Created Male and Female: Themes from Genesis
Created Male and Female: Themes from Genesis :
SPROUL: As we come to the second chapter of Genesis, once again we meet right away another area
of controversy. It's not by accident really that so many theological controversies focus on these
opening chapters of Genesis because as we said in the first lecture that the very foundation and the basis of the central elements of Judeo-Christian truth are set forth for us here,
our understanding of man, our understanding of the world, our understanding of the character of God
are all introduced in their foundational sense in these early chapters.
And so, the guns of criticism tend to be aimed sharply at these beginning chapters because if we can relativize the opening chapters of Genesis, there's a sense in which we can pull the rug out
from under the heart of the Christian faith. Well, in the nineteenth century we saw a spirit and a
wave of criticism moving across Europe and focusing in on the integrity of the biblical
documents, and we saw the rise of what was called the "religious historical school," which sought to bring some of the theories of evolution and the rest to bear on the biblical manuscripts.
And what came out of that period, based on a certain philosophy of history
that assumed that all development of thought and of culture followed a basic evolutionary pattern
that moved from the simple to the complex, from the primitive to the sophisticated, and that was applied as well to the biblical documents saying that the older the documents,
the more naive and primitive they would be. And with it came the Graf-Wellhausen
theory that taught that the first five books of the Bible were not written by a single author at a single time in history, but rather were the work of at least four separate authors whose
work was then compiled at a much later date and sort of amalgamated into the text that we had.
And those who were trying to watch the grass grow in antiquity from the perspective of the twentieth century came to the conclusion that there were at least four different authors whose names
or whose sections and editorial work were designated by the letters J, E,
D, and P. Anyone who's been to seminary or who has studied at all in Old Testament research is familiar with these designations. It is called the so-called "documentary hypothesis,"
where one of the strongest points of that theory indicates that the second chapter of Genesis is written by somebody different from the first chapter and that the two accounts of
creation, Genesis 1 and Genesis 2, are flatly contradictory one to the other.
More and more and more that theory is losing its credibility as we see that the purpose of
chapter 2 is not simply to carry on a sequential narrative as we find in chapter 1, but rather
to recapitulate all that's said in chapter 1 and then focus attention on something special.
The theme of chapter 2 of Genesis is not the general creation of the world. The theme and the
focus of Genesis 2 is the creation of woman and the divine institution of marriage. We see that chapter 1 ends with these words, "And God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good."
Let's look at that. "And God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good."
Like the artist who labors over his canvas and then when he puts down the brush, he steps back and he looks at that and he can say, "Ah! That's good." What we hear here is the benediction
of God upon the created order. A benediction, of course, means simply a "good saying",
a "good saying," from the Latin bene-diction. God says, "It's very good.
But then chapter 2 gives us a reference back, "Thus the heavens and the earth were completed.
And the seventh day God rested," and so on. And then verse 4, "This is the account of the
heavens and earth when they were created in the day when the Lord God made earth and heaven." Now, we get recapitulation and reflection upon the substance.
"Now no shrub of the field was yet in the earth and no plant of the field had yet sprouted." And as we go on, we see in verse 8 these words, "And the Lord God planted a garden toward the east in Eden, and here He placed the man whom He had formed. And out of the ground the Lord
God caused to grow every tree that is pleasing to the sight and good for food. And the tree of life
also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil."
And then we get a description of the garden of paradise, but as soon as we move down to verse
18 of chapter 2, a new chord is sounded in the text. It's an intrusion of a foreign element, something that changes the tone of everything that we've read about creation thus far. Verse
18 reads and says, "Then the Lord God said, 'It is not good for the man to be alone."
All through the six days of creation after God makes the light, after He makes the darkness,
after He divides the seas and the firmament, and after He makes the plants and the flowers and the
animals, after every dimension of creation, God looks at what He makes and He says, "That's good."
Benediction upon benediction, but in Genesis 2:18,
we have the first occurrence in sacred Scripture of malediction, malediction,
which the Old Testament uses in terms of the word "curse," where God makes a "bad saying." It's interesting, isn't it, that the very first thing in human history that receives
the malediction of God is the situation of human loneliness.
God looks at the man. He's surrounded by this gorgeous paradise. He has dominion
over the whole planet. He mirrors and reflects the holiness of God, yet something is wrong, something
is missing. There is something yet that is not complete. There is something that is not good.
And God pronounces His malediction on this situation saying, "It is not good for man to be
alone." Loneliness is not good. Isolation, a loss of fellowship, a lack of communion
within the species itself is not good. And so, we get the reason in chapter 2
in the expansion of why in chapter 1 we were told that when God created man, He didn't just create
men, He didn't just create males, but "male and female created He them."
"It's not good that man should be alone." Again, I keep referring to modern views of man and modern studies in philosophy of the human prediction, and I've already mentioned the existential
philosophers who have pointed to this awesome sense of angst or anxiety that sort of hangs as a
gloomy cloud over our existence, and that's one of the problems or the moments of pain of modern man.
But the philosophers also tell us that there is another
crying need within the human heart and that one of the most painful
experiences that a human being can ever endure is what they call "existential solitude."
Kierkegaard, for example, pointed out that yes, there are times when we want to be alone, where we want to be far away from the maddening crowd, where we want to have some privacy, where we want to have time to think and to reflect and to be away from the intrusion of people.
And we do have that need for privacy. Yet, at the same time, said Kierkegaard, man can't stand
a prolonged experience of solitude. And we understand that so that if we want to impose one of the most severe penalties that we can on criminals, we take and put them in solitary
confinement, a painful situation. At that point, Kierkegaard understood something that's basic to the nature of mankind. And he's agreeing with God, "It is not good that man should be alone."
So, God said, "I will make him a helpmate similar," or suitable, "for him."
A helpmate suitable, a companion that is fitting and appropriate for the man.
He's not saying, "I am going to make a slave. I'm not going to make a non-person, but I am going to make a companion, a helpmate, not just a helper but a helpmate suitable for him."
And then what follows I think is somewhat humorous, for "Out of the ground the Lord
God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the sky and God brought them to the man to see what he would call them. And whatever the man called the living creature, that was his name."
Now, let me just pause for a second and indulge myself in a bit of a parenthesis, a tangent that
the text itself provokes. Man is alone. He has no helpmate, and so God brings before him, parading
by his presence all of the different animals of this world. And we are told parenthetically by the text that Adam names the animals, and whatever he names them, that is their name.
So, God brings them by and Adam looks at them and he said, "That's a lion. That's a tiger. That's a
turkey. That's an elephant," and so on. Now we say, "What's the significance of that?" Well, there are two things that we have to understand from this experience. In the first place, here we see man engaged already in part of the work for which he was created. He is told to have dominion over the earth. And that dominion is symbolized by man's naming the animals.
Who names man? God does. Who names the animals? Man does.
We see throughout biblical history that the process of naming is a symbol of the manifestation of authority.
God's authority over us is seen in His naming us. We see God when He encounters people in biblical history. He encounters Jacob and when He wrestles with Jacob, and Jacob finally submits, God changes Jacob's life, and when He changes his life, He changes his name and He calls him Israel. But even
in that wrestling match, Jacob is trying to get the angel to tell Jacob his name, and the angel won't do it. Because when Jacob says, "Tell me your name," it's like two children wrestling today
in our society, and one of them is ordering the other one to give up. He has him in the vice of a headlock and they're wrestling there. And the one little boy says to the other one, "Say, 'Uncle!'"
Why don't we just say, "Say, 'Give up?'" But we have this crazy expression in our English, "Say, 'Uncle.'" And so, if the one boy says "Uncle," then the match is over because he has surrendered.
Well the way one said "Uncle" in the ancient Semitic world was by revealing one's name. One
was submitting to the authority of the victor. We see it in the New Testament with the whole process of the naming of John the Baptist, the naming of Jesus. Ordinarily, parents name their children,
but in the case of John the Baptist, the angel Gabriel assumes the divine prerogative, takes it away from Zechariah and Elizabeth and said, "His name shall be called John." When Jesus is born, the angel also announces to Mary and to Joseph, "His name shall be called Jesus," representing God's special authority,
God's special claim on these people and God's dominion over them.
Now, that's the symbolic sense, but there's something else going on here with the naming
of the animals that we don't want to miss. Here, dear friends, is the birth of science. We say that
one of the tasks of natural science is to harness the power and the forces of the natural world, to make nature work for us rather than against us. We improve our skills of farming and agriculture. We
are able to conquer space through the airplane and over the buoyancy of water by ships that transport
us. We invent the wheel. We use fire. We bring electricity and atomic energy to bear so that man can conquer the forces of his environment, and this is the scientific enterprise. But there
is a certain sense in which the whole enterprise of science is simply the activity of taxonomy,
not taxidermy, but taxonomy.
Those of you who have studied biology know immediately what the word "taxonomy" means.
Taxonomy in modern science is that subdivision of academic discipline, which is concerned for the classification of things.
You remember, in your high school biology class you had to learn the difference between a genus and species and phylum and orders, and all of that sort of thing. And we say well, that we
have vertebrates and invertebrates and mammals and arachnids and all these different forms
and where we distinguish the characteristics of certain forms of life from others.
Now, when we're involved in that study of taxonomy, what we are looking at is the process of individuation. What's the difference between a man and an ape? Is it simply because
man lacks the hairy covering of the whole body that is common among the primates?
How do we distinguish what makes a man a man?
We remember Plato's answer to that question. Plato mused, and he thought, and he said,
"What is it that really makes up the distinctive characteristics of a human being?" And finally,
he said, "Well, you know some creatures walk on four legs and man walks on two, and some have feathers and some don't." And so, for biological purposes, Plato tried to define man as
a featherless biped, i.e., a two-footed creature without feathers. And while they say in antiquity, whether it's legendary or not I don't know, Plato was allegedly having one of his garden lectures,
that on the other side of the wall of the garden, a student decided to pull a prank on Plato.
And he put a sign on a plucked chicken and threw it over the wall into the lap of Plato and his
students. And the sign said, "Plato's man, a plucked chicken," that was a featherless biped.
Now, we see the problems of individuation, but when we go through this process,
we are concerned with two things, to note, similarities and differences. And I might say this
that error in philosophy, error in theology, and error in science, more often than not is caused by a failure to do both of these accurately. We note similarities and we note the differences.
And there's a certain sense in which this is the substance of the scientific enterprise.
How do we progress in our studies in medicine, but that we begin to look more closely and
closely and closely at cellular behavior and at different enzymes and at different viral
things? And we say, "Well, this is a Streptococcus and this is a Staphylococcus." We see the certain
similarities between them, but we have to also note the differences so that we can distinguish one from the other. And each time that we make one of those distinctions, we have added to our understanding, added to the body of knowledge that makes up science. The very difference between
matter and energy, between a common cold and brain cancer, is all the difference in the world. And what's the pursuit of knowledge and the pursuit of science is constantly the making of distinctions,
the individuating, the manifestation of the call to dominion over the earth by taxonomy.
And so, this was the first enterprise of Adam. As the animals come by, Adam says, "That's a lion. That's a tiger. That's a turkey." He is beginning the process of science, but of course, as I mentioned, that was a parenthesis.
Now, let's look at the force of the passage. Why does God bring these creatures here? Not simply for the purpose of Adam's scientific enterprise, not simply for the purpose of Adam's
individuation, but God's bringing these creatures there because they're trying to find a helpmate
suitable. Or we can read between the lines and do it like this. God's looking at Adam's loneliness.
He is not happy about it. He says, "It's not good. I'm going to get him a helpmate that's suitable
for him." And so, He calls on the whole realm of creation and God brings a dog into the garden
and says, "What do you think of that, Adam?" And Adam looks at that dog, that beautifully figured animal with its smooth coat, very intelligent. I'm sure it was a German Shepherd. He brings that German shepherd into the garden and says, "What do you think Adam? And Adam
looks at it and says, "Phew! That is a beautiful creature, magnificent beast. And so intelligent, I can train it to come on command. It can become my best friend. It can get my slippers for me in
the morning. It can go to the edge of the garden and get the paper and deliver it to me every day.
It's fantastic. In fact, when it gets cold in the in the garden, I can snuggle up next to it
over there and maybe I'll need two or three of them. And some nights we can call them a two-dog night or a three-dog night. It's great Lord, but Lord, it's just not quite what I had in mind."
God said, "Alright, okay." So, the next thing He brings in a horse.
Adam said, "No, that's something." He said, "Look at that beast. That's so much bigger than the dog, so much stronger. It can pull my plow as I till the earth. I can ride on its back and have a great degree of increased mobilization and acceleration. I can ride through the woods and over the fences in the garden. I might even start races here in the garden.
That can really enrich my life. But God, I don't want to be picky, but it's still not quite it." So, God tries a kangaroo, an orangutan, a baboon, and Adam just keeps checking them off saying, "That's not what I had in mind." So, God said, "I'll tell you what I'm going to do.
If you don't like any of these things, I'm going to have a special act of creation,
a mail-order bride, Adam. One made to your specifications. One that is perfectly suitable."
Adam's eyes begin to light up, and he says, "That's great. How're we going to do it?" And He says, "I'll take care of it, but first Adam, you're going to take a nap."
And so, we read in the text, "So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man and he slept. And then He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place. And the Lord God
fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man and brought her to the man."
While Adam slept, God performed surgery on His creature. He goes into the caverns of his own body. He takes a part of his own skeletal section. He removes that rib, that joint,
that inner visceral part of man and then performs a special act of creation and makes the woman and takes her aside and Adam is asleep. And then Adam is taken to the recovery room,
and finally Adam wakes up and God said, "Adam, are you ready? I have something I want to show you."
And Adam rubs his eyes and he looks up and here comes God, not with a kangaroo or with a dog or
a horse or a baboon, but with ishah, a woman. And Adam looks at the woman and he becomes ecstatic.
He said, "God, that's it! That's it!" He said, "How did you ever thing of this? O God,
she's terrific. This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh. She shall be called 'woman' because she's taken right out of my chest, out of my heart, out of the depths of my being."
There is a companion that is made with just enough difference and just enough similarity
to be perfectly suitable
to end the malediction of loneliness. So here we see woman created not as an inferior being, but as one who is especially made by God.
And we read what follows is the biblical institution and establishment of marriage. "For this cause a man shall leave his father
and his mother and shall cleave to his wife, and they shall become one flesh."
Woman is made for man, and man is made for the woman. There is a fitting symmetry of suitability between male and female. God makes this partner and said, "Now, I want to join these two together.
It's not simply two independent beings walking through the garden. But I want these two
who are distinct and who are separate to experience a mystical transcendent kind of unity." The two shall become one flesh, not that they will become one identity, not that their maleness will be submerged into the marriage or that their femaleness will be lost. They will still be
male. They will still be female. They will still be Adam, they will still be Eve, but somehow in a mysterious way that God has ordained in the holy state of marriage they will be one flesh.
And for this, for this is so important that the man will cleave to his wife.
In the marriage ceremonies, we say that marriage was ordained of God, instituted of God, sanctified
by Christ, regulated by the commandments of God. And in those traditional vows,
we have the man's responsibility to cherish his wife.
Nobody beats what he cherishes. Nobody exploits what he cherishes. Nobody oppresses what he
cherishes. No one denigrates or demeans what he cherishes. And that whole concept of the man cherishing this special gift that God has made for him is found in these words:
"The man shall leave his father and his mother and shall cleave to his wife." He will embrace her
with love and with commitment and with tenderness. That's what marriage was ordained to be, suitable, dynamic, intimate. The two become one flesh.
Now, at the very end of this, almost like a dangling participle or a concluding unscientific
postscript, verse 25 is attached to Genesis 2. And it doesn't seem to fit. It seems to just hang there with no rhyme or reason for its being there, but let's look at it because in a later lecture
we're going to expand on this theme as the Old Testament does. But we're going to introduce it
now and leave it for your contemplation. "And the man and his wife were both naked and unashamed."
In the first marriage, there was total exposure, total vulnerability, no hiding, no clothes, no covering, and no shame. That's the idyllic setting for marriage. But what happens
to that peace and that freedom from shame is the tragedy of the human race.
God bless you
Comments