• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

One Flesh - a biological perspective

One weird fact, recalling this statement I made long ago in another thread:
FollowingHim said:
Shaking hands is a sign of peace - you hold your sword in your right hand, so if your hand is empty and shaking theirs, you're not trying to kill them.
Also, you'd traditionally wipe your bum with your left hand and eat with your right (in the absence of cleaning facilities), so you'd extend the right hand of fellowship and not the left...
Click to expand...
According to the Encyclopaedia Britannica:
"...one study has shown, a typical palm surface of the hand can harbour more than 150 different bacterial species, only 17 percent of which are common to both hands of the same person and only 13 percent of which are shared by different persons."

I wonder what causes those different bacterial communities on the right and left hands... :)
 
FollowingHim said:
I really am not talking just about bugs in your gut digesting food and making you fart. Though they are a very important part of it all.
Click to expand...

lol, yeah I think I know you are onto something more complex here but I had to make a joke. It’s so hard to perceive naturally what you are talking about though, which is what I’m truly pondering on. It’s an invisible world to most of the base senses.

I’ve been personally trying to get more fresh fruits and veggies in my diet, raw, with a probiotic. If in a month I’ve got a pep in my step I’ll come back and concede that maybe what’s going on in my internal ecology does effect worship. I bet I will feel better.

Still, I can’t quite let go of the thought they are separate from me and indeed live off me. That we are, in the image, and that they are somehow, as vast and intertwined as they are, a part of the environment. The fine line between ecology and self is something I’m happy to ponder on now. You’ve definitely got me thinking.
 
Last edited:
Great biological explanation.

I too question the ovespiritualization of "one flesh".

Another in-plain-sight explanation I generally use is that the two partners are uniting in sexual union to seal the deal of becoming one family (flesh).
 
SonoLumen said:
Still, I can’t quite let go of the thought they are separate from me and indeed live off me.
Click to expand...
Mojo said:
Another in-plain-sight explanation I generally use is that the two partners are uniting in sexual union to seal the deal of becoming one family (flesh).
Click to expand...
I have had that opinion of it for a while now (that "one flesh" was a euphemism for sex itself), but I feel it doesn't fit as well. If the "cleaving" is sex, and the "one flesh" is the result, that aligns more clearly with the wording in Genesis.
 
One needn't look to brand new science to find a physiological explanation for one-flesh: physicists have recognized for over 100 years that atoms trade components when they are placed together long enough (the long-enough depending on the substances). This is the physical explanation for why some substances adhere to each other even though they don't adhere to anything else. When one person holds hand with another person, electrons immediately begin 'invading' each other's territory, resulting -- upon unclasping -- some of him being left with her and some of her being left with him. If that's happening on the molecular level, it is likely happening on the cellular level as well.

The same thing happens, by the way, when one sits down on a chair such that one's skin is in contact with the chair. Afterward, the chair becomes minutely but partial human, and the person becomes partially wood.
 
Good point.

On consideration though, that makes you more "one flesh" with your shirt than your wife (and even more "one flesh" with an electric fence...), so I don't feel it is a core point. But it is worth pondering as part of the picture.
 
FollowingHim said:
Good point.

On consideration though, that makes you more "one flesh" with your shirt than your wife (and even more "one flesh" with an electric fence...), so I don't feel it is a core point. But it is worth pondering as part of the picture.
Click to expand...
Actually, the shirt is definitely not a better candidate, because penis and vagina skin is even more sensitive, porous and penetrable than leg or buttocks skin, and the contact is more, well, close than between a shirt and one's chest or back, not to mention that actual electrical impulses are transferred intravaginally, as well as envelopment of aural energy -- so it's still a similar principle.

We're not suggesting with a straight face, though, that 2010's science has revolutionized understanding of Scripture, are we?
 
Keith Martin said:
We're not suggesting with a straight face, though, that 2010's science has revolutionized understanding of Scripture, are we?
Click to expand...
If you don’t want to do it with a straight face, a smile would not be inappropriate.
 
The idea of teeth having skin was misunderstood for centuries also.

Until it wasn’t.
 
steve said:
The idea of teeth having skin was misunderstood for centuries also.

Until it wasn’t.
Click to expand...

Now there's an image -- teeth and inside cheeks being one flesh!
 
The real question, though, is, at what point in seminovaginal microbiome interchange does God join the two together? And I'm assuming must semen be released? If so, what if the man has had a vasectomy or is otherwise shooting blanks.

Furthermore, does one-flesh-ness occur with seminoral microbiomageness? I ask because that's definitely my love language. And at what point does the covenant achieve lift-off -- when I'm yelling, "Don't stop now!" -- or or later?
 
Ok sorry but when two become flesh I believe it starts with Carnell Knowledge i dont think fluids have to be exchange and when husband and wife have the intimate relationship they start coming together on all things
EXample how many have had your spouse leave for a week and weather Job or Vacation and doesn't part of you feel their presence missing you have become one your not complete
same happens when you loose your wife part of you is gone its hard to fill the void I thank the Lord he has not left or forsaken me so no the discharge of fluids no
not to be confused with deflowering someone then through the physical means you are responsible for her upkeep and care and in no way can you take from your first wife
 
Keith Martin said:
We're not suggesting with a straight face, though, that 2010's science has revolutionized understanding of Scripture, are we?
Click to expand...
No, I'm suggesting that recent science may point us back to a plain, simple, literal reading of scripture, and away from theological mumbo-jumbo. I would also suggest that plenty of non-theologians throughout history would have read scripture in such a simple way, without trying to get all complex about it, so I doubt my suggested reading is a revolution.
Keith Martin said:
The real question, though, is, at what point in seminovaginal microbiome interchange does God join the two together? And I'm assuming must semen be released? If so, what if the man has had a vasectomy or is otherwise shooting blanks.

Furthermore, does one-flesh-ness occur with seminoral microbiomageness? I ask because that's definitely my love language. And at what point does the covenant achieve lift-off -- when I'm yelling, "Don't stop now!" -- or or later?
Click to expand...
Hold up, you haven't got it yet. You're trying to stick with the standard view of "one flesh" as a synonym for "marriage", and are then trying to define the line of "when does marriage begin", falling straight back into the theological mumbo-jumbo! Forget the word "marriage" for a minute.

The plain reading of scripture I am suggesting is that when two people have sex, their bodies become "one" in a physical way. The more they have sex, the more one they will become obviously, but even a single encounter causes some level of unification of their bodies (hence the prostitute passage).
And as God made their bodies this way, it's his fault - he's the one that joins them together.

That is all. I'm suggesting it really might be that simple.
 
DontheBeeMan said:
Ok sorry but when two become flesh I believe it starts with Carnell Knowledge i dont think fluids have to be exchange and when husband and wife have the intimate relationship they start coming together on all things
EXample how many have had your spouse leave for a week and weather Job or Vacation and doesn't part of you feel their presence missing you have become one your not complete
same happens when you loose your wife part of you is gone its hard to fill the void I thank the Lord he has not left or forsaken me so no the discharge of fluids no
not to be confused with deflowering someone then through the physical means you are responsible for her upkeep and care and in no way can you take from your first wife
Click to expand...
I agree that there is a special connection between husband and wife on a psychological level as well as a physical, as you point out. However, I am just talking about the term "one flesh" as it appears in scripture. This term is explicitly used to describe the relationship between a man and a prostitute, not just a man and his wife. A man forms a physical connection with a prostitute, but not the psychological connection a man would also form with a wife (as you have described).

I am suggesting that "one flesh" may entirely refer to that physical connection.

That does not mean I am denying the psychological connection also exists. Obviously it does. But it may not be encompassed by the term "one flesh".
 
DontheBeeMan said:
genesis 2 vs 21 to 25 lets go to the start she is not a bond servent even torah says that
Click to expand...
I don't know what your point is, we are talking about the term "one flesh", not bondservants.

However, reading that entire passage does give considerable further clarity about the term "one flesh", which I should have included earlier - was in my mind so I forgot to write it down!

And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;
And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.
And Adam said, This is now 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.

Adam and Eve were physically "one flesh" - which Adam first calls "flesh of my flesh" - because they were truly made out of the same flesh. She was made from him.

We are then told that when any man cleaves to his wife, the two will also become "one flesh". This appears to be directly referring back to the previous verse, the fact that Eve was made from Adam's physical flesh. I take this to mean that God has designed biology so that any couple end up acquiring a degree of the same physical "one-ness" that Adam and Eve had from the start.
 
FollowingHim said:
Hold up, you haven't got it yet. You're trying to stick with the standard view of "one flesh" as a synonym for "marriage", and are then trying to define the line of "when does marriage begin", falling straight back into the theological mumbo-jumbo! Forget the word "marriage" for a minute.
Click to expand...

Who said anything about 'marriage,' whatever that is?

You decided to move a different discussion over here, and you've already awoken us to that 'marriage' isn't in Scripture, so why would I discuss 'marriage?'

But I'm still wondering, based on the assertions of a number of people back from before we got linked over to your new discussion, despite or in conjunction with the new evidence of microbiomassaging, is anyone going to explain either:
  • How one-flesh has nothing to do with sex; or
  • How we know when YHWH has joined two individuals together such that they are now one flesh and are not to be separated.
I do have the impression, Samuel, that you're suggesting that microbiomachinations explain the latter, and, believe me, I would never in a million worlds challenge that the transfer of little stuff during sexual intercourse is one aspect of the physical, emotional and spiritual bonding that occurs in its midst that explains why engaging in it with someone one has no commitment to is a recipe for disaster. However, what's left to our imagination, as well as our attempts to interpret Scripture's various takes on the matter, is how long do the microbiomie critters swap it up with each other before we can call it a YHWH-implemented one-flesh event?

Also, could you please define "theological mumbo jumbo" for the rest of us so we will know how to avoid engaging in it?
 
I'm not moving another discussion over here. This is an entirely standalone discussion of the one term "one flesh". It may hopefully inform that other, more wide-ranging discussion about when marriage begins or what marriage is anyway. But I certainly hope that other broad discussion is not moved over here and floods out this narrow one. I'd like to keep this one to the narrow topic of the definition of a couple of words and how that is informed by biology.

To answer your primary question:
Keith Martin said:
how long do the microbiomie critters swap it up with each other before we can call it a YHWH-implemented one-flesh event?
Click to expand...
1 Corinthians 6:16 "What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh."
Assuming Paul is warning against any sex with harlots at all - just once.
 
Keith Martin said:
Who said anything about 'marriage,' whatever that is?

You decided to move a different discussion over here, and you've already awoken us to that 'marriage' isn't in Scripture, so why would I discuss 'marriage?'

But I'm still wondering, based on the assertions of a number of people back from before we got linked over to your new discussion, despite or in conjunction with the new evidence of microbiomassaging, is anyone going to explain either:
  • How one-flesh has nothing to do with sex; or
  • How we know when YHWH has joined two individuals together such that they are now one flesh and are not to be separated.
I do have the impression, Samuel, that you're suggesting that microbiomachinations explain the latter, and, believe me, I would never in a million worlds challenge that the transfer of little stuff during sexual intercourse is one aspect of the physical, emotional and spiritual bonding that occurs in its midst that explains why engaging in it with someone one has no commitment to is a recipe for disaster. However, what's left to our imagination, as well as our attempts to interpret Scripture's various takes on the matter, is how long do the microbiomie critters swap it up with each other before we can call it a YHWH-implemented one-flesh event?

Also, could you please define "theological mumbo jumbo" for the rest of us so we will know how to avoid engaging in it?
Click to expand...
I nominate “microbiomachinations” for word of the year!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top