Sword & Trowel 2015: Issue 1 


source of grief, for God had given him perfect happiness, but it may well have been apparent to him that God intended a further provision, far more wonderful, someone equal to himself. We may ask – why did the Lord


make Eve from Adam’s side, and not from the dust of the earth, just as he had made the man? Adam knew the reason at once, describing Eve as, ‘bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh’. She was essentially the same as himself, although given a different body and calling. Adam no doubt felt the ‘one flesh’ concept of mutual belonging and devotion conveyed by the manner of Eve’s making.


Equal recipient


Adam came first, and Eve was made his helper indicating his primacy of place. But Eve was not then so subordinate to him as she became after the Fall when God made a greater difference between them, her desire being ‘to her husband’, and he having ‘rule’ over her. But from the beginning she was clearly his counterpart; a ‘helper-meet’, and an equal recipient of the commission to rule earth and beasts. The creation of man was not complete until the woman was formed, then together they constituted mankind. He pos- sessed powers and gifts that she did not have, and she possessed powers and gifts that he lacked. This was true not only in the obvious matter of ability to bear children, but in many other respects also. While after the Fall there would be male headship in church and family, in marriage men and women are mutually depend- ent contributors giving mutual value


page 40 The Garden of Eden


and respect. They need each other, and should never lose sight of this. Although he is to be the head of the union, he must always consider her, taking account of her views, insights and feelings, and being unfail- ingly sensitive, kind and careful in so doing. Some cultures in the world (and some Christians) get it all wrong, because they make the man not only dominant, but superior and special. He may be rough, unkind and dis- missive of her, decrying her feelings and views as inadequate and incon- sequential. He is absolute ruler, an attitude utterly out of line with ‘bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh’. There is no sign of mutual calling and belonging. It is an ignorant and arrogant concept of manhood. In some American groups that claim to emphasise marriage and family mat- ters there is the nonsensical teaching that the husband is Christ’s direct representative on earth over his wife, and that she must obey him as if he were the Lord and his dictates are the Lord’s word to her. It is based on inept exegesis and a marked lack of sanctification. The words ‘Therefore shall a man


leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh’ (verse 24) appear to be the inspired words of Moses, in- serting a principle into the narrative. Not only do these words institute marriage between one man and one woman, but they also direct that we should never behave as though the bond between parent and child is greater than the bond between hus- band and wife. Yet some do. Some


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44