MARRIAGE.
It is evident from the book of Creation, and at the same time from the Lord's words, that from creation there was given to man and woman an inclination and also a capability of conjunction, as into one. In the book of Creation, which is called Genesis, we read: "Jehovah God builded the rib which he had taken from the man into a woman, and brought her to the man. And the man said, This now is bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh. She shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of man. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife; and they shall be one flesh" (ii. 22-24). The Lord also says the same in Matthew:—"Have ye not read, that He which made them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh" (xix, 4-6). It is clear from these passages that the woman was created from the man (vir),[1] and that each has an inclination and capability of re-uniting themselves into one. That the re-union is into one man (homo) is also plain from the book of Creation, where both together are called man (homo); for we read:—In the day that God created man (homo), . . . a male and a female created He them, . . . and called their name man (homo)" (v. 1, 2). It is said, "He called their name Adam;" but Adam and man in the Hebrew tongue are one word. They are both together called man too in chap. i. 27, and iii. 22, 23, 24, of the same book. One man is also signified by one flesh; as is evident from passages in the Word where all flesh is mentioned, meaning all mankind. (C. L. n. 156.)
The Nature and Origin op Marriage.
The origin of love truly conjugial is the love of the Lord towards the church. Hence in the Word the Lord is called the
- ↑ The author must not be understood to mean that this account is to be interpreted literally, and that the woman was created from the man after the manner of the literal sense. He distinctly states otherwise (A. C. n. 152). But that, as
