a clear text IS a clear text.

here clearly:

end=UnAloneness means=sex/male/female.

means are NEVER more important than the desired end.

I can not think of a case where different means are immoral or important in the sense that they are different means, if the same end IS truly achieved. Can you?

tell me more Joe.

btw: I never said alone-ness=lonliness. THAT would be pure conjecture and a romantic gloss.

Mankind not being truly in a “good” or completely human state without being a social creature means wayyyyy more than having people around to not feel lonely.

Conjecture alert: then sex or at least, sex that results in procreation, would not be necessary: eve created, adam not alone, end of story. I am saying that the cure for aloneness appears to be the creation of humankind, human society.

Non conjecture: sex/male/female IS a means to an end. That that was the means God chose could and probably does mean and have significance beyond what the text tells us. That God chose that means of delivery does NOT logically mean that means = moral law. I would not know what passages to go to to unpack all that without speculation. Christ/church as groom/bride maybe… but no more so than vine/branches. Vine/branches helps me understand my relation to christ. I am not sure it would be wise to turn that to better understand the meaning of being of a vine or a branch…. follow me Joe? that WOULD be speculation….

I am sensing that you are reading between the lines of what I wrote.

“And would seem to suggest that “male/female/marriage/sex not intrinsic to being human.” ”

is this a typo on your part? or do you believe that this all seems to suggest that male/female/marriage sex are NOT intrinsic to being human?

This statement of yours sums up why the why matters:

“male/female/marriage/sex not intrinsic to being human. However the need to be UNalone is.”

You can’t really assert that is is true unless we know why it was bad for man to be alone. If my why is correct then this statement falls and honestly Frank to get to this conclusion you have to make a huge assumption that the statement that it was not good for man to be alone equates to simple loneliness. That is not supported by the text – the text simply does not say why it was not good for man to be alone. I am not looking for extra-textual support. I am looking to related passages. Specifically, what did God do to fix this aloneness – he created Eve, he created marriage, he created procreation. I think that is a pretty good clue as to what was wrong with man being alone. And would seem to suggest that “male/female/marriage/sex not intrinsic to being human.”

But we are simply repeating ourselves.

“and by the way Joe. I appreciate your politeness and thoughtfulness.”

Thanks Frank – And, I your’s.

This statement of yours sums up why the why matters:

“male/female/marriage/sex not intrinsic to being human. However the need to be UNalone is.”

You can’t really assert that is is true unless we know why it was bad for man to be alone. If my why is correct then this statement falls and honestly Frank to get to this conclusion you have to make a huge assumption that the statement that it was not good for man to be alone equates to simple loneliness. That is not supported by the text – the text simply does not say why it was not good for man to be alone. I am not looking for extra-textual support. I am looking to related passages. Specifically, what did God do to fix this aloneness – he created Eve, he created marriage, he created procreation. I think that is a pretty good clue as to what was wrong with man being alone. And would seem to suggest that “male/female/marriage/sex not intrinsic to being human.”

But we are simply repeating ourselves.

I guess I am saying that I do not see where you disagree. which point do you think is wrong or in any way speculative in my comment #45?

To oppose the points I have made from clear scripture is like the zwinglians looking to other texts to excape the plain and self-evident meaning of the words of institution “this Is my body”

what was not good was man´s aloneness why? dunno. More than an assumption to assume that this fact was part and parcel of being in God´s Image? I think not. That this need to be unalone is intrinsic to being fully human as conjecture? how so?

Eve was created. Why? to make mankind UNalone.

Male/female/sex will cease in the new creation. ergo, male/female/marriage/sex not intrinsic to being human. However the need to be UNalone is.

I am really not seeing where I seek to answer “why”. Show me where I am doing that.

I am not seeing how you could possibly disagree with any of these statements.

Why would the “why” really matter Joe.

Maybe you are reading into what I am saying some further or additional unstated point or conclusion. That would be unfair on your part, would it not?

There really is none.