Genesis 2:24

Therefore shall a man leave his father, and his mother,.... These are thought by some to be the words of Moses, inferring from the above fact, what ought to be among men; and by others, the words of

Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife.

These are the words of Moses by Divine instinct, or his inference from Adam’ s words. Shall a man leave his father and his mother; in regard of habitation and society, but not as to natural duty and affection; and in conjugal relation and highest affection, even above what they owe to their parents, they two shall be esteemed by themselves and others to be as entirely and inseparably united, and shall have as intimate and universal commmunion, as if they were one person, one soul, one body. And this first institution shows the sinfulness of divorces, and polygamy, however God might upon a particular reason for a time dispense with his own institution, or remit the punishment due to the violators of it.

Genesis 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.Ver. 24. Therefore shall a man leave, &c.] Whether these are the words of God, Adam, or Moses, it is uncertain, and not much material. The husband is bound more to love his wife than his parents, in regard of domestical communion, adhesion, and cohabitation, not in regard of honour, obedience, and recompense. And they two shall be one flesh.] Two in one flesh; not three or four, as the patriarchs of old, through ignorance, or inobservance of that plain prohibition. It is possible they might mistake the word sister for one so by blood, which was spoken of a sister by nation, as those clauses, "to vex her," and "during her life," do evince. Paraeus ad locum.

(24) Therefore shall a man leave . . . —These are evidently the words of the narrator. Adam names this new product of creative power, as he had named others, but he knew nothing about young men leaving their father’s house for the wife’s sake. Moreover, in Matthew 19:5, our Lord quotes these words as spoken by God, and the simplest interpretation of this declaration is that the inspired narrator was moved by the Spirit of God to give this solemn sanction to marriage, founded upon Adam’s words. The great and primary object of this part of the narrative is to set forth marriage as a Divine ordinance. The narrator describes Adam’s want, pictures him as examining all animal life, and studying the habits of all creatures so carefully as to be able to give them names, but as returning from his search unsatisfied. At last one is solemnly brought to him who is his counterpart, and he calls her Ishah, his feminine self, and pronounces her to be his very bone and flesh. Upon this, “He who at the beginning made them male and female “pronounced the Divine marriage law that man and wife are one flesh.

Verse 24. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother] There shall be, by the order of God, a more intimate connection formed between the man and woman, than can subsist even between parents and children. And they shall be one flesh.] These words may be understood in a twofold sense. 1. These two shall be one flesh, shall be considered as one body, having no separate or independent rights, privileges, cares, concerns, c., each being equally interested in all things that concern the marriage state. 2. These two shall be for the production of one flesh from their union a posterity shall spring, as exactly resembling themselves as they do each other. Our Lord quotes these words, Matthew 19:5, with some variation from this text: They TWAIN shall be one flesh. So in Mr 10:8. St. Paul quotes in the same way, 1 Corinthians 6:16, and in Ephesians 5:31. The Vulgate Latin, the Septuagint, the Syriac, the Arabic, and the Samaritan, all read the word TWO. That this is the genuine reading I have no doubt. The word שניהם sheneyhem, they two or both of them, was, I suppose, omitted at first from the Hebrew text, by mistake, because it occurs three words after in the following verse, or more probably it originally occurred in Genesis 2:24, and not in Genesis 2:25; and a copyist having found that he had written it twice, in correcting his copy, struck out the word in Genesis 2:24 instead of Ge 2:25. But of what consequence is it? In the controversy concerning polygamy, it has been made of very great consequence. Without the word, some have contended a man may have as many wives as he chooses, as the terms are indefinite, THEY shall be, c., but with the word, marriage is restricted. A man can have in legal wedlock but ONE wife at the same time. We have here the first institution of marriage, and we see in it several particulars worthy of our most serious regard. 1. God pronounces the state of celibacy to be a bad state, or, if the reader please, not a good one and the Lord God said, It is not good for man to be alone. This is GOD'S judgment. Councils, and fathers, and doctors, and synods, have given a different judgment; but on such a subject they are worthy of no attention. The word of God abideth for ever. 2. God made the woman for the man, and thus he has shown us that every son of Adam should be united to a daughter of Eve to the end of the world. 1 Corinthians 7:3.

24. Therefore shall a man, &c.] This verse contains the comment which the narrator makes upon the words of the man in Genesis 2:23. The word “therefore” introduces his inference. As in Genesis 10:9, Genesis 26:33, Genesis 32:32, a sentence beginning with “therefore” supplies the application, or relation, of the ancient narrative to later times. It is the man who is to leave “father and mother,” not “the woman.” Some compare the story in Judges 15:1, where the woman remains with her family or clan, and Samson comes to live with her. This feature has been thought to illustrate the primitive usage of “the matriarchate.” But it is unlikely that the Hebrew narrative would contain a reference to such conditions. Instead of “shall leave,” the full force of the tense in the Hebrew would be given by “doth leave” and “cleaveth.” The sanctity of marital relations is thus referred back to the very birthday of human society, being based on a principle laid down before the Fall. The relation of the man to his wife is proclaimed to be closer than that to his father and mother. By the words, “shall cleave unto his wife … one flesh,” is asserted the sanctity of marriage. Polygamy is not definitely excluded; but the principle of monogamy seems to be implied in the words “cleave” and “shall be one flesh”: and this principle is upheld by the prophets as the ideal of marriage, in their representation of the relation of Jehovah and Israel under the metaphor of the married state. This is the classical passage dealing with marriage to which our Lord appeals, Matthew 19:4-6, Mark 10:6-8, in His argument against divorce. St Paul quotes it in 1 Corinthians 6:16, in condemnation of unchastity, and in Ephesians 5:31, when describing the ideal relationships of Christ and His Church. and they shall be one flesh] Lit., as LXX καὶἔσονταιοἱδύοεἰςσάρκαμίαν, Lat. erunt duo in carne una, where the addition of “the two” is supported by the Syriac Peshitto, the Targum of Pseudo-Jonathan, and the quotations in the N.T., Matthew 19:5; Mark 10:8; 1 Corinthians 6:16.

These might be the words of the first man Genesis 2:24. As he thoroughly understood the relation between himself and the woman, there is no new difficulty in conceiving him to become acquainted at

24. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh — Some interpreters (Delitzsch, Lange) regard these as the words of Adam, spoken