My ongoing (and, thus far, futile) war against “helpmeets”

Last updated on: October 19, 2025 at 10:00 pm by Dan Peterson

0 Comments

My ongoing (and, thus far, futile) war against “helpmeets” 2025-10-19T22:00:55-06:00 Dan Peterson

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Brigham Young (John Donovan Wilson) and Mary Ann Angell (Twyla Wilson) walk home after their wedding, in the 2024 Interpreter Foundation theatrical film Six Days in August. (Still photo provided by James G. Jordan)

This is important. If you’re confused or on the fence about the matter, you need to get things straight. And this will help: “Polygamy Denial Debunked: A Look At The Primary Sources”

LaVell Edwards Stadium at Brigham Young University

(Wikimedia Commons public domain photograph

Here are some recent articles that I’ve found interesting:

The Atlantic: “Is Moderate Drinking Okay? “Every drink takes five minutes off your life.” Maybe the thought scares you. Personally, I find comfort in it.” At the very least, the once-popular conviction that alcohol (or, at least, red wine) somehow magically represents heart-health and longevity in a bottle has been recognized as an ungrounded superstition. And I would like to point out that I know people — honestly, I’ve even met a few of them — who seem to enjoy “activities that we share with other people: cooking, dinners, parties, celebrations, rituals, get-togethers—life!” and who often socialize face-to-face and aren’t isolated, and yet who do such things entirely without recourse to alcoholic lubrication. I know that it’s possible.

Jacob Hess, in The Deseret News: “Analysis: Are you a ‘real Christian’? That depends on how you define Christianity: Rather than fixate on the ‘yes you are — no you aren’t’ debate, more are discovering fresh spiritual strength through friendships across Christian traditions” I enjoyed this article. Of course, I’m unusually interested in the denial that Latter-day Saints are Christians; with my friend Professor Stephen D. Ricks, I actually published a book on the subject: Offenders for a Word. Some denials of the Christianity of Latter-day Saints come, of course, of simple ignorance: I saw a comment in a national publication two or three days ago in which the writer said, without any apparent hostility, that she couldn’t accept us as Christians because we deny the deity of Christ, which is, after all, a matter of fundamental importance in her view of Christianity. In other words, despite all of our missionary and other efforts, we still haven’t adequately managed to inform the general public of what we believe.

I was quite happy at BYU’s football victory last night over the University of Utah. (For insightful historical background — from a non-Utah source — on the football rivalry between the two schools, see here.) But I’m also happy to see the response to that victory from BYU’s head football coach: “Kalani Sitake praises Kyle Whittingham, encourages respect after BYU’s win over Utah.” And he’s being noticed: “Kalani Sitake — a leader who is coaching souls through football — featured in national profile: The Athletic gets to the heart of the BYU football coach — as a leader of men and one who embraces joy.” You may or may not be able to access the original article in The Athletic, which is published by the New York Times, but here’s the link to it: “There’s no leader in college football like Kalani Sitake: One story explains why.”

An lds.org image of Adam and Eve after the fall

I have several pet peeves. Fortunately, I also have a blog. Which means that, whenever I want, I can sound off publicly on things that bother me.

One of them is the frequent misuse of the word literally. Have you ever noticed how common it is for English-speakers to use the word literally when they actually mean exactly the opposite of literally? “I’m so hungry, I could literally eat a horse.” “That guy on the other team was literally 10 feet tall.” Or this one, presumably recorded from a conversation in the spirit world: “I literally died from embarrassment.”

But such quirky expressions aren’t the focus of this blog. Instead, I have a different pet peeve in mind, though it’s still a linguistic one.

In Latter-day Saint circles (and evidently beyond), it’s long since become customary for a husband to praise his wife as a “helpmeet.” However, since most of us find that term just a bit puzzling — intuitively, I suspect, we know that it makes no real sense — we sometimes change the word to “helpmate,” which, unlike “helpmeet,” is actually comprehensible.

The term helpmeet is derived from the King James rendition of Genesis 2:18, where God decides to provide a companion for the newly created man, Adam: “And the Lord God said, it is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.”

However, it’s important here to note that help meet in the KJV is two words, not one. This is not only a hint as to how we ought to read it aloud, but a clue about what the passage means. We should already be familiar with such King James language from other biblical passages. In Acts 26:20, for instance, we see Paul telling the Gentiles that “they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.” (Thankfully, we don’t call righteous deeds “worksmeets.”) It should be obvious from the context that meet, in this verse, means something like “worthy,” “befitting” or “appropriate.” (And that is, precisely, what the underlying Greek and Hebrew words do mean.)

It’s hardly surprising, in this light, to see how other translations render Genesis 2:18: The New International Version, for example, reads “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.” (I certainly hope that Latter-day Saint husbands won’t start calling their wives “helpersuitables” anytime soon!)

The very next verse launches into an amusing little story — amusing when it’s properly understood, and when it’s seen in its larger context — about the quest to find a suitable companion for Adam:

“And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him” (Genesis 2:19-20).

It turns out that tigers, ostriches, and bears (or perhaps velociraptors, trilobites and pterodactyls) aren’t appropriate companions for men. But directly after the failure of this little parade of the animals to supply a proper companion for Adam, to provide a creature who could pass audition before Adam and the Lord, God creates Eve, who instantly wins the man’s complete approval. (He was probably quite relieved.) She also receives a name from him, thus continuing the story of the beasts and their naming but, this time, bringing it to a successful conclusion: “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” (Genesis 2:23).

There is, in other words, no “helpmeet” in the scriptures. There is, instead, a “help” who is specially suited to be “meet” — which is to say, suitable, appropriate — for her husband, and who was created to complete him in a way that nothing else in creation, whether animate or inanimate, properly can.

Likewise, the husband is “meet” for her, although he was plainly not appropriate as a companion for tortoises, kangaroos, and warthogs.

And now I introduce to you the article, published in Mere Orthodoxy, that reminded me of my peeve about the invented and nonsensical word helpmeet. Although I should say that it goes considerably beyond that issue, and is well worth reading: “A Helper Corresponding to Him.”

Posted from Park City, Utah

Travel and Religion

History and Religion

Previous Post

October 18, 2025

Ancient Egyptian Cosmology Illustrated in Soil Core Samples