God Created a Woman

Part 1 - Genesis 1 & 2

Part One of this series of devotionals studying complementarianism is a free post. Be sure to subscribe to see the rest of the series!

The woman was made of a rib out of the side of Adam; not made out of his head to rule over him, nor out of his feet to be tramped upon by him, but out of his side to be equal with him, under his arm to be protected, and near his heart to be beloved.¹

Matthew Henry so succinctly describes woman and her nature and value.  What is woman?  What is God’s purpose for her?  In the wake of feminism and gender identity issues, it would do us well to go back to the beginning. 

Read Genesis 1

1.  As God embarked on His six-day creation act the final creative work was of what creature?

The Hebrew word for “man” can be translated “mankind” or “humankind.”  

2.   Since the human was made last in the creation week, what does that tell us about our position or authority as it relates to the rest of creation?

God says, “Let us make man. . . .” In Genesis 1:24 God had said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures. . . .” By the sheer power of His spoken will, God had caused the living creatures to emerge from the earth “by remote control as it were.” In the creation of man, however, God Himself acted directly and personally.²

3.   In chapter 1, when is the first time the woman is mentioned?

The statement “male and female created he them” is not yet speaking to any sort of hierarchy between the two kinds of humans (Genesis 1:27).  Indeed we don’t even really know yet how there came to be two.  Rather, in the very first statement in the Bible about women, God very poetically states the nature of the male and female together, not their roles just yet.

             So God created man in his own image,

            In the image of God created he him,

           Male and female created He them.

Each of these three lines makes a point. Line one asserts the divine creation of man. We came from God. Line two overlaps with line one, except that it highlights the divine image in man. We bear a resemblance to God. Line three boldly affirms the dual sexuality of man. We are male and female. Nowhere else in Genesis 1 is sexuality referred to; but human sexuality, superior to animal sexuality, merits the simple dignity given it here. Further, Moses doubtless intends to imply the equality of the sexes, for both male and female display the glory of God’s image with equal brilliance: “. . . in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.” This is consistent with God’s intention, stated in verse 26, that both sexes should rule: “. . . and let them rule. . . .” ³

Read Genesis 2

The second chapter of Genesis is a recap of the first chapter, giving us added details about the creation that God had made.  God tells us about the series of events in the creation of the woman.  

4.  In verse 18, there is something lacking in Adam.  What is it?

In a roundabout way, the incompleteness in Adam implies that the woman who is about to be created has something lacking in her too.  I think this is significant. Both egalitarian and patriarchal beliefs tend to wince at this.  Adam’s need for Eve is more than just needing a woman’s touch or a “partner.”  And Eve, capable as she may be, needed more than just a provider or leader.  They needed fellowship.  Not only with God (because God was already there with Adam), but with each other.  The human race is dependent. The human race is dependent upon both male and female as we can see in 1 Corinthians 11:11-12 (which we will discuss in a future post).

“Mankind was created in one person in Adam, and when there was found no help meet for Adam, no companion in body, soul, or spirit, fit for him, then God, instead of creating a wholly new thing, made Eve out of Adam.”⁴

5. After the declaration of Adam’s need, what did God do for him?

After the declaration of Adam’s need, God did something special for him.  He forms another creature from the same essence as Adam.  

Imagine the scene: As the last of the beasts plods off with its new name, the man turns away with a trace of perplexity and sorrow in his eyes. God says, “Son, I want you to lie down. Now close your eyes and sleep.” The man falls into a deep slumber. The Creator goes to work, opening the man’s side, removing a rib, closing the wound, and building the woman. There she stands, perfectly gorgeous and uniquely suited to the man’s need. The Lord says to her, “Daughter, I want you to go stand over there. I’ll come for you in a moment.” She obeys. Then God touches the man and says, “Wake up now, son. I have one last creature for you to name. I’d like to know what you think of this one.” And God leads Eve out to Adam, who greets her with rhapsodic relief: This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman, because she was taken out of man.⁵

6.  These are the first recorded human words. What do they express?

Matthew Henry beautifully says, 

The man was dust refined, but the woman was dust double-refined, one remove further from the earth. That Adam slept while his wife was in making, that no room might be left to imagine that he had herein directed the Spirit of the Lord, or been his counsellor, (Isa. 40:13). He had been made sensible of his want of a meet help; but, God having undertaken to provide him one, he does not afflict himself with any care about it, but lies down and sleeps sweetly, as one that had cast all his care on God, with a cheerful resignation of himself and all his affairs to his Maker’s will and wisdom. Jehovah-jireh, let the Lord provide when and whom he pleases.⁶

The female was the only part of God’s creation that was on Adam’s level, who was equal to him, who corresponded to him.  The animals could help him and perform what they could for him, but only the woman could fulfill the man’s need.  And it is only one woman who does that for the man in a marriage, by the way, not multiple women.  Elisabeth Elliot says,

The animals are there, fellow creatures with us of the same Creator-God, fellow sufferers, mute and mysterious. “But for the man there was not found a helper fit for him.  God might have given Adam another man to be his friend, to walk and talk and argue with if that was his pleasure. But Adam needed more than the companionship of the animals or the friendship of a man. He needed a helper, specially designed and prepared to fill that role. It was a woman God gave him, a woman, “meet,” fit, suitable, entirely appropriate for him, made of his very bones and flesh. You can’t make proper use of a thing unless you know what it was made for, whether it is a safety pin or a sailboat. To me it is a wonderful thing to be a woman under God  — to know, first of all, that we were made (“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.”) and then that we were made for something (“The rib which the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man.”) This was the original idea. This is what woman was for. The New Testament refers back clearly and strongly to this purpose: “For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man” (1 Cor. 11:8-9).  Some texts are susceptible of differing interpretations, but for the life of me I can’t see any ambiguities in this one.⁷

7. What do the words “help” and “meet” mean in the context of Genesis 2:20?

8.   Look up the word “woman” and write down the definition.

Although the man and the woman are distinct creatures with differing purposes, they stand together before God as He talked with them and communed with them in the garden.  The race of man is male and female.  In God’s wisdom, He decided not to create just one kind of human but two kinds of human.  Equal but different.  

The man perceives the woman not as his rival but as his partner, not as a threat because of her equality with himself but as the only one capable of fulfilling his longing within…. What distinguishes this particular social institution? Moses reasons that marriage is the re-union of what was originally and literally one flesh—only now in a much more satisfying form, we would all agree. This is why “He who loves his wife loves himself. For no man ever hates his own flesh.” Becoming “one flesh” as husband and wife is symbolized and sealed by sexual union, it is true. But the “one flesh” relationship entails more than sex. It is the profound fusion of two lives into one, shared life together, by the mutual consent and covenant of marriage. It is the complete and permanent giving over of oneself into a new circle of shared existence with one’s partner.⁸

9.  In what ways are the man and the woman equal?

10.  In what ways are the man and the woman different or un-equal?

Genesis 2:24-25 introduces the institution of marriage. “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.”

 It is interesting that there is no mother or father to leave at this point, so why is that mentioned?  God is setting a precedent.  He wants it this way and not another way.  It is important to note that although there were only two humans on the entire planet at this time, Adam states that they shall become one flesh.  It is specifically a coupling.  That is, there is no other option other than two that are made into one.  To put it negatively, several do not become one.  Also, one flesh is not made from any other coupling than the man and his wife (singular).  This speaks volumes against marriage in any other configuration.  

11.  According to Genesis 2:24-25, what is different about the relationship between the first couple and their relationship to any other creature?

The first couple are so equal that it is described as being “one.”  They are not merely partners, as if it were just two people working together side-by-side.  Oneness is much more than that.  The man and the woman are sharing their existence just as they did before the woman was formed, in and around and through and for and with each other.  

This is not enough for some feminist writers, though.  They lament the fact that even though God refers to males and females together, the whole race is referred to as “man” rather than “woman.”  

12.  What are some reasons for this terminology in the Bible?

One reason for God’s terminology here is that man arrived first.  The name man is merely descriptive.  Man is what the human is.  It wasn’t a woman until God took her out of him.  

13.  At the end of Genesis 2, has the Fall of Man happened?  What does that say about the institution of marriage or of womanhood?

There is a hint of hierarchy even in this though, and that is what has feminists and egalitarians scrambling to take this passage out of context.  Many views of womanhood (feminism, Islam, Mormonism, many cults, egalitarianism) believe that the curse on the woman after the Fall resulted in woman’s subordination to man, and so they have to make the sinless creation to be without hierarchy.  So if the Fall resulted in subordination, then redemption is a restoration of equality of the sexes.  But we have seen in just these few verses that is not the case.  The status as Helper Suitable for the man is established before the Fall as a part of God’s very good creation.  Subordination does not mean inferiority, and that is true in any leader-follower relationship.  Feminism especially cannot seem to understand that truth.  Even within the Godhead itself, Jesus submitted himself to the will of the Father (John 5:30).  Furthermore, the Spirit comes from the Father as well and does His will (John 15:26), yet the equality within the Trinity is undeniable in Scripture.  At this point, the end of Genesis 2, the Fall of Man has not happened yet.  This is part of God’s “very good” creation.  God really did make Eve to be a helper suitable for Adam, and He made Adam first on purpose. Adam was not made a helper for Eve, nor were they made simultaneously.   This was all the way it was supposed to be!  

In Genesis and in other passages, men are given a leadership role simply by virtue of being a man.  The first woman’s role was to be a helper on par with the man, a complement to him, and this is by virtue of simply being a woman.  When these roles are performed correctly and harmoniously, the original glory of God’s very good creation is re-created and re-invigorated.  And conversely, when the roles are abused or neglected or distorted, the nobility of God’s purpose in us is hindered.

Read Matthew 19:1-6

14.  What question is Jesus answering in these verses?

The Matthew 19 passage relates to the marriage union and Jesus draws his conclusions from the creative act itself.  Interestingly, Jesus repeats the word “two” to emphasize the binding (or as my pastor-husband says, “welding”) of only these two individuals above every other relation.  One commentary said it this way:

Shall cleave  literally, shall be glued to. The word expresses the closest possible union, stronger and higher than that towards parents. They twain shall be one flesh; the two shall become one flesh. The Septuagint (Greek Old Testament) and Samaritan Pentateuch insert “the two,” which is not in the present Hebrew text. Our Lord adopts the addition as conveying the correct sense. In marriage there is a moral and physical union, so that two persons become virtually one being. Originally, man contained woman in himself before she was separated from him; she was a corporeal unity with man; or, as others put it, man, as a race, was created male and female, the latter being implicitly contained in the former; the previous unity is thus asserted. In marriage this unity is acknowledged and continued. Paul quotes this text in Eph. 5:31; and in 1 Cor. 6:16 uses it as an argument against fornication.

Wherefore; so that. This follows from the quotation just given. Our Lord explains and confirms the original dictum by an assertion of his own and a general law. What God hath joined together. The institution of marriage is God’s appointment. Christ says “what”, neuter singular, not “those whom,” plural and concrete, that he may make it clear that he is here speaking in the abstract, not specially of Adam and Eve. What he enunciates is true of all wedlock, not simply of the case of our first parents. Let not man put asunder. Man does thus infringe the primitive rule when he divorces his wife. Herein he opposes God and acts against nature. He and his wife are one; they can no more separate from one another than they can from themselves. If we regard our Lord’s language in this passage without prejudice, and not reading into it modern notions, we must consider that he here decrees the indissolubility of the marriage tie. His hearers plainly understood him so to speak, as we see from the objection which they urged.⁹

In light of these thoughts, it brings to mind the frivolousness with which the world treats the marriage union.  The seriousness and permanence of marriage requires a single man or woman to carefully prepare themselves and examine their future mate that their free-will choice to marry and pledge such a union together can be fulfilled when they take their vows.

Also, the fact that a man and woman can so closely and permanently be joined reminds us of the equality of the sexes.  The woman and the man are a paradox.  Co-equal before God as the human race, yet differing in form and purpose and ability.  Both sides of the paradox show the amazing wisdom of God our Creator. 

God created a Woman.  “And God saw everything that He had made, and behold, it was very good.”  Gen. 1:31.

This post is a free Part One of this series of devotionals studying complementarianism. Be sure to subscribe to see the rest of the series!

1. Henry, M. (1994). Matthew Henry’s commentary on the whole Bible: complete and unabridged in one volume (p. 10). Peabody: Hendrickson.

2. Grudem, Wayne (2006). Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood: A Response to Evangelical Feminism(Kindle Locations 2177-2180). Crossway, Wheaton, IL. Kindle Edition.

3. Ibid. (Kindle Locations 2191-2197).

4. Spence-Jones, H. D. M. (Ed.). (1909). St. Matthew (Vol. 2, p. 243). London; New York: Funk & Wagnalls Company.

5. Ortlund, (Kindle Locations 2297-2305).

6. Henry, M. (1994). Matthew Henry’s commentary on the whole Bible: complete and unabridged in one volume (p. 10). Peabody: Hendrickson.

7. Elliot, Elisabeth. Let Me Be a Woman (p. 13). Tyndale House Publishers. Kindle Edition.

8. Ortlund (Kindle Locations 2308-2319).

9. Spence-Jones (p. 243).