Eph. 3:20 said:
All very good objections, but I think youre reading a lot into the passages thats not there and these overstatements directly conflict with some scripture as I will show. It seems the case as a whole is built upon statements that arent there (not directed at you, these are the general objections). One thing that is great about the God we serve is He wrote down for us what might keep us from His blessing, what He allowed and what He doesnt allow and those things dont change until He speaks a change to it.
(Ex. 21:10) If he takes for himself another woman...Lets stop right here. Why go any further with this text if this is something that God doesnt allow? He protects the first wife because God is in the protection business. He protects the first or the 82nd wife...it doesnt matter. But one must ask, why would make rules of conduct for a conduct He forbids? What a perfect place to tell us that He at least somehow displeased by this practice....Its because He doesnt forbid it and it in no way displeased Him. If that is the case it will have to be proven in another verse, this one says nothing to that effect.
There were CIVIL laws , not spiritual.They were the laws of Moses .
They were laws to have an orderly society .
There is a problem when you confuse civil law with Gods law.
Civil laws regulate the sinful behavior of men to protect the innocent or the victims.
It was not a moral but a political or civil one for the good ordering of the state. Among such laws were those of tolerance or permission, which did not approve of the evil things concerned, but only suffered them for the prevention of greater evil--as when the sea makes a breach into the land, if it cannot possibly be stopped, the best course is to make it as narrow as possible..........These laws tolerated what God condemned, and that for the purpose of preventing greater evils.
Just as divorce for uncleanness was purely a "concession" that was necessary at that time because of Israel's "hardness of heart" and the "chaotic conditions" that resulted from their attitude. God "allowed" easy divorce and polygamy (even though both were really adultery and a violation of the Seventh Commandment) but He did not "legitimate" it.
How do you deal with Deuteronomy 17:17, God specifically gave a command for the future kings of the nation of Israel: not to multiply wives to himself... This is an explicit command from God against polygamy.
********* David sinned every time he took an additional wife - Deut 17:17
********* David sinned when he committed adultery with Bathsheba - God still loved him
********* David sinned when he had Uriah killed - God still loved David
********* David sinned when he took Bathsheba as still another wife - but God still loved him....
Why didn't God punish David for these sins immediately ? You can not assume because there was no immediate punishment that God ordained or approved of Polygamy !
God allowed many sins, , he was long suffering and patient. Because he tolerated the sin of men then or now, does not mean he approves of it or condones it.
Yes this is correct. But notice, there are two offenses. He has taken the wife of Uriah (offense #1), you have struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword.
The evil was his two offenses that were mentioned in the passage.
".... and I will take thy wives before thine eyes and give them unto thy neighbor, and he shall lie with thy wives in the sight of this sun."
This is in direct connection to David taking the wife of another. God lets another man take his wives, and he lets the man lay with them in broad daylight as humiliation for his crime so all would know.
The sword shall never depart from your house, because you have taken his wife to be your wife and have killed him with the sword of the sons of Ammon.
The sword not departing in Davids house is in direct connection to the sword that struck down Uriah. It was a exact exchange for the violations David had committed. There are no other sins mentioned.
There was a direct connection between the lust of David having many wives and his desire for Bethsheba
This was Levitical law that a man could not take back his wife/concubines a second time after they had been with another man.
Is there any record that after He had repented that he took one more wife , or that he replaced his concubines?
Is there any record that God told David to take these wives?
Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines (1 Kg. 11:3). God promised to bless Solomon if he walks in all Gods laws. But not a syllable of censure about his extreme polygamy and concubinage. The only censure is his marrying pagan women against Gods commands, (11:2 4,5), and that he turned his heart away from the Lord, (11:4,9,10,11,33, 9:4, 6) And what sense does it make to think that God was incensed about Solomons marriages to pagan wives and thus rebuke him for it, yet He never rebukes him for marrying multiple Israelite wives?
Could you tell me the name of his Israelite wives?
In Solomons day wives were currency. For example, a lesser king would seal a treaty with a greater king by offering up his daughter to be the wife of his victorious opponent. Solomon, being the aggressive king that he was, acquired many wives through this process. The offerings of daughters became tokens of friendship between the Solomon and other kings. Solomon became intoxicated from this and fell into some ill fate. In these times there was a strong religion current.
Could you tell me how God blessed this polygamy? What was the fruit of it?
To condone something is to:
To overlook, forgive, or disregard (an offense) without protest or censure.(The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition)
God did indeed condone this practice. He never punished those for practicing it. If He did, it should be easy enough to produce a passage that demonstrates God condemning this practice and the ensuing punishment because of it. It was not sin then and it is not sin today. You must have Biblical proof to justify this claim.
However, He never, ever, ever condoned actual sin.
God tolerated many many sins in the OT (just as he does today )
All of us came as sinners, God was long suffering and he tolerated our sin and rebellion .
If you can not see the fruit of polygamy you just choose not to see it.
Look at the problems with the off springs of these relationships.
There was hatred and jealousy in the off spring of the woman of David.
We see the same kind of jealousy in the children of Jacob.
We see plots to kill have siblings by the mother of another.
God is not the author of confusion. If this was a blessed practice , the result would not have been as hateful and violent .
The subject of this passage is clearly divorce. The illegal practice of men ditching their wives to get a new one. This passage aligns itself with Malachi 2:14. The question itself clearly spells out the context of the passage,Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any cause at all? (vs. 3) This has nothing to do with adding more wives. It has everything to do with honoring the covenant relationship till death do us part.
God regulated divorce in the civil OT law, just as he did polygamy.
You can not have it both ways.
Jesus points out that God allowed for the sin of men in the OT
The majority of the people in the OT economy couldnt afford additional wives. Thats why they were ditching the old wife to get a new one. This was a careless disregard for the lifetime commitment the a marriage is to include. To have many wives was seen as a sign of power and wealth, which most OT early Israel was not. There are 23 OT men mentioned within scripture that had multiple wives, yet no single word of rebuke or censure for any of them.
Lamech practiced polygyny (Genesis 4:19). Nahor, Abraham's brother, had both a wife and a concubine (Genesis 11:29; 22:20-24). Jacob was tricked into polygamy (Genesis 29:20-30),. Esau took on a third wife hoping it might please his father Isaac (Genesis 28:6-9). Ashur the father of Tekoa had two wives (1 Chronicles 4:5). Michael, Obadiah, Joel, Ishiah, and those with them "had many wives" (1 Chronicles 7:3-4). Shaharaim had at least four wives, two of which he "sent away" (1 Chronicles 8:8-11). Caleb had two wives (1 Chronicles 2:18) and two concubines (1 Chronicles 2:46, 48). Gideon had many wives (Judges 8:30). Elkanah is recorded as having two wives, one of which was the godly woman Hannah (1 Samuel 1:1-2, 8-2:10). David, had 8 wives and 10 concubines (1 Chronicles 1:1-9; 2 Samuel 6:23; 20:3). Solomon, had 700 wives and 300 concubines (1 Kings 11:1-6). Rehoboam had eighteen wives and sixty concubines (2 Chronicles 11:21), and sought many wives for his sons (1 Chronicles 11:23). Abijah had fourteen wives (2 Chronicles 13:21). Ahab had more than one wife (1 Kings 20:7). Jehoram had wives who were taken captive (2 Chronicles 21:17). Jehoiada the priest gave king Joash two wives (2 Chronicles 24:1-3), and Jehoiachin had more than one wife (2 Kings 24:15).
Tell me how god blessed these polygamous relationships.
Please notice the first man that practiced this...
Isaac had one wife.
Jacobs wives both came after his conversion. Then Jacob made a vow saying If God will be with me and keep me on this journey...then the Lord will be my God. (Gen. 28:20) And this stone will I set up as a pillar, will be Gods house, and of all that thou dost give me;I will give a tenth. (Gen. 28:22)
Nope not so .
This is not a conversion, it is "lets make a deal" . Theses are not the words of conversion.
Gen 28:20
And Jacob vowed a vow, saying, If God will be with me, and will keep me in this way that I go, and will give me bread to eat, and raiment to put on,
Gen 28:21
So that I come again to my father's house in peace;
then shall the LORD be my God:
It is a bargain , not a conversion
Gen 32:9 And Jacob said,
O God of my father Abraham, and God of my father Isaac, the LORD which saidst unto me, Return unto thy country, and to thy kindred, and I will deal well with thee:
Not his God yet , he is still the God of his fathers
Here is where Jacob was converted and God became HIS God.
Gen 32:23
And he took them, and sent them over the brook, and sent over that he had.
Gen 32:24
And Jacob was left alone; and there wrestled a man with him until the breaking of the day.
Gen 32:25
And when he saw that he prevailed not against him, he touched the hollow of his thigh; and the hollow of Jacob's thigh was out of joint, as he wrestled with him.
Gen 32:26
And he said, Let me go, for the day breaketh. And he said, I will not let thee go, except thou bless me.
Gen 32:27
And he said unto him, What [is] thy name? And he said, Jacob.
Gen 32:28
And he said,
Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel: for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed.
Gen 32:29
And Jacob asked [him], and said, Tell [me], I pray thee, thy name. And he said, Wherefore [is] it [that] thou dost ask after my name? And he blessed him there.
Gen 32:30
And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel:
for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.
It was from this time on that God spoke to him and led him. From then on God was the God of Jacob (Israel )
No he did not.
Present any citation that says Moses had 2 wives at the same time.
He is never listed with the polygamists because there is no scripture to support that .
Strife happened in the most monogamous marriages; Adam and Eves troubles with Cain for one. It is just human nature, fallen human nature. The more people you have involved in anything, the more problems you will encounter.
Exactly so why would God ordain that additional strife in a home or family?
I would point out that if polygamy was indeed Gods plan or desire that the need to populate the earth would have been the logical time to introduce polygamy, yet God did not .
He created one man and one woman. Only after sin entered the world did men's lust lead to a perversion of Gods original plan.
Then when the world required re population , did God send a family of polygamists? Or did he send men and their ONE wives
Are we to say that it is possible for two to become one flesh, but impossible for three? If so then Jacob and Leah were one flesh because she was his first wife. Doesnt the Trinity claim three as one? Can we see the absurdity?
How do 3 become one flesh? Excuse my bluntness but how does a woman become one with her "sister wife"
So we then to presume that a man becomes one with one and then with another and another. Other wives are not one flesh with the other wives.
It is blasphemy to compare the lust of men with the Trinity.
The trinity is unique in that they always were and always will be one..they did not have to "become one"
I have viewed their site. I dont agree with everything they teach, but some of it I do agree with. I dont think they have a membership.
Are you a "christian polygamist"? (a contradiction in terms to me ).
What is your churches position on this?
Hope this helps.
Eph. 3:20
I am not the one in need of help actually
You like to quote Corinthians to imply that there is no sin as long as something is done in love .
That is a misuse of scripture I will not go into that now.
But I think we have to look at the totality of Paul to the Corinthians
1Cr 7:1
Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: [It is] good for a man not to touch a woman.
1Cr 7:2
Nevertheless, [to avoid] fornication, let every man have
his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.
1Cr 7:3
Let the husband render unto
the wife
due benevolence: and likewise also
the wife unto the husband.
1Cr 7:4
The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but
the wife.Eph 5:28
So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth
his wife loveth himself.
Eph 5:33
Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love
his wife even as himself; and the wife [see] that she reverence [her] husband.
The church was surrounded with pagan and godless people. They were surrounded by a hebrew culture that still had remnants of polygamy and concubines .
But over and over the NT reinforces the correctness of monogamy in their teachings and in their laws for leadership.
The church is the bride of Christ. He is not a polygamist