Then the LORD God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper as his partner.” So out of the ground the LORD God formed every animal of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name. The man gave names to all cattle, and to the birds of the air, and to every animal of the field; but for the man there was not found a helper as his partner.”(Genesis 2:18 – 20)

As I sit and think about this passage, many thoughts go streaming through my mind. Concepts of marriage, and what makes the marriage relationship different from all other relationships amongst humanity. How animals can work for and work with people, but that somehow it is not an equilateral relationship. What significance does naming the animals mean for caring for them? Does this mean that humanity has a sacred duty for stewardship? Or that the animal/bird kingdoms are ours to do with as we wish? Did the Creator really expect that man would find a partner in the animal/bird kingdom, or this a creation legion that found its way into sacred text? And finally, what was different about man that he should not be alone and the Creator could/should be alone? Or, was the Creator already part of a Triune aspect of a/the Divine?

So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then he took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh. And the rib that the LORD God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man. Then the man said, “This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; this one shall be called Woman, for out of Man this one was taken.” (Verses 21 – 23)

Hold on – more pondering and questions. How did this created partner differ in bone & flesh from the other animals – if animals/birds/all created things other than humanity are actually flesh as human beings are? Was there a sudden & special recognition that this creation was equal to that of the first creation? And if so, why is the female gender of humanity treated and regarded as inferior to the male gender? Why are marital relationships only seen as genuine and acceptable if one is the male gender and the other is the female gender if it was only at the naming that a difference was made? Did the first created person only find the second created person acceptable because of the body make up? And finally, are we really judging and dividing humanity based on a Judaeo-Christian creation legion?

“Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and clings to his wife, and they become one flesh.” (Verse 24)

Based on the questions and observations I made above, you could probably guess the nature of any further questions and observations I have. I am not convinced that a human married and mated couple need to have specifically designated bodies & shapes. It was not for the purpose of creation that spouses cling together but that what makes up one person finds completion in another person. We, meaning society, get so hung up on assigned words and outer forms when we should be looking at the inner person and their self presentation. Much of what is put into and designated as holy scripture did not start out as sacred text, but was gathered up and put into a collection. But THAT is a whole other topic and conversation.

What it comes down to is this, beloved reader – the Creator wanted to provider humanity with what it needed. Humanity was given the choice as to what suited each member of humanity and retain it within human relationship. Anything that seeks to disrupt or prevent that human relationship is in the wrong. Shalom & Selah!