Adam and Eve - Did God intend
to prohibit same sex
marriage partnerships?

”God made Adam and Eve - Not Adam and Steve!”

We’ve all heard someone
say that as if it should
be engraved in stone.

Adam & Eve
stained glass window.

That statement sums up the belief system of many Christians. They view Genesis 2:24 as God’s final answer on who can get married.

The Adam & Eve marriage model, ‘one man with one woman’ is the only marriage model God will bless, according to some Christians.

Their logic works like this. Since God only mentioned a heterosexual couple in Genesis 2, anti-gay Christians assume God intended to condemn homosexual couples because He did not mention them.

How would you answer
these important questions?

1. In the Adam and Eve story, did God or Moses give an explicit command that gay and lesbian partnerships are wrong?

2. In telling us about Adam & Eve, did God or Moses intend to prohibit all lesbian and gay relationships?

Anti-Gay Christian Author
Tom Schmidt Answers No!

Thomas E. Schmidt, Ph.D.,
anti-gay evangelical Christian.

Tom Schmidt is a conservative evangelical Christian author and college professor who believes all intimate same sex partnerships are sinful. Yet here is his surprising answer to our two questions (bold emphasis mine).

"So while it is true that the Genesis creation story does not provide explicit commands about sexuality, it provides a basis for biblical commands and for subsequent reflection on the part of those who wish to construct a sexual ethic to meet changing situations.

Applying this principle to our subject, it is fair to say that the human author of Genesis was not consciously prohibiting same-sex relations when he wrote the creation account, but it is appropriate for us to explore the relevance of biblical commands about marriage and to evaluate modern homosexuality in light of Genesis."

- From his book, Straight and Narrow?, Thomas E. Schmidt, Leicester: IVP, 1995, 240 pp.

The Complementarian argument
against gay Christians
is not scriptural,
as Tom Schmidt admits.

If anti-gay, Complementarian reasoning about Adam and Eve is valid, we could also conclude that God is against grandparents because grandparents are not mentioned in Genesis 2.

But of course, God is not against grandparents! It goes against our common sense to conclude that if God did not mention grandparents in Genesis 2, God must be against grandparents.

It also goes against our common sense to assume that because God did not mention homosexual couples in the Adam and Eve story, God must be against gay couples.

In reality, the traditional view of Genesis 2, believed by many Christians, distorts scripture by assuming facts not in evidence. Genesis is an explanation of origins. It is not a dissertation on marriage relationships. God asserts the importance of human relationships by observing:

“It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.” Genesis 2:18

(from the KJV - the most gay-friendly English Bible available today. "Meet" means fitting, suitable, appropriate for).

Why not accept the Adam and Eve story at face value without reading into it more than God actually says?

Adam was a one of a kind original. The animals had compatible companions but Adam was all alone. Here was Adam, a perfect man, alone and lonely because no other human beings existed and Eve had not yet been created.

Adam, the original, perfect man in a perfect world, had God as his intimate companion yet God knew His companionship was not enough for Adam. In the midst of fellowship with God, Adam still needed someone like himself - an orientation compatible partner - for emotional, physical and spiritual companionship.

Emotional, physical and spiritual companionship form the basis of all loving heterosexual and homosexual human relationships.

When God created Eve and presented her to Adam, Adam rejoiced because Eve was:

“bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh.” Genesis 2:23.

3rd Century Fresco of Adam and Eve from Roman Italy.

In Genesis 2:23, Adam is adam and Eve is ishshah, the Hebrew words for man and woman.

Adam is also referred to as 'iysh, meaning man, because Eve-ishshah was taken from the 'iysh-man's, side.

Blue Letter Bible on Genesis 2:23, Adam, ishshah and ‘iysh. This Link will open in a new page.

God's first stated reason for creating Eve was companionship for Adam.

Eve’s similarity to Adam allowed them to bond as a couple. Adam and Eve’s deep spiritual and emotional kinship modeled God’s first stated reason for marriage, which is companionship, not procreation. God said:

“It is not good that the man should be alone.” Genesis 2:18.

God includes the story of Adam and Eve in the Genesis historical record because God intended to populate the earth, not because God intended to forbid every marriage model different from the Adam and Eve model.

Just as the dyadic (two person) nature of Adam and Eve’s relationship was not used in Genesis to forbid polygamy, so the heterosexual nature of Adam and Eve’s relationship does not forbid homosexual unions for the small percentage of the human population who are homosexual.

Some Christians read far too much into God’s presumed silence concerning Adam and Eve and gay marriage. Here is another important question thoughtful Christians ask.

If same sex marriages are okay with God, why aren’t same sex marriages mentioned in scripture?

Adam and Eve leaving
the Garden of Eden.

The answer is that Biblical marriage models reflect the ancient cultures in which they occurred.

There were no grandparents or gay couples, in the beginning, with Adam and Eve, so there was no reason for God or Moses to mention grandparents or gay couples in the Genesis 2 account.

It should also be pointed out that there are gay people and gay couples mentioned in the Bible. Never be afraid to embrace truth, even when it is different than what you were brought up to believe.

Since loving, committed, same sex partnerships between equals, as we know them today, were relatively rare in the ancient cultures of Biblical times, we rightly expect not to find much emphasis on gay couples in scripture.

Can we now agree that the following conclusions are illogical?

If the logic of Christians who condemn gay couples is valid, that since God did not mention other marriage models in Genesis, God must be against gay couples, we can use the same logic to prove any number of things which are not true. It sounds kind of silly but here is where such illogic takes us.

  1. The Genesis 2 marriage model says nothing about wedding gifts therefore God must be against wedding gifts.

    Of course, no one believes that and no thinking person would draw that conclusion from Genesis 2.

  2. The Genesis 2 marriage model says nothing about wedding rings therefore God must be against wedding rings.

    Would anyone with more than two functioning brain cells draw that conclusion from Genesis 2?

  3. The Genesis 2 marriage model says nothing about getting married in church therefore, God must be against getting married in church.

    Really now, doesn't such a crazy conclusion assault our common sense?

  4. The Genesis 2 marriage model says nothing about adopting children, therefore God must be against adopting children.

    No one believes God is against adopting children simply because adoption is not mentioned in Genesis 2.

  5. The Genesis 2 marriage model says nothing about gay couples therefore God must be against gay couples.

That kind of reasoning does not make sense. It goes against the inborn common sense we have as human beings. Such arguments are called reductio ad falsum, reduction to the false or reductio ad ridiculum, reduction to the ridiculous. Such reasoning leads to false and ridiculous conclusions.

Reading into scripture, something scripture does not say and then teaching as doctrine, what scripture does not say, is false interpretation. It leads to wrong conclusions about God’s will for the human race and His purpose for creating Adam and Eve.

Links to related pages about
Adam and Eve and God's purpose.

Don't let anyone tell you gays and lesbians are not part of the bride of Christ.

Biblical Complementarity - What Did God Really Intend When He Gave Us The Story Of Adam and Eve?

You may be surprised to learn that that Complementarian theory originated with an ancient Greek philosopher named Plato.

Marriage In The Bible is much different than the vanilla version so frequently pushed by Focus On The Family and the American Family Association.

Family Values in the Bible are so different from Focus On The Family values that modern Christians would totally reject the "family values" practiced by Abraham and Sarah, Ruth and Boaz and many other Old Testament heroes of faith.

Click Here to return to the Home Page.

Google Translate

into 90 languages

WordPress Or SBI!

by Faith

We are saved
by grace alone
through faith alone
in Christ alone.

Gay Christian FAQ

FREE Bible Study
Is the Bible
God's Word?

FREE Bible Study Downloads

FREE info - build
your own website.

Do you know
the context of
Romans 1:26-27?

Early Christians believed Romans 1:26-27 prohibited shrine prostitution.

SiteSell Facebook

John MacArthur says Leviticus 18:21-22
is about
temple prostitution.

Are Christians required to keep Torah Law?

Are Ex-Gays victims
of false teaching?

Free SiteSell E-books

FREE Bible Study
Who Is Jesus?

FREE online videos
about starting
your own website.

Bible Study Resources
for eDisciples

Will you pass the
Good Person Test?

Click the cross.