Note: this is a revision of our first Card Talk ever, from 2013 when we were a little blog on Tumblr. Changes have been made for the purpose of formatting, clarity, and more biblical/rabbinic nerdity. 

Genesis 2:18-25 records the story of YHWH deciding "it is not good for the man to be alone," and the creation of woman from the man's rib. 

In short, after YHWH comes to the conclusion that man shouldn't be alone, YHWH creates all the beasts of the field and birds of the air and presents them to the man; the man names all of the earthly creatures before him, and suddenly realizes that he is not like them. He gets lonely.

The Sunday School version of the story (anticipating the tale of Noah, since all the flannel board creatures had already been purchased) displays the animals parading before the man in pairs. This version of the story basically plays out with the man saying, "Mr. Sheep, Mrs. Sheep over here. Mr. Goat, Mrs. Goat over there. Mr. Orangutan, Mrs. Orangutan. Wait. What the ...?! Everyone has someone, but me! Even that ugly, feces throwing mongrel!" The man realizes his need, YHWH knocks him out, and creates the woman. They live happily ever, until they screw everything up for all of us throughout time.

There is another version of this story, with slightly different details. For centuries great biblical minds, including some found in the Talmud (Tractate Yebamoth 63a) have argued that the man didn't just name the animals, he had sex with them.

We'll give you a second to re-read that.

Even Sheep Need Love

The idea that "Adam" diddled the animals is based on a reading of the Hebrew phrase employed in Gen 2:18 and 2:20: 'ezer kenegdo [עֵזֶר כְּנֶגְדֹּֽו].

Gen 2:18: Then the Lord God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper ( 'ezer kenegdo) as his partner.” 

Gen 2:20: 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 ( 'ezer kenegdo) as his partner.

'ezer kenegdo translates in a variety of ways, but they all circle the same idea: "A helper corresponding to him." "A sustainer beside him." "A suitable helper." In other words, someone that was appropriate to the man in a way that the animals were not. So far, so good. But where does the sex come into play?

The argument goes as follows: the man was alone and YHWH saw it was not good, so the animals were made. YHWH paraded all of the animals in front of man, a creature with sexual desires, and the man had sex with each animal. This reading posits bestiality was not a sin prior to The Fall of Man. Which is not as far fetched as the current taboo might have you believe. Part of The Fall is a stark separation between humanity and the rest of nature. This could have been one of those separations. Furthermore, the Torah does not record bestiality as being a sin until the Moses received that word on Sinai (Exodus 22:19). In any event, this take on the story says that the man had intercourse with Mr. and/or Mrs. Sheep, Goat, Orangutan and all the other cute and ugly creatures, but found that none "corresponded," "fit," or was a "suitable helper" (depending on your translation) to his body. 

In this reading of the tale, when YHWH presents woman, and the man says, "this at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh" (Gen 2:23), it is because after all his experimenting he has found something/someone he, uhm, fits. In light of this interpretation, verse 23 could be paraphrased to read, "Finally! Something my body corresponds/responds to!"

This might also explain why the man was so quick to throw his wife under the bus after God questioned them over the whole incident with The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil: the man blames God for giving him the woman, in essence saying (as one of our seminary professors once quipped), "Look man: I was happy with the sheep: this woman you gave me — and the serpent you made — screwed everything up." (Gen 3:12)

Of singular importance is the idea that this interpretation requires a physical reading of 'ezer kenegdo; That the phrase is about how the bodies of two people join together physically, not mentally, emotionally, spiritually, or socially.

We feel this view is in error. 

Divine Help

As we state above, this reading of 'ezer kenegdo is too simplistic. It leaves out the very real (and sensible) possibility that the mental, emotional, spiritual, and social joining of bodies is more important than merely the physical. That YHWH felt and feels that when one corresponds with another, when one sustains another, it it more than a testament to the intersection of genitalia. 

As stated above, 'ezer kenegdo means "a helper corresponding to him" or a "sustainer beside him." But some argue a closer parsing of the Hebrew shows that it literally means to be "opposite" or "against" something. Therefore, "a helper against him," in the sense of a support propping something up, like the third leg of an easel. The famed Rashi took this thought further arguing that "if the man is worthy, the woman will be a helper (“against him,” as a support); if he is unworthy, she will be against him (opposed to him)". In other words, the 'ezer kenegdo requires active intervention from one on the behalf of another. But this all begs the question: why do people need other people?

Over the centuries, scholars, clergy, and Sunday School students who were paying have noticed what comes before this story: the man was given a job to do:

Gen 2:15: The Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to till it and keep it.

It is after this that YHWH says it is not good for man to be alone. The man was given a job to accomplish that required more than animal assistance. He needed someone who was suitable to the divinely given task. Someone who corresponds with another human. Someone who can sustain another human. Someone who mentally, emotionally, spiritually, and socially fits. Someone who can help him do the work he has been given to do. Thus the relationship between the two humans was predicated on them fulfilling a divine purpose that was more than interlocking privates. 

Now, some have used this passage to show the dominance of males over females, "Adam" over "Eve." Some have cited this passage as an example of the male patriarchy subjugating women through antiquated narrative. Both are basing this off the idea that the woman comes from the man and her only purpose was to be his "helper." Both camps need to STFU and actually read the Bible. 

'ezer  is not the Hebrew Bible's go-to word for "help." And it certainly is not used as a term of subjugated status, or second class citizenry. 

When 'ezer is used in the Bible, it overwhelmingly refers to God (ESP IN PSALMS). 

(c.f. Exodus 18:4, Deuteronomy  33:17, Psalms 33:20; 70:5; 89:19; 115:9-11; 121:2)

Rashi, with his quote above, understood this. As did the commentary writer Matthew Henry:

That 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 trampled 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.

Though we would say he did not go far enough: equality means that the woman protected and loves the heart of the man as well. That they love and care for each other, are helpers, sustainers, and corresponding parts, just as God is for humanity (we'll leave you to make the connections to an egalitarian reading of Ephesians chapter 5 on your own). 

Perhaps Adam understood this better than we do. 

Perhaps that is why the first words we hear a human speak in the Bible is his joy at finding his corresponding, sustaining, equal partner. 

Perhaps we are too much like him and forget the same when things get tough, throwing the other under the bus, blaming God, and wishing we had something that fit less well. 

Perhaps we all have our bouts with mental, emotional, spiritual, and social sheep sex.

But what do we know: we made this game and you probably think we're going to Hell.