God instructs humankind to be fruitful and multiply, the man alone cannot comply. Being alone prevents the man from fulfilling the design of creation and therefore is not good. HELPER - Traditionally “helper.” The English word “helper,” because it can connote so many different ideas, does not accurately convey the connotation of the Hebrew word עֵזֶר (’ezer). Usage of the Hebrew term does not suggest a subordinate role, a connotation which English “helper” can have. In the Bible God is frequently described as the “helper,” the one who does for us what we cannot do for ourselves, the one who meets our needs. In this context the word seems to express the idea of an “indispensable companion.” The woman would supply what the man was lacking in the design of creation and logically it would follow that the man would supply what she was lacking, although that is not stated here. See further M. L. Rosenzweig, “A Helper Equal to Him,” Jud 139 (1986): 277–80. SUITABLE FOR - The Hebrew expression כְּנֶגְדּוֹ (kénegdo) literally means “according to the opposite of him.” Translations such as “suitable [for]” (NASB, NIV), “matching,” “corresponding to” all capture the idea. (Translations that render the phrase simply “partner” [cf. NEB, NRSV], while not totally inaccurate, do not reflect the nuance of correspondence and/or suitability.) The man’s form and nature are matched by the woman’s as she reflects him and complements him. Together they correspond. In short, this prepositional phrase indicates that she has everything that God had invested in him. QUESTION - How was the woman a helper suitable for the man (Genesis 2:18)? ANSWER - In Genesis 2:18, we read of the one thing that was not declared “good” in all of God’s creation: “Then the LORD God said, ‘It is not good that the man should be alone.’” The same verse includes God’s solution: “I will make him a helper fit for him.” Eve was the solution to Adam’s deficiency. Two Hebrew terms in this verse provide important information to better understand the creation of Eve as the first woman. The word translated “helper” is the Hebrew term ‘ezer. This word is even used of God, sometimes, noting that He is our Helper (Psalm 115:9-11). We would certainly not view God, as a Helper, as subservient to humans, nor should we understand the role of “helper” in Genesis 2:18 as a position of subservience. The concept of an “ideal partner” seems to convey the thought best. The second important Hebrew word in this verse, translated “fit” is kenegdow. It literally means “according to the opposite of him.” In other words, the focus is on an appropriate match. Eve was not created above or below Adam; she was complementary. The animals Adam had named each had an appropriate companion (Genesis 2:20), and Adam was given a fitting companion as well. Eve was “just right” for him. Further, God’s statement that it was not good for man to be alone implies that Adam was lonely and incomplete by himself. He had been created for relationship, and it is impossible to have relationship alone. With the creation of Eve, Adam experienced the joy of love for another person. The Bible is unique in its depiction of women’s valued status as a complementary companion. No other ancient text from the Middle East offers commentary on the creation of women. It is in the Bible that we learn of the important role women have had since the beginning of human existence. Both man and woman were made in God’s image, according to Genesis 1:27, “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.” The apostle Paul refers to Genesis when he says, “A man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh” (Ephesians 5:31). Husband and wife are to live as one, united in love for God and for one another, modeling the love Christ has for His bride, the Church.GotQuestions.org It Is Not Good The Lord God said, “It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.” —Genesis 2:18 Today's Scripture: Genesis 2:15-25 In one prison system in the US, 25,000 of the most dangerous inmates endure solitary confinement in small concrete cells. They have virtually no contact with the outside world. An inmate at Oregon State Penitentiary said that the most difficult part about such isolation is “not being able to see somebody face to face . . . to communicate, to touch, to hug, to feel loved, to feel human.” This man’s words seem to scream, “I’m lonely! This is not the way it’s supposed to be.” The writer of Genesis would have agreed. After God created man, He acknowledged Adam’s loneliness, and said, “It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.” In essence, God was saying that the man needed another person with whom he could be fully human. Although the immediate setting is companionship, in the larger context God is telling us that being fully human means enjoying relationship with other human beings. No matter the cause of loneliness—sin, loss, shame, sickness, depression—God says this is “not good.” He created us to be in close relationship with others (Eccl. 4:9-12) and with Him (Rev. 21:3). Reach out and develop those needed friendships—for your sake and theirs. By: Marvin Williams Friendships can help dispel loneliness. Created for Relationship The Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.” Genesis 2:18 Today's Scripture & Insight: Genesis 2:15–25 There’s a growing “rent-a-family” industry in many countries to meet the needs of lonely people. Some use the service to maintain appearances, so that at a social event they can appear to have a happy family. Some hire actors to impersonate estranged relatives, so that they can feel, if briefly, a familial connection they long for. This trend reflects a basic truth: Humans are created for relationship. In the creation story found in Genesis, God looks at each thing He has made and sees that it’s “very good” (Ge 1:31). But when God considers Adam, He says, “It is not good for the man to be alone” (Ge 2:18). The human needed another human. The Bible doesn’t just tell us about our need for connection. It also tells us where to find relationships: among Jesus’s followers. Jesus, at His death, told His friend John to consider Christ’s mother as his own. They would be family to each other even after Jesus was gone (John 19:26–27). And Paul instructed believers to treat others like parents and siblings (1 Timothy 5:1–2). The psalmist tells us that part of God’s redemptive work in the world is to put “the lonely in families” (Psalm 68:6), and God designed the church as one of the best places to do this. Who are the lonely people in your life who need you to be their family? How have your relationships with fellow believers sustained you through periods of loneliness? God, help me to depend on others and to be a dependable friend as well. The Bedrock For Wedlock They are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate. — Matthew 19:6 Today's Scripture: Genesis 2:18-25 Some people would like to leave open the “lock” in wedlock. The vows “for better or for worse . . . till death us do part” sound too risky. One liberal minister said that marriage as we’ve known it is obsolete. Yet studies show that married people tend to be happier and healthier. A Gallup Poll revealed that 95 percent of Americans consider marriage and family life to be very important to them. God put a padlock on wedlock because man needed the support and fulfillment that is inherent to a lifelong commitment. In Genesis 2:18, the Lord said, “It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.” We must recognize that God is not only the architect of marriage but also the One who holds it together. A marriage should be made up of three people: a wife, a husband, and Jesus Christ. The foundation of a Christian marriage needs to be a commitment to love and honor the Lord. The marriage bond that joins two hearts No power on earth can break If these two hearts will yield to God And of His love partake. —DJD Put Christ first if you want your marriage to last. QUESTION - What does it mean that a wife is supposed to be a helpmeet / help meet? ANSWER - The word helpmeet comes from Genesis 2:18 in the King James Version of the Bible, which says, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.” Meet in this context is an adjective that means “suitable.” What the verse actually says is that God created a “help” for Adam, and this helper was “meet” (suitable, fit, proper) for him. Through the years the phrase help meet morphed into a single word, helpmeet, which is sometimes used as a synonym for helpmate, meaning “spouse” or “companion.” Modern translations render the phrase in Genesis 2:18 as “a helper fit for him” (ESV); “a helper suitable for him” (NIV and NASB); or “a helper comparable to him” (NKJV). It is interesting to note that the only part of God’s creation declared to be “not good” concerns Adam’s solitary state. God stated that it was not good for man to be alone (Genesis 2:18). A man is, by nature, a social creature; God created us to need companionship. And, of course, a man alone cannot propagate. Adam by himself was incomplete. This is why God created Eve as a “help meet”: to complete Adam, to provide society for him, and to enable him to produce children. Eve was exactly what Adam needed—a helper suitable for him. Does this mean that every man must have a wife, a helper to complete him? No. In fact, the apostle Paul said that celibacy is a good thing for the servant of God (1 Corinthians 7:7–9). Does it mean that every woman must be a wife and a completer of a man? No. Not every woman wants to marry or is led to matrimony. However, the Genesis passage sets the standard for most people in most contexts. A wife is the helper suitable for her husband. So what exactly does it mean to be a suitable helper? The key is the word suitable. A suitable wife is compatible with her husband in many respects—physically, mentally, emotionally, and spiritually. This doesn’t mean the man and woman are the same in everything, only that they fit together in harmony. They complement each other. The B-flat key on the piano is not the same as the G, but together they make a harmonious chord. Similarly, a suitable helper for a husband is a wife who is different from him, but well-suited to him, one who completes him in every way and who brings harmony, not discord, to the relationship.GotQuestions.org Made for Each Other It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him. Genesis 2:18 Today's Scripture & Insight: Genesis 2:18–24 “I take care of him. When he’s happy, I’m happy,” says Stella. Merle replies, “I’m happy when she’s around.” Merle and Stella have been married for 79 years. When Merle was recently admitted to a nursing home, he was miserable—so Stella gladly brought him home. He’s 101, and she’s 95. Though she needs a walker to get around, she lovingly does what she can for her husband, such as preparing the food he likes. But she couldn’t do it on her own. Grandchildren and neighbors help with the things Stella can’t manage. Stella and Merle’s life together is an example of Genesis 2, where God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him” (v. 18). None of the creatures God brought before Adam fit that description. Only in Eve, made from the rib of Adam, did Adam find a suitable helper and companion (vv. 19–24). How is it helpful to know that no matter our marital status, as believers in Jesus we’re never alone? How have you seen the body of Christ in action? Dear God, thank You for creating man and woman for each other and for instituting community so that none of us are truly alone. The Power Of A Promise For this reason a man shall . . . be joined to his wife. —Matthew 19:5 Today's Scripture: Genesis 2:18-25 I wear only two pieces of jewelry: a wedding band on my finger and a small Celtic cross on a chain around my neck. The ring represents my vow to be faithful to Carolyn, my wife, as long as I shall live. The cross reminds me that it is not for her sake alone, but for Jesus’ sake that I do so. He has asked me to be faithful to her until death shall separate us. A marriage vow is more than a contract that we can break by paying damages. It is a unique vow that is explicitly intended to be binding until death separates us (Matt. 19:6). The words “for better, for worse; for richer, for poorer; in sickness and in health” take into consideration the probability that it will not be easy to keep our vows. Circumstances may change and so may our spouses. “For better or for worse,” we pledge, Through sickness and through strife; And by the help and grace of God We’ll keep these vows for life. —D. De Haan Love is more than a feeling; it’s a commitment. Walter Kaiser - A Helper for Man? Are women inferior to men, merely designed to be their helpers? Is it consistent with the biblical text to view men as the initiators and women as their assistants? Is this what makes women suitable matches for men? The Creator regarded Adam’s situation as incomplete and deficient while he was living without community or a proper counterpart. The Creator judged Adam’s situation quite negatively: “It is not good.” Ecclesiastes 4:9–12 expresses this same opinion about aloneness. The wise writer Solomon advised: Two are better than one. … If one falls down, his friend can help him up. … Also, if two lie down together, they will keep warm. But how can one keep warm alone? Though one may be overpowered, two can defend themselves. True, in Jeremiah 16:1–9 the prophet Jeremiah is commanded by God to remain alone, but this is meant to be a sign that God’s judgment on the people is so near that it will not be worthwhile to get married. Nevertheless, the full life is a life that finds its fulfillment in community with another person or group of persons. In the Genesis story we find that God created a woman after he had created the man. This would end Adam’s loneliness and the state that God judged to be “not good.” She was to be his “helper”—at least that is how most of the translations have interpreted this word. A sample of the translations reads as follows: “I shall make a helper fit for him” (RSV); “I will make a fitting helper for him” (New Jewish Publication Society); “I will make an aid fit for him” (AB); “I will make him a helpmate” (JB); “I will make a suitable partner for him” (NAB); “I will make him a helper comparable to him” (NKJV). However, the customary translation of the two words ˓ēzer keneḡdô as “helper fitting him” is almost certainly wrong. Recently R. David Freedman has pointed out that the Hebrew word ˓ēzer is a combination of two roots: ˓-z-r, meaning “to rescue, to save,” and ǵ-z-r, meaning “to be strong.” The difference between the two is the first letter in Hebrew. Today that letter is silent in Hebrew, but in ancient times it was a guttural sound formed in the back of the throat. The ǵ was a ghayyin, and it came to use the same Hebrew symbol as the other sound, ˓ayin. But the fact that they were pronounced differently is clear from such place names which preserve the g sound, such as Gaza or Gomorrah. Some Semitic languages distinguished between these two signs and others did not; for example, Ugaritic did make a distinction between the ˓ayin and the ghayyin; Hebrew did not (R. David Freedman, “Woman, a Power Equal to a Man,” Biblical Archaeology Review 9 [1983]: 56–58). It would appear that sometime around 1500 B.C. these two signs began to be represented by one sign in Phoenician. Consequently the two phonemes merged into one grapheme and what had been two different roots merged into one, much as in English the one word fast can refer to a person’s speed, abstinence from food, his or her slyness in a “fast deal” or the adamant way in which someone holds “fast” to positions. The noun ˓ēzer occurs twenty-one times in the Old Testament. In many of the passages it is used in parallelism to words that clearly denote strength or power. Some examples are: There is none like the God of Jeshurun, The Rider of the Heavens in your strength (˓-z-r), and on the clouds in his majesty. (Deut 33:26, my translation) Blessed are you, O Israel! Who is like you, a people saved by the Lord? He is the shield of your strength (˓-z-r) and the sword of your majesty. (Deut 33:29, my translation) The case that begins to build is that we can be sure that ˓ezer means “strength” or “power” whenever it is used in parallelism with words for majesty or other words for power such as ˓oz or ˓uzzo. In fact, the presence of two names for one king, Azariah and Uzziah (both referring to God’s strength), makes it abundantly clear that the root ˓ēzer meaning “strength” was known in Hebrew. Therefore I suggest that we translate Genesis 2:18 as “I will make a power [or strength] corresponding to man.” Freedman even suggests on the basis of later Hebrew that the second word in the Hebrew expression found in this verse should be rendered equal to him. If this is so, then God makes for the man a woman fully his equal and fully his match. In this way, the man’s loneliness will be assuaged. The same line of reasoning occurs in the apostle Paul. He urged in 1 Corinthians 11:10, “For this reason, a woman must have power [or authority] on her head [that is to say, invested in her].” This line of reasoning which stresses full equality is continued in Genesis 2:23, where Adam says of Eve, “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called ‘woman,’ for she was taken out of man.” The idiomatic sense of this phrase “bone of my bones” is a “very close relative,” “one of us” or in effect “our equal.” The woman was never meant to be an assistant or “helpmate” to the man. The word mate slipped into English since it was so close to Old English meet, which means “fit to” or “corresponding to” the man. That all comes from the phrase that I have suggested likely means “equal to.” What God had intended then was to make a “power” or “strength” for the man who would in every way “correspond to him” or even “be his equal.” See also comment on GENESIS 2:20–23; 1 CORINTHIANS 11:7; EPHESIANS 5:22; 1 TIMOTHY 2:11–12. (See page 61 in HARD SAYINGS BIBLE) QUESTION - What is complementarianism? ANSWER - Complementarianism is the teaching that masculinity and femininity are ordained by God and that men and women are created to complement, or complete, each other. Complementarians believe that the gender roles found in the Bible are purposeful and meaningful distinctions that, when applied in the home and church, promote the spiritual health of both men and women. Embracing the divinely ordained roles of men and women furthers the ministry of God’s people and allows men and women to reach their God-given potential. The complementarian view starts with Genesis 1:26–27, which says that God created humanity, male and female, in His own image. Genesis 2:18 contains the further detail that God created Eve specifically to complement Adam: “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.” The two genders are, therefore, part of God’s created order. Any modern-day blurring of the genders or distortion of the roles is a result of the Fall. Complementarianism follows Ephesians 5:21–33 as the model for the home. The husband has the role of headship in the family. He is to nurture his wife and lead his family lovingly, humbly, and sacrificially. The wife has the role of nurturing her children and intentionally, willingly submitting to her husband’s leadership. When both husband and wife are complementing each other in this way, Christ is honored. In fact, the marriage itself becomes what it was designed to be: a living picture of Christ and the church (Eph 5:32). In the church, complementarianism follows 1 Timothy 2:11—3:7 and Titus 2:2–6 as the model. Biblically, the men in the church bear the responsibility to provide spiritual leadership and training. The women are to exercise their spiritual gifts in any way that Scripture allows—the only prohibition is “to teach or to assume authority over a man” (1 Timothy 2:12). When men and women are fulfilling their God-given roles within a church, Christ is honored. In fact, the church itself becomes what it was designed to be: a living picture of Christ’s body (1 Corinthians 12:12–27). The opposing view is egalitarianism, which teaches that, in Christ, there are no gender distinctions anymore. This idea comes from Galatians 3:28. Because all believers are one in Christ, egalitarians say, men’s and women’s roles are interchangeable in church leadership and in the household. Egalitarianism sees gender distinctions as a result of the Fall and Christ’s redemption as removing those distinctions, bringing unity. Complementarianism sees gender distinctions as a result of Creation and Christ’s redemption as a return to those distinctions, avoiding confusion. Paul sides with the complementarians, citing the order of creation as the basis for his teaching: “For Adam was formed first, then Eve” (1 Timothy 2:13). A difference in role does not equate to a difference in quality, importance, or value. Men and women are equally valued in God’s sight and in His plan. Complementarianism seeks to preserve the biblical differences between men’s and women’s roles while valuing the quality and importance of both genders. The result of true complementarianism is honor to Christ and harmony in the church and in the home. GotQuestions.org QUESTION - What is egalitarianism? ANSWER - The broadest meaning of egalitarianism is that all people are inherently equal and ought to be treated as such. When used as a doctrinal term within Christianity, egalitarianism has a narrower meaning, suggesting that God does not intend any distinctions between men and women in matters of spiritual leadership. Biblical Christianity is Western civilization’s basis for the former definition, but Scripture opposes the latter. All people are morally and spiritually equal, with identical value, and ought to be offered the same opportunities. However, in the explicit issue of spiritual authority, God has mandated different roles for the two equal genders, a concept known as complementarianism. Those in favor of doctrinal egalitarianism focus on issues such as women in the pastorate. Their argument is that all Christians are equal in the eyes of Christ, regardless of race or gender (Galatians 3:28); therefore, God intends males and females to occupy the same positions in spiritual roles. It’s true that Scripture declares the inherent moral equality of all people; it also denounces favoritism (James 2:1, 9). While this makes males and females equal in their morality, spiritual value, and humanity (Genesis 1:27), it does not make them identical in every single way. The ultimate example of this concept is the Trinity itself. All three Persons of the Godhead are equal: morally, spiritually, in power, in divinity, etc. And yet there is submission within that equality as each divine Person fulfills a different role. This does not imply one Person of the Trinity is more moral or more important than the others. It simply means each has a part to play. In the same sense, God intended the unique abilities of men and women to be used according to a mutually balanced design. The debate between complementarianism and egalitarianism allows for broad interpretations of where the lines of that design are to be drawn. A biblical, complementarian view does not promote the stereotype that wives are to be homebound, barefoot, pregnant, powerless, and ignored. Nor does it mandate differences between men and women in arenas such as politics or the workplace. Scripture supports every social and economic aspect of egalitarianism, treating men and women as equally capable and valuable persons. Forms of egalitarianism that obliterate all distinctions between the sexes, however, are not biblical. GotQuestions.org QUESTION - Are men and women equal in God’s eyes? ANSWER - Yes, men and women are equal in God’s eyes in that both men and women are created in the image and likeness of God (Genesis 1:27). Men and women are also equally sinners in need of grace and salvation. Redeemed men and women are equally forgiven, equally indwelt by the Holy Spirit, equally invited before the throne of grace, and equally heirs of God (Galatians 3:28). In Genesis 2:18 the Lord says, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.” After God creates the woman from Adam’s rib (Genesis 2:21–22), Adam proclaims, “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called ‘woman,’ for she was taken out of man” (Genesis 2:23). We then read the first description of marriage: “That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh” (Genesis 2:24). Everything about this passage points to the fact that men and women are equal in God’s eyes. The woman was “suitable” for (not inferior to) the man, she was created from him, and she becomes “one flesh” with him in marriage. Nowhere does Scripture imply that women are unequal to men in God’s eyes or that they should have less significance than men. Men and women have different roles in the home and in the church, but different roles do not indicate differing worth. A screwdriver has a different role in the carpenter’s shop than a hammer, but that doesn’t mean one tool is more valuable than the other. The roles of men and women are divinely designed to be complementary. People who believe men and women are not equal in God’s eyes often have a misunderstanding of God’s Word. 1Pe 3:7 says, “Husbands . . . be considerate as you live with your wives, and treat them with respect as the weaker partner and as heirs with you of the gracious gift of life, so that nothing will hinder your prayers.” Some readers latch on to the word weaker and get offended. But what does it mean that the wife is the “weaker partner”? It has nothing to do with her mental or spiritual capabilities. It simply refers to the fact that a woman has a different physical makeup from a man. Men are naturally stronger, and, from the beginning of time, men have been the primary providers and protectors of their families. We find an allusion to this in God’s curse on Adam: “Through painful toil you will eat food from [the ground] all the days of your life” (Genesis 3:17). God’s curse on Eve explains the age-old battle of the sexes: “Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you” (verse 16), or, as the NLT has it, “You will desire to control your husband, but he will rule over you.” The harmonious relationship between the man and woman was broken by sin, and God predicted a new dynamic would emerge. But, even in Eve’s curse, there is no hint of her inferiority or inequality. People who take umbrage with Peter’s mention of a woman’s physical weakness completely miss the rest of 1 Peter 3:7, which clearly says that the husband and wife are spiritually equal. They are “heirs” of the “gift of life” together. A wife should be treated with “respect,” and a husband who fails to honor his wife will find that his prayers are “hindered.” The Amplified Bible renders the verse this way: “You husbands, live with your wives in an understanding way [with great gentleness and tact, and with an intelligent regard for the marriage relationship], as with someone physically weaker, since she is a woman. Show her honor and respect as a fellow heir of the grace of life, so that your prayers will not be hindered or ineffective.” Another passage that some people can get confused about is 1 Timothy 2:11–15, “A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety” (cf. 1 Corinthians 14:34). In the church, women are not to exercise spiritual authority over men; that much is clear. The reasons for God’s directive for the church are also clear: the order of creation and the deception of Eve. Men, not women, are to be pastors; this difference in role, however, has no bearing on a woman’s intrinsic worth before God. A quarterback may call the plays on a football field, but that doesn’t make him any more valuable as a person than a tight end. Those who focus on what women cannot do in 1 Timothy 2 often overlook what men cannot do in the same passage. Men will never experience the blessing of a life forming inside of them. Women are the only ones who can bear children (verse 15). The fact is, men and women have different, God-given roles, and those roles should be celebrated and assumed with thanksgiving. Just because God has given men the spiritual leadership roles in the church doesn’t mean men are superior or that they have a special standing with God. It does mean that men bear a greater responsibility for the condition of the church and the family. Concerning the marriage relationship, 1 Corinthians 11:3 says, “The head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.” Men will answer to God for how they lead their families and the church. Are women and men equal? In some ways, yes, and, in some ways, no. Spiritually, men and women are absolutely equal. Physically, they are obviously not equal. God has chosen distinct roles for both men and women that they may complement each other in a way that most glorifies Himself. Women may be fragile in some regards, but so are many things that are most precious to us. Men and women should work together, each fulfilling their respective, distinct roles, for the common goal of glorifying God. GotQuestions.org R C
Gênesis 2
Wiersbe - The woman was by no means a "lesser creature." The same God who made Adam also made Eve and created her in His own image (1:27). Both Adam and Eve exercised dominion over Creation (v. 29). Adam was made from the dust, but Eve was made from Adam's side, bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh (2:23). The plain fact is that Adam needed Eve. Not a single animal God had created could do for Adam what Eve could do. She was a helper "meet [suitable] for him." When God paraded the animals before Adam for him to name them, they doubtless came before him in pairs, each with its mate; and perhaps Adam wondered, "Why don't I have a mate?" Though Eve was made to be a "suitable [face-to-face] helper" for Adam, she wasn't made to be a slave. (See context in The Wiersbe Bible Commentary) Matthew
Gênesis 2
Wiersbe - God had at least four purposes in mind when He performed the first marriage in the Garden of Eden. First, He wanted suitable companionship for Adam, so He gave him a wife. He gave Adam a person and not an animal, someone who was his equal and therefore could understand him and help him. Martin Luther called marriage "a school for character," and it is. As two people live together in holy matrimony, the experience either brings out the best in them or the worst in them. It's an opportunity to exercise faith, hope, and love and to mature in sacrifice and service to one another for God's glory. Second, marriage provides the God-given right to enjoy sex and have children. The Lord commanded them to "be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth" (Gen. 1:28). This doesn't imply that sexual love is only for procreation, because many people marry who are beyond the time of bearing children; but the bearing of children is an important part of the marriage union (1 Tim. 5:14). A third purpose for marriage is to encourage self-control (1 Cor. 7:1-7). "It is better to marry than to burn with passion" (v. 9, nkjv). A marriage that's built only on sexual passion isn't likely to be strong or mature. Sexual love ought to be enriching and not just exciting, and marriage partners need to respect one another and not just use one another. Throughout Scripture, sexual union outside of marriage is condemned and shown to be destructive, and so are the perversions of the sexual union (Rom. 1:24-27). No matter what the judges or the marriage counselors say, "God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral" (Heb. 13:4, niv). Finally, marriage is an illustration of the loving and intimate relationship between Christ and His church (Eph. 5:22-33). Paul called this "a great mystery," that is, a profound spiritual truth that was once hidden but is now revealed by the Spirit. Jesus Christ is the Last Adam (1 Cor. 15:45) and therefore a type of the first Adam.Adam was put to sleep and his side opened that he might have a wife, but Jesus died on a cross and His blood shed that He might have a bride, the church (John 19:33-37). Christ loves the church, cares for it, and seeks to cleanse it and make it more beautiful for His glory. One day Christ will claim His bride and present her in purity and glory in heaven (Jude 24; Rev. 19:1-9). (See context in The Wiersbe Bible Commentary) NET NOTE on now - The Hebrew term הַפַּעַם (happa’am) means “the [this] time, this place,” or “now, finally, at last.” The expression conveys the futility of the man while naming the animals and finding no one who corresponded to him. NET NOTE on called woman - The Hebrew text is very precise, stating: “of this one it will be said, ‘woman’.” The text is not necessarily saying that the man named his wife—that comes after the fall (Gen 3:20). Some argue that naming implies the man’s authority or ownership over the woman here. Naming can indicate ownership or authority if one is calling someone or something by one’s name and/or calling a name over someone or something (see 2 Sam 12:28; 2 Chr 7:14; Isa 4:1; Jer 7:14; 15:16), especially if one is conquering and renaming a site. But the idiomatic construction used here (the Niphal of קָרָא, qara’, with preposition lamed [לְ, lé]) does not suggest such an idea. In each case where it is used, the one naming discerns something about the object being named and gives it an appropriate name (See 1 Sam 9:9; 2 Sam 18:18; Prov 16:21; Isa 1:26; 32:5; 35:8; 62:4, 12; Jer 19:6). Adam is not so much naming the woman as he is discerning her close relationship to him and referring to her accordingly. He may simply be anticipating that she will be given an appropriate name based on the discernible similarity. NET NOTE on bone of my bones - This poetic section expresses the correspondence between the man and the woman. She is bone of his bones, flesh of his flesh. Note the wordplay (paronomasia ~ pun) between “woman” (אִשָּׁה, ’ishah) and “man” (אִישׁ, ’ish). On the surface it appears that the word for woman is the feminine form of the word for man. But the two words are not etymologically related. The sound and the sense give that impression, however, and make for a more effective wordplay. Woman (0802)(ishshah) means woman, wife, female, betrothed one, bride. Ishshah is one who is a female human being regardless of her age or virginity. Thomas E Mccomiskey - The Bible holds woman in the highest regard and sets forth "graciousness" (Proverbs 11:16) and "worth" (Ruth 3:11) as womanly ideals. However, beauty without discretion is condemned (Proverbs 11:22). Women held positions of prestige in the OT. The wise woman of Tekoa, Deborah, and Esther are only a few of the many women of influence in OT history. There are, however, warnings against the adulterous woman and the harlot. Congress with them will lead to certain punishment (Proverbs 6:24-29) and even spiritual death (Proverbs 2:16-19). The word ʾishshâ occurs in a number of set expressions, e.g. ’ishshâ nebî’â, a prophetess, and ʾishshâ zônâ, a harlot. Metaphorically, a noble woman represents wisdom, but a foolish woman (Proverbs 9:13) represents that which is opposed to wisdom. The word is frequently used in the sense of "wife." The good wife is highly honored in the OT. He who finds one finds a source of blessing (Proverbs 18:22) and honor (Proverbs 12:4). A fruitful wife is a sign of blessing (Psalm 128:3). Her honored position is evident in the fact that she is "from the Lord" (Proverbs 19:14). The classic picture of the ideal wife is set forth in Proverbs 31:10-31. A quarrelsome wife, however, may be a source of contention (Proverbs 19:13; Proverbs 21:9, 19; Proverbs 25:24; Proverbs 27:15). The legal role of the wife is clearly defined in the OT. Adultery is punishable by death for both parties (Deut. 22:22). A woman suspected of adultery could be made to take an oath of innocence and subjected to a kind of lie detector test by her husband in the sacred precincts to determine her guilt or innocence (Numbers 5:11-31). Hebrew servants could have wives (Exodus 21:3). If a servant's master gave him a wife, the servant stood in danger of being separated from his wife when his period of service ended (Exodus 21:4-5). The newly married wife was not to be separated from her husband (Deut. 24:5) and the widow was provided for in the Levirate system (Deut. 25:5). The role of the wife is used as a metaphor in a number of important passages. Adultery (Ezekiel 16:32) and divorce (Jeremiah 3:1) figure strikingly in the prophetic message of denunciation. Israel was seen as the wife of the Lord, a figure expressive of the deepest love. Yet they spurned God, as a wayward wife spurns her husband. In Malachi 2:14 the initiation of the marriage relationship between the Lord and his people is the Mosaic covenant. (TWOT) Gilbrant - This is the most common word for "woman" and/or "wife" in the OT. It denotes woman as the physical counterpart of man (Gen. 2:22-24). It is also used in the sense of a wife, to whom the man is to be completely committed (Gen. 2:24, 25). The word also denotes a betrothed, or engaged, woman (Deut. 20:7; 28:30). While worth (Ruth 3:11) and graciousness (Prov. 11:16) are set forth as womanly ideals, a beautiful woman without discretion is condemned (Prov. 11:22). The Bible also commends wise women (2 Sam. 14:2; 20:16), and condemns foolish women (Prov. 9:13). In fact, the female gender is used metaphorically to personify wisdom in several OT passages, especially in Proverbs. The role of the wife is used as a metaphor in several other OT passages to denote adultery (Ezek. 16:32), and divorce (Jer. 3:1). Israel's unfaithfulness to the Lord led the prophets to use these metaphors in denouncing the apostasy of the nation. God told Hosea to take a wife of harlotry as a representation of his relationship to unfaithful Israel (Hos. 1:2). While the term, "wife of harlotry," could refer to either idolatry or prostitution, an overview of the sexual practices connected with idolatry show that it is entirely possible that it refers to both in this passage. Yet, a good wife is viewed as a source of honor and blessing (Prov. 12:4; 18:22), and a fruitful wife is a sign of blessing (Ps. 128:3). Proverbs 31:10-31 gives the picture of the ideal wife. Although women would do well to model themselves after this picture, they should not become discouraged when they do not measure up to it. Instead, they should keep pressing toward the mark for the prize (Phil. 3:14). After all, none of us measure up to Jesus Christ, who is the ultimate standard by which we will all be judged (Eph. 4:11-16). ʾIshshāh is used in apposition with other nouns to denote "female children" (Num. 31:18), "nursing women" (Exo. 2:7), "a harlot" (Josh. 2:1; 6:22; Judg. 11:1), "an adultress" (Prov. 30:20), "foreign women" (1 Ki. 1, 8; Ezra 10:2), "a widow" (1 Ki. 11:26), "a prophetess" (Judg. 4:4), and "a concubine" (Judg. 19:1, 27). It occurs with "house" to denote a "house of wives," or "a harem" (Est. 2:3). The phrase born of a woman shows the frailty and mortality of the human race (Job 14:1; 15:14; 25:4). Other meanings include: a synonym for stepmother (Lev. 18:8, 11; 20:11); a female animal (Gen. 7:2); each woman (Exo. 11:2; Ruth 1:8, 9); and each female of the birds of prey (Isa. 34:15). ʾIshshāh is also used of heartless women (Amos 4:3), who are referred to as fat cows (Amos 4:1; Israel as figurative sheep who devour each other after God has given them over to their own ways (Zech. 11:9); weak men (Jer. 50:37; 31:30); inanimate things in the description of the tabernacle (Exo. 26:3, 5, 6, 17). (Complete Biblical Library) Ishshah -674v - adulteress*(2), any woman(1), childbearing*(1), each(3), each one(1), each woman(1), every(1), everyone(1), female(3), girls*(1), harem*(5), harlot's*(2), harlot*(3), marriage(9), married(3), married*(6), marry*(3), none*(1), one(8), widow(7), wife(274), wife and his wives(2), wife and the wives(1), wife or a woman(1), wife's(8), wives(100), woman(203), woman of the wives(1), woman's(6), women(104), women as wives(1). Gen. 2:22; Gen. 2:23; Gen. 2:24; Gen. 2:25; Gen. 3:1; Gen. 3:2; Gen. 3:4; Gen. 3:6; Gen. 3:8; Gen. 3:12; Gen. 3:13; Gen. 3:15; Gen. 3:16; Gen. 3:17; Gen. 3:20; Gen. 3:21; Gen. 4:1; Gen. 4:17; Gen. 4:19; Gen. 4:23; Gen. 4:25; Gen. 6:2; Gen. 6:18; Gen. 7:2; Gen. 7:7; Gen. 7:13; Gen. 8:16; Gen. 8:18; Gen. 11:29; Gen. 11:31; Gen. 12:5; Gen. 12:11; Gen. 12:12; Gen. 12:14; Gen. 12:15; Gen. 12:17; Gen. 12:18; Gen. 12:19; Gen. 12:20; Gen. 13:1; Gen. 14:16; Gen. 16:1; Gen. 16:3; Gen. 17:15; Gen. 17:19; Gen. 18:9; Gen. 18:10; Gen. 18:11; Gen. 19:15; Gen. 19:16; Gen. 19:26; Gen. 20:2; Gen. 20:3; Gen. 20:7; Gen. 20:11; Gen. 20:12; Gen. 20:14; Gen. 20:17; Gen. 20:18; Gen. 21:21; Gen. 23:19; Gen. 24:3; Gen. 24:4; Gen. 24:5; Gen. 24:7; Gen. 24:8; Gen. 24:15; Gen. 24:36; Gen. 24:37; Gen. 24:38; Gen. 24:39; Gen. 24:40; Gen. 24:44; Gen. 24:51; Gen. 24:67; Gen. 25:1; Gen. 25:10; Gen. 25:20; Gen. 25:21; Gen. 26:7; Gen. 26:8; Gen. 26:9; Gen. 26:10; Gen. 26:11; Gen. 26:34; Gen. 27:46; Gen. 28:1; Gen. 28:2; Gen. 28:6; Gen. 28:9; Gen. 29:21; Gen. 29:28; Gen. 30:4; Gen. 30:9; Gen. 30:26; Gen. 31:17; Gen. 31:35; Gen. 31:50; Gen. 32:22; Gen. 33:5; Gen. 34:4; Gen. 34:8; Gen. 34:12; Gen. 34:21; Gen. 34:29; Gen. 36:2; Gen. 36:6; Gen. 36:10; Gen. 36:12; Gen. 36:13; Gen. 36:14; Gen. 36:17; Gen. 36:18; Gen. 36:39; Gen. 37:2; Gen. 38:6; Gen. 38:8; Gen. 38:9; Gen. 38:12; Gen. 38:14; Gen. 38:20; Gen. 39:7; Gen. 39:8; Gen. 39:9; Gen. 39:19; Gen. 41:45; Gen. 44:27; Gen. 45:19; Gen. 46:5; Gen. 46:19; Gen. 46:26; Gen. 49:31; Exod. 1:19; Exod. 2:2; Exod. 2:9; Exod. 3:22; Exod. 4:20; Exod. 6:20; Exod. 6:23; Exod. 6:25; Exod. 11:2; Exod. 15:20; Exod. 18:2; Exod. 18:5; Exod. 18:6; Exod. 19:15; Exod. 20:17; Exod. 21:3; Exod. 21:4; Exod. 21:5; Exod. 21:22; Exod. 21:28; Exod. 21:29; Exod. 22:16; Exod. 22:24; Exod. 26:3; Exod. 26:5; Exod. 26:6; Exod. 26:17; Exod. 32:2; Exod. 35:22; Exod. 35:25; Exod. 35:26; Exod. 35:29; Exod. 36:6; Lev. 12:2; Lev. 13:29; Lev. 13:38; Lev. 15:18; Lev. 15:19; Lev. 15:25; Lev. 18:8; Lev. 18:11; Lev. 18:14; Lev. 18:15; Lev. 18:16; Lev. 18:17; Lev. 18:18; Lev. 18:19; Lev. 18:20; Lev. 18:22; Lev. 18:23; Lev. 19:20; Lev. 20:10; Lev. 20:11; Lev. 20:13; Lev. 20:14; Lev. 20:16; Lev. 20:18; Lev. 20:21; Lev. 20:27; Lev. 21:7; Lev. 21:13; Lev. 22:12; Lev. 24:10; Lev. 24:11; Lev. 26:26; Num. 5:6; Num. 5:12; Num. 5:14; Num. 5:15; Num. 5:18; Num. 5:19; Num. 5:21; Num. 5:22; Num. 5:24; Num. 5:25; Num. 5:26; Num. 5:27; Num. 5:28; Num. 5:29; Num. 5:30; Num. 5:31; Num. 6:2; Num. 12:1; Num. 14:3; Num. 16:27; Num. 25:8; Num. 25:15; Num. 26:59; Num. 30:3; Num. 30:16; Num. 31:9; Num. 31:17; Num. 31:18; Num. 31:35; Num. 32:26; Num. 36:3; Num. 36:6; Num. 36:8; Num. 36:11; Num. 36:12; Deut. 2:34; Deut. 3:6; Deut. 3:19; Deut. 5:21; Deut. 13:6; Deut. 17:2; Deut. 17:5; Deut. 17:17; Deut. 20:7; Deut. 20:14; Deut. 21:11; Deut. 21:13; Deut. 21:15; Deut. 22:5; Deut. 22:13; Deut. 22:14; Deut. 22:16; Deut. 22:19; Deut. 22:22; Deut. 22:24; Deut. 22:29; Deut. 22:30; Deut. 24:1; Deut. 24:3; Deut. 24:4; Deut. 24:5; Deut. 25:5; Deut. 25:11; Deut. 27:20; Deut. 28:30; Deut. 28:54; Deut. 29:11; Deut. 29:18; Deut. 31:12; Jos. 1:14; Jos. 2:1; Jos. 2:4; Jos. 6:21; Jos. 6:22; Jos. 8:25; Jos. 8:35; Jos. 15:16; Jos. 15:17; Jdg. 1:12; Jdg. 1:13; Jdg. 3:6; Jdg. 4:4; Jdg. 4:9; Jdg. 4:17; Jdg. 4:21; Jdg. 5:24; Jdg. 8:30; Jdg. 9:49; Jdg. 9:51; Jdg. 9:53; Jdg. 9:54; Jdg. 11:1; Jdg. 11:2; Jdg. 13:2; Jdg. 13:3; Jdg. 13:6; Jdg. 13:9; Jdg. 13:10; Jdg. 13:11; Jdg. 13:13; Jdg. 13:19; Jdg. 13:20; Jdg. 13:21; Jdg. 13:22; Jdg. 13:23; Jdg. 13:24; Jdg. 14:1; Jdg. 14:2; Jdg. 14:3; Jdg. 14:7; Jdg. 14:10; Jdg. 14:15; Jdg. 14:16; Jdg. 14:20; Jdg. 15:1; Jdg. 15:6; Jdg. 16:1; Jdg. 16:4; Jdg. 16:27; Jdg. 19:26; Jdg. 20:4; Jdg. 21:1; Jdg. 21:7; Jdg. 21:10; Jdg. 21:11; Jdg. 21:14; Jdg. 21:16; Jdg. 21:18; Jdg. 21:21; Jdg. 21:22; Jdg. 21:23; Ruth 1:1; Ruth 1:2; Ruth 1:4; Ruth 1:5; Ruth 1:8; Ruth 1:9; Ruth 3:8; Ruth 3:11; Ruth 3:14; Ruth 4:5; Ruth 4:10; Ruth 4:11; Ruth 4:13; Ruth 4:14; 1 Sam. 1:2; 1 Sam. 1:4; 1 Sam. 1:15; 1 Sam. 1:18; 1 Sam. 1:19; 1 Sam. 1:23; 1 Sam. 1:26; 1 Sam. 2:20; 1 Sam. 2:22; 1 Sam. 4:19; 1 Sam. 14:50; 1 Sam. 15:3; 1 Sam. 15:33; 1 Sam. 18:6; 1 Sam. 18:7; 1 Sam. 18:17; 1 Sam. 18:19; 1 Sam. 18:27; 1 Sam. 19:11; 1 Sam. 21:4; 1 Sam. 21:5; 1 Sam. 22:19; 1 Sam. 25:3; 1 Sam. 25:14; 1 Sam. 25:37; 1 Sam. 25:39; 1 Sam. 25:40; 1 Sam. 25:42; 1 Sam. 25:43; 1 Sam. 25:44; 1 Sam. 27:3; 1 Sam. 27:9; 1 Sam. 27:11; 1 Sam. 28:7; 1 Sam. 28:8; 1 Sam. 28:9; 1 Sam. 28:11; 1 Sam. 28:12; 1 Sam. 28:13; 1 Sam. 28:21; 1 Sam. 28:23; 1 Sam. 28:24; 1 Sam. 30:2; 1 Sam. 30:3; 1 Sam. 30:5; 1 Sam. 30:18; 1 Sam. 30:22; 2 Sam. 1:26; 2 Sam. 2:2; 2 Sam. 3:3; 2 Sam. 3:5; 2 Sam. 3:8; 2 Sam. 3:14; 2 Sam. 5:13; 2 Sam. 6:19; 2 Sam. 11:2; 2 Sam. 11:3; 2 Sam. 11:5; 2 Sam. 11:11; 2 Sam. 11:21; 2 Sam. 11:26; 2 Sam. 11:27; 2 Sam. 12:8; 2 Sam. 12:9; 2 Sam. 12:10; 2 Sam. 12:11; 2 Sam. 12:15; 2 Sam. 12:24; 2 Sam. 14:2; 2 Sam. 14:4; 2 Sam. 14:8; 2 Sam. 14:9; 2 Sam. 14:12; 2 Sam. 14:13; 2 Sam. 14:18; 2 Sam. 14:19; 2 Sam. 14:27; 2 Sam. 17:19; 2 Sam. 17:20; 2 Sam. 19:5; 2 Sam. 20:3; 2 Sam. 20:16; 2 Sam. 20:17; 2 Sam. 20:21; 2 Sam. 20:22; 1 Ki. 2:17; 1 Ki. 2:21; 1 Ki. 3:16; 1 Ki. 3:17; 1 Ki. 3:18; 1 Ki. 3:19; 1 Ki. 3:22; 1 Ki. 3:26; 1 Ki. 4:11; 1 Ki. 9:16; 1 Ki. 11:1; 1 Ki. 11:3; 1 Ki. 11:4; 1 Ki. 11:8; 1 Ki. 11:19; 1 Ki. 14:2; 1 Ki. 14:4; 1 Ki. 14:5; 1 Ki. 14:6; 1 Ki. 14:17; 1 Ki. 16:31; 1 Ki. 17:17; 1 Ki. 17:24; 1 Ki. 20:3; 1 Ki. 20:5; 1 Ki. 20:7; 1 Ki. 21:5; 1 Ki. 21:7; 1 Ki. 21:25; 2 Ki. 4:1; 2 Ki. 4:8; 2 Ki. 4:17; 2 Ki. 5:2; 2 Ki. 6:26; 2 Ki. 6:28; 2 Ki. 6:30; 2 Ki. 8:1; 2 Ki. 8:2; 2 Ki. 8:3; 2 Ki. 8:5; 2 Ki. 8:6; 2 Ki. 8:18; 2 Ki. 14:9; 2 Ki. 22:14; 2 Ki. 23:7; 2 Ki. 24:15; 1 Chr. 1:50; 1 Chr. 2:18; 1 Chr. 2:24; 1 Chr. 2:26; 1 Chr. 2:29; 1 Chr. 2:35; 1 Chr. 3:3; 1 Chr. 4:5; 1 Chr. 4:18; 1 Chr. 4:19; 1 Chr. 7:4; 1 Chr. 7:15; 1 Chr. 7:16; 1 Chr. 7:23; 1 Chr. 8:8; 1 Chr. 8:9; 1 Chr. 8:29; 1 Chr. 9:35; 1 Chr. 14:3; 1 Chr. 16:3; 2 Chr. 2:14; 2 Chr. 8:11; 2 Chr. 11:18; 2 Chr. 11:21; 2 Chr. 11:23; 2 Chr. 13:21; 2 Chr. 15:13; 2 Chr. 20:13; 2 Chr. 21:6; 2 Chr. 21:14; 2 Chr. 21:17; 2 Chr. 22:11; 2 Chr. 24:3; 2 Chr. 25:18; 2 Chr. 28:8; 2 Chr. 29:9; 2 Chr. 31:18; 2 Chr. 34:22; Ezr. 2:61; Ezr. 10:1; Ezr. 10:2; Ezr. 10:3; Ezr. 10:10; Ezr. 10:11; Ezr. 10:14; Ezr. 10:17; Ezr. 10:18; Ezr. 10:19; Ezr. 10:44; Neh. 4:14; Neh. 5:1; Neh. 7:63; Neh. 8:2; Neh. 8:3; Neh. 10:28; Neh. 12:43; Neh. 13:23; Neh. 13:26; Neh. 13:27; Est. 1:9; Est. 1:17; Est. 1:20; Est. 2:3; Est. 2:8; Est. 2:9; Est. 2:11; Est. 2:12; Est. 2:13; Est. 2:14; Est. 2:15; Est. 2:17; Est. 3:13; Est. 4:11; Est. 5:10; Est. 5:14; Est. 6:13; Est. 8:11; Job 2:9; Job 14:1; Job 15:14; Job 19:17; Job 25:4; Job 31:9; Job 31:10; Job 42:15; Ps. 58:8; Ps. 109:9; Ps. 128:3; Prov. 2:16; Prov. 5:18; Prov. 6:24; Prov. 6:26; Prov. 6:29; Prov. 6:32; Prov. 7:5; Prov. 7:10; Prov. 9:13; Prov. 11:16; Prov. 11:22; Prov. 12:4; Prov. 14:1; Prov. 18:22; Prov. 19:13; Prov. 19:14; Prov. 21:9; Prov. 21:19; Prov. 25:24; Prov. 27:15; Prov. 30:20; Prov. 31:3; Prov. 31:10; Prov. 31:30; Eccl. 7:26; Eccl. 7:28; Eccl. 9:9; Cant. 1:8; Cant. 5:9; Cant. 6:1; Isa. 3:12; Isa. 4:1; Isa. 13:16; Isa. 19:16; Isa. 27:11; Isa. 32:9; Isa. 34:15; Isa. 34:16; Isa. 45:10; Isa. 49:15; Isa. 54:6; Jer. 3:1; Jer. 3:3; Jer. 3:20; Jer. 5:8; Jer. 6:11; Jer. 6:12; Jer. 7:18; Jer. 8:10; Jer. 9:20; Jer. 13:21; Jer. 14:16; Jer. 16:2; Jer. 18:21; Jer. 29:6; Jer. 29:23; Jer. 35:8; Jer. 38:22; Jer. 38:23; Jer. 40:7; Jer. 41:16; Jer. 43:6; Jer. 44:7; Jer. 44:9; Jer. 44:15; Jer. 44:20; Jer. 44:24; Jer. 44:25; Jer. 48:41; Jer. 49:22; Jer. 50:37; Jer. 51:22; Jer. 51:30; Lam. 2:20; Lam. 4:10; Lam. 5:11; Ezek. 1:9; Ezek. 1:23; Ezek. 3:13; Ezek. 8:14; Ezek. 9:6; Ezek. 16:32; Ezek. 16:34; Ezek. 16:41; Ezek. 18:6; Ezek. 18:11; Ezek. 18:15; Ezek. 22:11; Ezek. 23:2; Ezek. 23:10; Ezek. 23:44; Ezek. 23:48; Ezek. 24:18; Ezek. 33:26; Dan. 11:17; Dan. 11:37; Hos. 1:2; Hos. 2:2; Hos. 3:1; Hos. 12:12; Amos 4:3; Amos 7:17; Mic. 2:9; Nah. 3:13; Zech. 5:7; Zech. 5:9; Zech. 11:9; Zech. 12:12; Zech. 12:13; Zech. 12:14; Zech. 14:2; Mal. 2:14; Mal. 2:15 Man (0376)(ish) means man, individual, male husband. One distinguished by maleness Ish does not indicate humankind but the male gender in particular. "The word ʾîsh connotes primarily the concept of man as an individual and thus differs in that regard from the more general concepts inherent in the words ʾĕnôsh and ʾādām ("mankind")." Gilbrant - The etymology of ʾîsh is uncertain. It usually means "man," "husband," and sometimes is used in the collective for "humankind." Man is sometimes used in connection with ʾādhām. ʾAdām suggests the earth origin of man, while ʾîsh defines other qualities of man. Man is distinguished from God. In Num. 23:19, ʾîsh is used to demonstrate the vast difference between God and a human being. Hosea 11:9 reads, "for I am God and not man." Job 9:32 says that "He (God) is not a man, as I am." Elihu reminds the three friends of Job that it was God, not man, who brought Job down (Job 32:13). Isaiah often uses the word "holy" when speaking of God. The Hebrew meaning of "holy" suggests "separation." God is the Holy One. Man is distinguished from animal. In Ex 11:7, ʾîsh is used to show this distinction. (ED: but see use in Ge 7:2 "very clean animal by sevens, a male and his female [ishshah]") The word for husband is usually expressed by this term. Leah, in Gen. 29:32 says, "Now, therefore, my husband will love me." In v. 34 of chapter 29, she repeats "my husband (man)." The relationship of man and wife (spouse) is close. The husband is ʾîsh, the mate ʾîshshāh (HED #828). In Gen. 2:25, Adam and Eve are "man and his wife." Throughout the story of the first human family, there were two persons, "man" and "wife." In the prophets, the Lord is referred to as the "husband" of Israel. "I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord" (Jer. 31:32). "For Thy Maker is thine husband," (Isa. 54:5). "Thou shalt call me my husband," (Hosea 2:16). In these passages, God enters into the closest love relationship possible between the human and the Divine. That relationship is expressed by husband and wife. The word "man" may be in the construct position to express physical or spiritual values, nationality, profession, relationship, etc. Jacob said to his mother, "Esau my brother is a hairy man, but I am a smooth man" (Gen. 27:11). David is described by the servant of Saul as a man of war (soldier) and as a handsome man (1 Sam. 16:18). Exodus 18:21 speaks of "trustworthy man." An Egyptian is "a man of Egypt" in Gen. 39:1. A Levite is "a man of Levi" in Judg. 19:1. Genesis 25:27 states that Esau was a hunter (a man knowing hunting) and a field man (an agriculturist), while Jacob was a quiet or mature man dwelling in tents. There are some passages in which ʾîsh appears as a messenger sent from God. In Judges 13, Manoah's wife refers to "the man of God" as on whose countenance was like "an angel of God" in v. 6. In vv. 10f, Manoah and his wife come to "the man." Messengers sent from God could apparently appear as Divine messengers or messengers taking on human form. Moses, Samuel, David, Elijah, Elisha, Shemaiah and Igdaliah are called "men of God." This title demonstrates their position and mission under God's commands. "Man" can also be used for the distributive "each," or "everyone." In Gen. 40:5, "Each man his dream" and "Each man according to the interpretation of his dream," are examples of the distributive use. (Complete Biblical Library) Ish uses in 1797 verses and translated adulteress*(1), all(1), another(2), any(6), any man(21), any man's(4), any one(3), anyone(16), anyone*(1), archers*(1), Benjamite*(3), certain(6), champion*(2), counselor*(1), counselors*(1), deserve(1), each(148), each had another(1), each his man(1), each man(1), each man(37), each man's(3), each one(37), each one by another(1), each person(1), each*(5), eloquent*(1), every(1), every man(38), every man's(7), every one(8), everyone(16), everyone*(3), expert(1), farming*(1), father*(1), fellow(3), fellows(2), friend*(1), friends*(1), high*(1), himself(1), hunter*(1), husband(65), husband's(1), husbands(4), idiot*(1), Ishi(1), keepers(2), liar*(1), male(2), man(746), man against another(1), man of each(1), man the men(1), man your husband(1), man's(21), man's are the men(1), manchild(1), mankind*(1), marry*(1), marrying*(1), men(669), men at one(1), men's(1), men*(1), no*(1), none*(10), one(89), one of men(1), one's(1), oppressor*(1), ordinary(1), own(1), people(3), person(5), persons(2), prime(1), rank(1), respective(1), sailors*(1), slanderer*(1), soldiers(1), soldiers*(3), some(8), son*(1), steward*(1), swordsmen*(1), this one(1), this one and that one(1), those(1), those who(3), tiller*(1), together*(1), traders*(2), tradition*(1), traveler*(1), troop(1), warriors(3), whoever*(3). JUST USES IN GENESIS LISTED BECAUSE OF LARGE NUMBER - CLICK THE STRONG'S NUMBER SO SEE MORE USES) - Gen. 2:23; Gen. 2:24; Gen. 3:6; Gen. 3:16; Gen. 4:1; Gen. 4:23; Gen. 6:4; Gen. 6:9; Gen. 7:2; Gen. 9:5; Gen. 9:20; Gen. 10:5; Gen. 11:3; Gen. 11:7; Gen. 12:20; Gen. 13:11; Gen. 13:13; Gen. 13:16; Gen. 14:24; Gen. 15:10; Gen. 16:3; Gen. 17:23; Gen. 17:27; Gen. 18:2; Gen. 18:16; Gen. 18:22; Gen. 19:4; Gen. 19:5; Gen. 19:8; Gen. 19:10; Gen. 19:11; Gen. 19:12; Gen. 19:16; Gen. 19:31; Gen. 20:7; Gen. 20:8; Gen. 23:6; Gen. 24:13; Gen. 24:16; Gen. 24:21; Gen. 24:22; Gen. 24:26; Gen. 24:29; Gen. 24:30; Gen. 24:32; Gen. 24:54; Gen. 24:58; Gen. 24:59; Gen. 24:61; Gen. 24:65; Gen. 25:27; Gen. 26:7; Gen. 26:11; Gen. 26:13; Gen. 27:11; Gen. 29:19; Gen. 29:22; Gen. 29:32; Gen. 29:34; Gen. 30:15; Gen. 30:18; Gen. 30:20; Gen. 30:43; Gen. 31:49; Gen. 31:50; Gen. 32:6; Gen. 32:24; Gen. 32:28; Gen. 33:1; Gen. 34:7; Gen. 34:14; Gen. 34:20; Gen. 34:21; Gen. 34:22; Gen. 34:25; Gen. 37:15; Gen. 37:17; Gen. 37:19; Gen. 37:28; Gen. 38:1; Gen. 38:2; Gen. 38:21; Gen. 38:22; Gen. 38:25; Gen. 39:2; Gen. 39:11; Gen. 39:14; Gen. 40:5; Gen. 41:11; Gen. 41:12; Gen. 41:33; Gen. 41:38; Gen. 41:44; Gen. 42:11; Gen. 42:13; Gen. 42:21; Gen. 42:25; Gen. 42:28; Gen. 42:30; Gen. 42:33; Gen. 42:35; Gen. 43:3; Gen. 43:5; Gen. 43:6; Gen. 43:7; Gen. 43:11; Gen. 43:13; Gen. 43:14; Gen. 43:15; Gen. 43:16; Gen. 43:17; Gen. 43:18; Gen. 43:19; Gen. 43:21; Gen. 43:24; Gen. 43:33; Gen. 44:1; Gen. 44:3; Gen. 44:4; Gen. 44:11; Gen. 44:13; Gen. 44:15; Gen. 44:17; Gen. 44:26; Gen. 45:1; Gen. 45:22; Gen. 46:32; Gen. 46:34; Gen. 47:2; Gen. 47:6; Gen. 47:20; Gen. 49:6; Gen. 49:28 The Miracle Of Marriage Adam said: "This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh." — Genesis 2:23 Today's Scripture: Matthew 19:1-8 When Pastor Howard Sugden performed the wedding ceremony for my husband and me, he emphasized that we were participating in a miracle. We believed him, but we didn’t comprehend the size of the miracle needed to hold two people together, much less become one. After 20 years, I realize that the marriage, not the wedding, was the real miracle. Anyone can have a wedding, but only God can create a marriage. One definition of wed is “to cause to adhere devotedly or stubbornly.” For some couples, “stubborn” is a more accurate description of their relationship than “devoted.” God has in mind something much better for us than a stubborn refusal to divorce. The union of marriage is so strong that we become “one flesh.” God wants marriage to be the way it was when He first created Eve from Adam (Genesis 2:21-24). That’s what Jesus was explaining to the Pharisees when they asked Him, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for just any reason?” (Matthew 19:3). Jesus replied, “A man shall . . . be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh” (v.5). The marriage bond that joins two hearts No power on earth can break If they commit their lives to Christ And of His love partake. —D. De Haan A happy marriage is a union of two good forgivers. Genesis 2:24 For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh. BGT ἕνεκεν τούτου καταλείψει ἄνθρωπος τὸν πατέρα αὐτοῦ καὶ τὴν μητέρα αὐτοῦ καὶ προσκολληθήσεται πρὸς τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ καὶ ἔσονται οἱ δύο εἰς σάρκα μίαν KJV Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. NET That is why a man leaves his father and mother and unites with his wife, and they become a new family. BBE For this cause will a man go away from his father and his mother and be joined to his wife; and they will be one flesh. CSB This is why a man leaves his father and mother and bonds with his wife, and they become one flesh. ERV Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. ESV Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. GWN That is why a man will leave his father and mother and will be united with his wife, and they will become one flesh. NKJ Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. NAB That is why a man leaves his father and mother and clings to his wife, and the two of them become one body. NIV For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh. NJB This is why a man leaves his father and mother and becomes attached to his wife, and they become one flesh. NLT This explains why a man leaves his father and mother and is joined to his wife, and the two are united into one. NRS Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and clings to his wife, and they become one flesh. YLT therefore doth a man leave his father and his mother, and hath cleaved unto his wife, and they have become one flesh. LXE Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother and shall cleave to his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. ASV Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. DBY Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and cleave to his wife; and they shall become one flesh. BHT `al-Kën ya|`ázob-´îš ´et-´äbîw wü´et-´immô wüdäbaq Bü´išTô wühäyû lübäSär ´eHäd NAS For this cause a man shall leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and they shall become one flesh. NIRV That's why a man will leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife. The two of them will become one. RSV Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh. RWB Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they shall be one flesh. WEB Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they shall be one flesh. leave: Ge 24:58,59 31:14,15 Ps 45:10 be joined: Lev 22:12,13 De 4:4 10:20 Jos 23:8 Ps 45:10 Pr 12:4 31:10 Ac 11:23 and they shall become one flesh: Mal 2:14-16 Mt 19:3-9 Mk 10:6-12 Ro 7:2 1Co 6:16,17 7:2-4,10 1Co 7:11 Eph 5:28-31 1Ti 5:14 1Pe 3:1-7 Genesis 2 Resources - Multiple sermons and commentaries Related Passages: Malachi 2:14-16+ “Yet you say, ‘For what reason?’ Because the LORD has been a witness between you and the wife of your youth, against whom you have dealt treacherously, though she is your companion and your wife by covenant. 15 “But not one has done so who has a remnant of the Spirit. And what did that one do while he was seeking a godly offspring? Take heed then to your spirit, and let no one deal treacherously against the wife of your youth. 16 “For I hate divorce,” says the LORD, the God of Israel, “and him who covers his garment with wrong,” says the LORD of hosts. “So take heed to your spirit, that you do not deal treacherously.” MARRIAGE: LEAVE AND CLEAVE! Marriage as defined by God is to leave and cleave and not leave! For this reason (term of conclusion) a man (adam) shall leave ('azab) his father and his mother, and be joined (dabaq) to his wife - Leave is translated in the Septuagint with kataleipo which means to leave behind. That old relationship with parents is severed and replaced by a new bond with one's spouse. Joined means they are to "stick like glue." It speaks of the permanence of this union and in committed Christians in America, this "permanence" is reflected by the fact that 70% are still "glued" to their first partner (see divorce among Christians). Note that Moses says a man is joined to his wife. In other words this is not advocating or supporting a man and woman living together out of wedlock! Further if we let the Holy Spirit inspired text speak for itself, it is clear that the marriage in God's good and acceptable and perfect will and which is honored by God is between one man and one woman for one lifetime. This verse has no asterisks or exception clauses. NET NOTE on leave - The verb translated “leave” (עָזָב, ’azab) normally means “to abandon, to forsake, to leave behind, to discard,” when used with human subject and object (see Josh 22:3; 1Sa 30:13; Ps 27:10; Pr 2:17; Isa 54:6; 60:15; 62:4; Jer 49:11). Within the context of the ancient Israelite extended family structure, this cannot refer to emotional or geographical separation. The narrator is using hyperbole to emphasize the change in perspective that typically overtakes a young man when his thoughts turn to love and marriage....BE JOINED - The verb is traditionally translated “cleaves [to]”; it has the basic idea of “stick with/to” (e.g., it is used of Ruth resolutely staying with her mother-in-law in Ruth 1:14). In this passage it describes the inseparable relationship between the man and the woman in marriage as God intended it. And they shall become one flesh - This is a mystery. This is a miracle. Two cannot become one unless God supernaturally brings this about. So at every wedding you have ever attended, you have not just witnessed their wedding, but you have truly witnessed a divine miracle. Two becoming one CAN NEVER be undone! Physical separation cannot undo the supernatural act! Divorce cannot undo the supernatural act! One flesh speaks of the Oneness of Covenant, where there is union and communion and intimacy of a type which one cannot experience in any other human relationship (see covenant of Marriage. Jesus declared "So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate." (Mt 19:6) Separate is chorizo in present imperative with a negative. There were 3 words for ''divorce'' and this one means to ''place distance or space between''. Divorce (apostasiou) is literally "to remove either spatially or from the center of a state or relationship" or "to break fellowship." The biblical teaching on divorce can only be understood against the background of Jesus' view of marriage. Marriage was a sacred concept to Jesus. The permanence of the contract of marital union is stressed by the fact that two people become one flesh. No one would contemplate severing even a limb, much less half of his torso. Yet, this is precisely the emotional and spiritual result of the fracturing of marriage. Furthermore, divorce is a device of men created to annul, as it were, the authority of God. Moses allowed divorce as a concession (an effort to protect ill-treated Hebrew wives), sin encouraged the practice (polygamy brought murder and revenge), and human nature coerced it (the hardness of hearts, cf. Dt 24:1-4). The Pharisees sought to trap Jesus on the divorce question (Mt 19:3). The followers of Shammai were the conservatives in that they believed divorce should be granted only because of unchastity, adultery, or something scandalous. On the other hand, Hillel, the more liberal, argued for divorce for any reason, i.e., "if she finds no favor in your eyes." Jesus refers to neither rabbi, nor does He directly refer to Moses. Rather, He goes back to the beginning, quoting the divinely inspired words of Adam (Mt 19:4-6), because the answer to this problematic issue does not lie in legal codes or traditional practices but in God's design in creation (Gen. 2:24). God does not condone the corruption of divine ordinances, nor does He accommodate or compromise His morality (Mt 19:4). The Pharisees had made the "permission" of the Law a "command," giving way to human stubbornness instead of divine plan and purpose. Why then does God reject divorce? (1) Marriage is a divine institution (Mt 19:4). (2) Marriage is by express command (Mt 19:5). (3) Marriage makes two people become one flesh (Mt 19:6). (4) The first couple show unbroken unity of lives (Mt 19:8). (5) There are evil consequences in separation (Mt 19:9). NET NOTE on one flesh - Heb “and they become one flesh.” The perfect with vav consecutive carries the same habitual or characteristic nuance as the preceding verbs in the verse. The retention of the word “flesh” (בָּשָׂר, basar) in the translation often leads to improper or incomplete interpretations. The Hebrew word refers to more than just a sexual union. When they unite in marriage, the man and woman bring into being a new family unit (הָיָה + לְ, hayah + lamed preposition means “become”). The phrase “one flesh” occurs only here and must be interpreted in light of v. 23. There the man declares that the woman is bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh. To be one’s “bone and flesh” is to be related by blood to someone. For example, the phrase describes the relationship between Laban and Jacob (Gen 29:14); Abimelech and the Shechemites (Judg 9:2; his mother was a Shechemite); David and the Israelites (2 Sam 5:1); David and the elders of Judah (2 Sam 19:12); and David and his nephew Amasa (2 Sam 19:13, see 2 Sam 17:2; 1 Chr 2:16–17). The expression “one flesh” seems to indicate that they become, as it were, “kin,” at least legally (a new family unit is created) or metaphorically. In this first marriage in human history, the woman was literally formed from the man’s bone and flesh. Even though later marriages do not involve such a divine surgical operation, the first marriage sets the pattern for how later marriages are understood and explains why marriage supersedes the parent-child relationship. Leave (05800) 'azab basically means to depart from something -- to leave, to forsake (48x), to leave (26x; "left" 22x), to loose, to depart, to abandon. Things that can left behind or forsaken include persons (Ge 44:22; Nu 10:30; Ru 1:16; 2Ki4:30), people who should left behind (Ge 2:24); places (2Ki 8:6; Jer 18:14; 25:38) and objects (Ge 39:12,13; 50:8; Ex 9:21). Men can forsake God (apostatize) (Dt 28:20, 31:16, Jer 1:16), can abandon qualities of virtue (1Ki 12:8, 2Chr 10:8, 13), the way (of righteousness) (Pr 15:10), instruction/wisdom (Pr 4:2, 6), reproof (Pr 10:17 - "ignore" = forsake), kindness (lovingkindness, faithfulness) (Pr 3:3). God promises to not forsake His people (Ge 24:27, 28:15, Dt 31:6,7 contrast what God's people will do = Dt 31:16). In a use similar to Pr 28:13, we are instructed to "forsake wrath." (Ps 37:8) Be joined (cleave) (1692) dabaq means to stick to, adhere to, cling to, join with, stay with, stay in close proximity to and which yields the noun form for "glue". Dabaq describes something that sticks or clings to something else (Ezek 29:4 and Ezekiel’s tongue to roof of his mouth Ezek. 3:26). It is interesting that one of the most concentrated uses of "dabaq" in the OT is found in this short story of Ruth (Ru 1:14, 2:8, 2:21, 23-see notes Ru 1:14; 2:8; 21; 23) -- Ruth 2:8 "stay here with my maids"; Ruth 2:21 "‘You should stay close to my servants"; Ruth 2:23 "So she stayed close by the maids of Boaz"; Dabaq often refers to physical things sticking to each other, especially parts of the body as described vividly by Job who said "My bone clings to my skin and my flesh, and I have escaped only by the skin of my teeth" (Job 19:20, cf one's tongue "stuck to their palate" Job 29:10). God speaking through Moses warned Israel to "choose life in order that you may live… by loving the LORD your God, by obeying His voice, and by holding fast (dabaq) to Him" going on to explain that one should cling to Jehovah because "this is your life and the length of your days, that you may live in the land which the LORD swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to give them." (Dt 30:19, 20) King Hezekiah heeded this instruction and "clung to the LORD; he did not depart from following Him, but kept His commandments, which the LORD had commanded Moses." and the result of his clinging was that "Jehovah was with him; wherever he went he prospered." (2Ki 18:6 18:7, cf : Ps 63:8) A vivid picture of the meaning of dabaq is found in David's declaration "I will set no worthless thing before my eyes; I hate the work of those who fall away; It shall not fasten its grip on me." (Ps 101:3), picturing the power of sin to entrap the sinner. (Spurgeon on Ps 101:3) Dabaq also conveys the ideas of loyalty and devotion as in the first use of dabaq where "a man shall leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and they shall become one flesh" (Ge 2:24) which also emphasizes the basic meaning of being intimately joined to another and of being identified with one another, even as Ruth was now committing to be "identified" no longer with the Moabites but primarily with Naomi, her people and her God. As alluded to earlier, this idea of leaving former affections and loyalties and shifting them to Jehovah is found numerous times in Deuteronomy, as for example in (Dt 10:20) where Moses instructs Israel that they are to "fear the LORD your God; you shall serve Him and cling to Him, and you shall swear by His name". In this verse we also see that reverential awe (fear) of God is in part manifest by one cleaving closely to Him. This truth gives us some insight into Ruth's cleaving to Naomi and ultimately to Naomi's God. (cf Dt 11:22 23, 13:4 Josh 23::8 contrast Josh 23:12 Dt 13:17) QUESTION - What does it mean that “the two shall become one flesh” (Genesis 2:24)? ANSWER - Genesis 2:24 gives us a picture of the marriage bond before sin entered the world: “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh” (Genesis 2:24, NKJV). “One flesh” echoes the language of the preceding verse when Adam first meets Eve and exclaims, “This one is bone of my bone, and flesh from my flesh!” (Genesis 2:23, NLT). Two becoming one in marriage involves uniting two whole and separate people into a new, God-designed and God-purposed life. The two shall become one flesh clause expresses the original purpose of marriage: to seal a permanent relationship between a husband and wife. Jesus spoke of this union in a conversation with the Pharisees about divorce: “But at the beginning of creation God ‘made them male and female. For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate” (Mark 10:6–9; see also Matthew 19:4–6). Marriage was intended to be an unbreakable, lifelong union. Termination of marriage in divorce was not considered before sin came into the world (Genesis 3). The Bible teaches that all instances of separation and divorce were because of sin (Deuteronomy 24:1–4; Ezra 9—10; Malachi 2:14; Matthew 5:31–32; Luke 16:18). When God said, “And the two shall become one,” His ideal objective was for the man and woman to join together in an inseparable and exclusive union. Husbands and wives become “one flesh” in sexual intimacy, as reflected literally in their children’s lives. A child is one, new, whole, individual and separate life created through the physical union of two people—a man and a woman. God’s idyllic design for the sexual union in marriage is to be exclusive: “Give honor to marriage, and remain faithful to one another in marriage. God will surely judge people who are immoral and those who commit adultery” (Hebrews 13:4NLT; see also Ephesians 5:22–33; 1 Timothy 3:2, 12 and Titus 1:6). Two becoming one in the sexual aspect of marriage means caring for and fulfilling one another’s physical needs with respect and mutual consent (1 Corinthians 7:1–5), not exploiting one another (1 Thessalonians 4:3–7), and delighting in one another (Proverbs 5:15–19; Ecclesiastes 9:9). God’s design for physical intimacy in marriage is portrayed with beauty and dignity in the Song of Solomon. Of course, oneness in marriage reaches far beyond the physical level. The original Hebrew word translated as “flesh” refers to much more than a person’s physical or sexual composition. It relates to the whole human existence. The biblical view of “one flesh” communicates a unity that covers every facet of a couple’s joint lives as husband and wife. In marriage, two whole lives unite together as one emotionally, intellectually, financially, spiritually, and in every other way. The “two shall become one” in purpose. They are so close that they function like one person, balancing each other’s strengths and weaknesses so that together they can fulfill their God-given calling. In Scripture, marriage is viewed as a covenant relationship between a man and a woman (Malachi 2:14–16; Proverbs 2:16–17). The two people become dependent on each other and responsible for one another. This human bond in marriage is a metaphor for God’s relationship with Israel (Ezekiel 16:8) as well as a picture of the union between Christ and the church: “But whoever is united with the Lord is one with him in spirit” (1 Corinthians 6:17; cf. Ephesians 5:31–32). Nevertheless, since the fall of humankind, the marriage relationship has failed to measure up to its God-intended ideal. Apart from salvation in Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit’s sanctifying work, husbands and wives cannot even begin to live in mutual harmony and accord. Yet, in Christ, believers discover the unconditional love of God (1 Corinthians 13:4–8)—a supernatural love that enables them to make a lifelong commitment to care for their spouse as Christ loved His bride, the church, and sacrificed Himself for her (Ephesians 5:25). The two shall become one flesh expresses the heart of the Bible’s concept of marriage. By entering into marriage, a husband and wife take solemn vows to become permanently one flesh—to love, honor, and cherish one another until they are parted by death.GotQuestions.org The Girl In The Yellow Coat A man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. —Genesis 2:24 Today's Scripture & Insight: Genesis 2:18-25 It was her yellow raincoat that caught my attention, and quickly I became increasingly interested in this cute freshman with long, brown hair. Soon I worked up my courage, interrupted Sue as she walked along reading a letter from a guy back home, and awkwardly asked her for a date. To my surprise, she said yes. More than 4 decades later, Sue and I look back and laugh at our first uncomfortable meeting on that college campus—and marvel how God put a shy guy from Ohio together with a shy girl from Michigan. Through the years, we have faced innumerable crises together as we raised our family. We’ve negotiated parenting four kids, and we’ve struggled mightily with losing one of them. Problems big and small have tested our faith, yet we’ve stuck together. It took commitment from both of us and the grace of God. Today we rejoice in God’s design, spelled out in Genesis 2:24—to leave our parents, to be unified as man and wife, and to become united as one flesh. We cherish this amazing plan that has given us such a wonderful life together. Lord, the first thing You organized during society’s earliest days was marriage. Thank You for how You designed this amazing institution. Show me how to help strengthen others in their marriage relationship. Marriage thrives in a climate of love, honor, and respect. Jay Adams - GENESIS 2:24 “and the two shall become one flesh” “Well, what’s difficult about this passage? Doesn’t it say that two people shall be joined together and shall have sex?” Well, no, on several counts. First, it says a man and a wife are joined together, not merely two people. There are those who try to call a same sex relationship a marriage. That simply doesn’t fit the biblical model. God’s Word is explicit about that. But second, it does say that a man and a wife are joined together in marriage. That verb joined (literally, “glued”) together speaks of a permanent relationship. Not a trial relationship that, if it doesn’t work out, may be terminated. Jesus said, “What God has yoked together, a human being must not separate” (Matthew 19:6). So, divorce, though allowed for unrepentant adultery and desertion, was not in view in Genesis 2. The goal was to cement a permanent relationship between a man and his wife. But neither does the passage speak about sexual relations. The words “one flesh” have a different meaning. The word “flesh,” in Hebrew, had much the same meaning as our word “body.” They, like us, used the word to mean “person.” When we say “everybody,” we do not think of every body (as though we were speaking only of meat and bones). Rather we think of every person. So, too when the Hebrew wrote “all flesh” it meant all persons, or everybody. Just a few chapters later, for instance, when Moses was foretelling the flood to come, He said, “God looked on the earth, and behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted their way upon the earth” (Genesis 6:11). Joel wrote that God would pour out His Spirit on “all flesh” (Joel 2:28; i.e., upon all sorts of persons). So, the two becoming one flesh meant that they were to become so close that they would function like one person. Of course, the fall of man has kept the marriage relationship from measuring up to that ideal. Men and women, apart from salvation and sanctification, do not even begin to approach such unity of companionship. Yet, in Christ, they can learn to approach it more and more (Fifty Difficult Passages Explained) QUESTION - Is the divorce rate among Christians truly the same as among non-Christians? ANSWER - We’ve all heard the claim: “Christians are just as likely to divorce as non-Christians.” This statement is often attributed to a 2008 study by the Barna Research Group that indicated that those who identified as Christian were just as likely as non-Christians to be divorced. This study was also broken down into subcategories by religious denomination, showing Baptists and non-denominational Protestants leading the way in divorce. The claim that the divorce rate among Christians equals that of non-Christians builds upon the common assumption that 50 percent of all marriages end in divorce. But, according to the latest research, those statements about the divorce rate, among Christians in particular, are untrue. Harvard-trained social researcher and author Shaunti Feldhahn, in her book The Good News About Marriage says that the data reveals a different story about the divorce rate. Feldhahn states that the “50 percent” figure was not based on hard data; rather, the number came from projections of what researchers thought the divorce rate would become after states passed no-fault divorce laws. “We’ve never hit those numbers. We’ve never gotten close,” she writes. According to her study, the overall divorce rate is around 33 percent. Partnering with George Barna, Feldhahn reexamined the data pertaining to the divorce rate among Christians and found that the numbers were based on survey-takers who identified as “Christian” rather than some other religion. Under that broad classification, respondents were as likely as anyone else to have been divorced. The “Christian” category included people who profess a belief system but do not live a committed lifestyle. However, for those who were active in their church, the divorce rate was 27 to 50 percent lower than for non-churchgoers. Nominal Christians—those who simply call themselves “Christians” but do not actively engage with the faith—are actually 20 percent more likely than the general population to get divorced. Dr. Brad Wilcox, director of the National Marriage Project, states that “‘active conservative protestants who attend church regularly are actually 35% less likely to divorce than those who have no religious preferences” (quoted by Stetzer, Ed. “The Exchange.” Christianity Today. “Marriage, Divorce, and the Church: What do the stats say, and can marriage be happy?” Feb. 14, 2014. WEB. Oct. 26, 2015). In her studies, Feldhahn found that 72 percent of all married people were still married to their first spouse. And of those marriages, four out of five are happy. Putting it all together, what these findings tell us is that religion itself cannot insulate us from the stresses that pull at the fabric of our marriages. But there’s definite good news regarding divorce rates and Christians: contrary to what’s been reported for years, the divorce rate is not 50 percent; it’s more like 30 percent. And then we find that people who keep God at the center of their home and family stay married at far greater rates, and even thrive within those marriages. One of the reasons for this is that those whose first commitment is to the lordship of Jesus put fewer expectations upon their spouses to meet emotional needs that only God can meet. The lessening of unrealistic expectations gives marriages a stronger foundation upon which to withstand difficult times. Although 1 Peter 2:7 is speaking of the church in general, the words also echo the truths revealed in the statistics on Christian marriages: “The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone.” When Jesus is the cornerstone of our homes and marriages, we can weather the storms (see Matthew 7:24).GotQuestions.org QUESTION - What does it mean to be one flesh in a marriage? ANSWER - The term “one flesh” comes from the Genesis account of the creation of Eve. Genesis 2:21-24 describes the process by which God created Eve from a rib taken from Adam’s side as he slept. Adam recognized that Eve was part of him—they were in fact “one flesh.” The term “one flesh” means that just as our bodies are one whole entity and cannot be divided into pieces and still be a whole, so God intended it to be with the marriage relationship. There are no longer two entities (two individuals), but now there is one entity (a married couple). There are a number of aspects to this new union. As far as emotional attachments are concerned, the new unit takes precedence over all previous and future relationships (Genesis 2:24). Some marriage partners continue to place greater weight upon ties with parents than with the new partner. This is a recipe for disaster in the marriage and is a perversion of God’s original intention of “leaving and cleaving.” A similar problem can develop when a spouse begins to draw closer to a child to meet emotional needs rather than to his or her partner. Emotionally, spiritually, intellectually, financially, and in every other way, the couple is to become one. Even as one part of the body cares for the other body parts (the stomach digests food for the body, the brain directs the body for the good of the whole, the hands work for the sake of the body, etc.), so each partner in the marriage is to care for the other. Each partner is no longer to see money earned as “my” money, but rather as “our” money. Ephesians 5:22-33 and Proverbs 31:10-31 give the application of this “oneness” to the role of the husband and to the wife, respectively. Physically, they become one flesh, and the result of that one flesh is found in the children that their union produces; these children now possess a special genetic makeup, specific to their union. Even in the sexual aspect of their relationship, a husband and wife are not to consider their bodies as their own but as belonging to their partner (1 Corinthians 7:3-5). Nor are they to focus on their own pleasure but rather the giving of pleasure to their spouse. This oneness and desire to benefit each other is not automatic, especially after mankind’s fall into sin. The man, in Genesis 2:24KJV, is told to “cleave” to his wife. This word has two ideas behind it. One is to be “glued” to his wife, a picture of how tight the marriage bond is to be. The other aspect is to “pursue hard after” the wife. This “pursuing hard after” is to go beyond the courtship leading to marriage, and is to continue throughout the marriage. The fleshly tendency is to “do what feels good to me” rather than to consider what will benefit the spouse. And this self-centeredness is the rut that marriages commonly fall into once the “honeymoon is over.” Instead of each spouse dwelling upon how his or her own needs are not being met, he or she is to remain focused on meeting the needs of the spouse. As nice as it may be for two people to live together meeting each other’s needs, God has a higher calling for the marriage. Even as they were to be serving Christ with their lives before marriage (Romans 12:1-2), now they are to serve Christ together as a unit and raise their children to serve God (1 Corinthians 7:29-34; Malachi 2:15; Ephesians 6:4). Priscilla and Aquila, in Acts 18, would be good examples of this. As a couple pursues serving Christ together, the joy which the Spirit gives will fill their marriage (Galatians 5:22-23). In the Garden of Eden, there were three present (Adam, Eve, and God), and there was joy. So, if God is central in a marriage today, there also will be joy. Without God, a true and full oneness is not possible. GotQuestions.org Related Resources: Covenant: The Oneness of Covenant Covenant: Oneness Notes Covenant: As It Relates to Marriage R C