Concubines

[WilliamB]

I believe that it is an issue of righteousness not of sexual sin but in order to understand it, one must look past the rituals of man and look at what is actually of God and what marriage actually is.

We as Christians continue to teach and believe that marriage is only marriage in the eyes of God based on man made religious and government laws. Having a wedding ceremony and/or marriage certificate has zero to do with marriage in the eyes of God. Sorry if that contradicts what you've always been taught but there is simply no biblical truth to it. Sex is marriage. The joining of the flesh is what marries us in the eyes of God.

But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. Mark 10: 6-8

The worldly ceremonies, rings, certificates, etc. are exactly that. Worldly. I'm not suggesting there's anything wrong with these things just as there is nothing wrong with birthday parties, Easter dinners or Christmas festivities. But don't make the mistake of assuming that earthly ceremonies or certificates means anything to God.

That being said, when you look at the old testement of multple wives and concubines, it is not an issue as if it's ok or not. It's a matter of righteousness. If you have sex with a woman, you are married and thus operating in righteousness is what is pleasing to God. That means you are responsible to your covenant to God and must stay with her and provide for her which is exactly what they did and why they had so many because the didn't just have sex with them and leave them.

Fast forward to the New Testament:

Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. 1 Corin. 7:1-2

Hear Paul is giving excellent advice not a commandment. Having no wife frees you to give yourself fully to the Lord but to avoid burning with lust, have just one. Because having even one wife already puts you at a disadvantage because that's less time you can devote to the Lord plus, you have to worry more about the things of this world because you must provide for your wife. All things are available unto me but not all things are good for me. Having 10 wives is a perfect example. Is it available unto me? Of course! Is it good for me? Not at all. It would leave me zero time with the Lord and I would be consumed with the world in order to provide for them all.

Here's another scripture that has been fairly effectively turned around to suit earthly beliefs on marriage.

He said to her, "Go, call your husband and come here."
The woman answered and said, "I have no husband." Jesus said to her, "You have correctly said, 'I have no husband'; for you have had five husbands, and the one whom you now have is not your husband; this you have said truly." The woman said to Him, "Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. John 4:16-19

Now, in order to understand this scripture, you have to look at it logically. Let's say there is a woman at your church who has been married five times via ceremony/certificate. It's not very likely that would be much of a secret. In fact, she would probably be the topic of much gossip and judgement throughout the congregation gossip circles. Now, a stranger shows up and tells her exactly what is quoted in John 4. I think it's safe to say that no one is going to call the stranger a prophet because he can speak on something that is more than likely common knowledge. Same would be true 2000 years ago if not more so. Ok, now look at this:

So the woman left her waterpot, and went into the city and said to the men, "Come, see a man who told me all the things that I have done; this is not the Christ, is it?" They went out of the city, and were coming to Him. John 4 28-30

There are two points here. First, notice how she refers to her "marriages" as something she's done, as if it were wrong. If her marriages were based on certificates or whatever was worldly popular or law at the time, she wouldn't have "done" anything. They would be legit therefore no reason to mention them. Secondly, if she actually had been, let's call it "legally" married 5 times, the people of the town would have zero respect for her or her word. Much like today only multiplied by 2000 years. But yet, the town immediately went out of the city and made the estimated 1/2 mile walk to the well in the noon heat of the desert, based on her word. I don't know if any of you have been in the desert at noon but I can tell you, it's not pleasant at all and certainly not worth making the trip based on the words of some "harlot".

Now, let's look at it from the other perspective that sex is marriage. Same scenario except the woman in question is not "legally" married but she has had sex with 5 different men and the one she's with now (courting) she hasen't slept with yet. This makes much more logical sense. First, if someone came to you and told you exactly how many people you had slept with, and the one you're with now, you haven't slept with, that would be stunning to anyone. Thus, she immediately knew he must at least be a prophet because how could he know her intimate secrets. Plus, if she's living with a man, most people would assume they're sleeping together but Jesus knew they hadn't.

Let's look at another scripture:

Or do you not know that the one who joins himself to a prostitute is one body with her? For He says, "THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH." 1 Corin. 6:16

This is self explanitory. Sex is marriage in the eyes of God but it's also important to understand that if you believe something is a sin in your heart, then it is. But that has nothing to do with the next persons heart and trying to force your will on someone else is a waste of time. Your heart is your heart, their heart is their heart but please know that there is no biblical basis for marriage being "legit" in the eyes of God, based on earthly requirements. It is all about doing what is righteous. Therefore, if you join flesh with someone, do what is righteous by staying with them and providing for them, thus honoring your covenant with God. If you have no intentions of operating in righteous toward them, don't have sex with them as you will be married and you will violate your marriage covenant between you, your wife and God.

May God bless you and continue to guide in Truth of the Spirit, not the letter of the law.

 

[dayhiker]

Sullivan,
Your right that Roman forbade multiple wives. But Isreal had an exception from that rule.
David Instone-Brewer in Divorce and Remarriage in the Bible: the Social and Literary Context states this. He didn't his Doctorate in Jewish literature of NT times.

So I take it that Jews just before Jesus' time found multiply wives important enough to push Rome to make that exception for me.

 

[SullivanZ]

Sullivan,
Your right that Roman forbade multiple wives. But Isreal had an exception from that rule.
David Instone-Brewer in Divorce and Remarriage in the Bible: the Social and Literary Context states this. He didn't his Doctorate in Jewish literature of NT times.

So I take it that Jews just before Jesus' time found multiply wives important enough to push Rome to make that exception for me.

There's no record, to my knowledge, of any Jews practicing this in the 1st century A.D. To my knowledge anyway.

If you know differently and can cite some stuff, I would be willing to reconsider my statement on that though.

 

[Jim the Puritan]

Paul's instructions to Timothy, applicable to us all in our relationships with the opposite sex:

"Treat . . . older women as mothers, and younger women as sisters, with absolute purity."

I Timothy 5:1-2

The New Testament is clear you are not to be getting into sexual relationships other than with your wife.

 

[SullivanZ]

Paul's instructions to Timothy, applicable to us all in our relationships with the opposite sex:

"Treat . . . older women as mothers, and younger women as sisters, with absolute purity."

I Timothy 5:1-2

The New Testament is clear you are not to be getting into sexual relationships other than with your wife.

Or wives.

 

[CryptoLutheran]

crypto, God commanded us to go forth and multiply .. so having children is immoral?

Men treating women like baby-making factories is immoral, yes. And that's the basic reason for multiple wives and concubines in the ancient world. The more women you owned (yes, owned) the more likely you were to sire more children (particularly sons).

Having children isn't immoral. Male dominance and the treatment of women as baby-making chattel is.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[dayhiker]

I'm also glad that Paul told us that that all things are pure and good.

 

[dayhiker]

Crypto.
Ya, I know men owned the women back then.
I just don't get why you say its immoral to have children. I personally had two. Neither my wife or I or our church say it as immoral.

 

[dayhiker]

The Jews practised having multiply wives till 1048AD if I remember the date exactly when a rabbi said they should do it any more. Some Jews in Arab cultures still have multiply wives today.
One of the church fathers, might have been Jerome, poked fun of jews being followed by 3 or 4 wives.
Josephus had two wives is an other example.

There's no record, to my knowledge, of any Jews practicing this in the 1st century A.D. To my knowledge anyway.

If you know differently and can cite some stuff, I would be willing to reconsider my statement on that though.

 

[CryptoLutheran]

Crypto.
Ya, I know men owned the women back then.
I just don't get why you say its immoral to have children. I personally had two. Neither my wife or I or our church say it as immoral.

I haven't said that having children is immoral. In none of my posts have I even implied this, in fact I specifically said that having children isn't immoral.

I said that men treating women as baby-making chattel is immoral.

Having children is good and godly. Treating a woman as property for the purpose of siring offspring is evil and ungodly.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[cubinity]

I'm also glad that Paul told us that that all things are pure and good.

Me too!

 

[SullivanZ]

The Jews practised having multiply wives till 1048AD if I remember the date exactly when a rabbi said they should do it any more. Some Jews in Arab cultures still have multiply wives today.
One of the church fathers, might have been Jerome, poked fun of jews being followed by 3 or 4 wives.
Josephus had two wives is an other example.

Really...?

 

[dayhiker]

That's what I've found in my reading of history.

 

[DamianWarS]

You're adding in your own meaning there.

Jesus never said anything about polygamy. Why?

For one, it was not practiced in 1st century A.D. under the Roman Empire. The Jews obeyed the Romans and they forbade it.

Polygamy offends our 21st century minds. But that doesn't make it wrong in God's eyes. I personally find it to be wrong but I'm not going to put words in God's mouth He never said.

Jesus' words in Matthew 19 are:

“Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

and he adds

“Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

Jesus was responding to divorce not polygamy but by responding to divorce Jesus makes a more general definition to marriage and how we should look to the beginning for our example not just in the case of divorce but in all cases involving marital relations. Jesus is not saying ONLY in the case of divorce should be look to the beginning but instead he is pointing to our man-made flawed ideas of marriage and invalidating them because they do not match with the design God created from the beginning. We can use abuse, homosexuality, polygamy and any marital relations and look to the beginning to help define what our actions should look like.

But regardless how limiting you may find Jesus' words we can ignore the words and simply just read the text Jesus is talking about then apply the same conclusion. God creates a perfect example of marriage and when we want to define marriage we don't need to first read Jesus' words but instead we can flip right to Genesis and see how God designed marriage in the first place and use that definition to shape our ideas of marriage. The way Jesus points it out exposes our flawed understanding and points to God's design but God's design was always there. What if I were to say "marriage to trees is right". No where in the Bible does it exclusively discourages this but that doesn't make it right. I can use this very text to show how "marriage with trees" is not what God had in mind when he designed marriage. I can use the same text, in the same way, to also show how polygamy is not what God had in mind when he designed marriage. The words of Jesus simply agree with this and help show us that our man-made ideas are flawed but regardless what Jesus says the design of God is still here.

 

[SullivanZ]

Jesus' words in Matthew 19 are:

“Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

and he adds

“Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

Jesus was responding to divorce not polygamy but by responding to divorce Jesus makes a more general definition to marriage and how we should look to the beginning for our example not just in the case of divorce but in all cases involving marital relations. Jesus is not saying ONLY in the case of divorce should be look to the beginning but instead he is pointing to our man-made flawed ideas of marriage and invalidating them because they do not match with the design God created from the beginning. We can use abuse, homosexuality, polygamy and any marital relations and look to the beginning to help define what our actions should look like.

But regardless how limiting you may find Jesus' words we can ignore the words and simply just read the text Jesus is talking about then apply the same conclusion. God creates a perfect example of marriage and when we want to define marriage we don't need to first read Jesus' words but instead we can flip right to Genesis and see how God designed marriage in the first place and use that definition to shape our ideas of marriage. The way Jesus points it out exposes our flawed understanding and points to God's design but God's design was always there. What if I were to say "marriage to trees is right". No where in the Bible does it exclusively discourages this but that doesn't make it right. I can use this very text to show how "marriage with trees" is not what God had in mind when he designed marriage. I can use the same text, in the same way, to also show how polygamy is not what God had in mind when he designed marriage. The words of Jesus simply agree with this and help show us that our man-made ideas are flawed but regardless what Jesus says the design of God is still here.

God created Adam and Eve naked. But no Christians promote nudism, even though that was by design and from the beginning.

 

[dayhiker]

Also the verse says a man shall leave his father and mother. But all I've read the son brought his bride to live with the father and mother in their family compound. As the son was to carry on the father's business/livelihood. It was the bride that left her family.
Why didn't the Jews follow this part of the command. Or why didn't Jesus address this part of God's design?

 

[SullivanZ]

I want to be clear on something - I'm not pro-polygamy. I am not pro-choice (usually). I am not pro-genocide / infanticide either. I'm not pro-stoning my children to death. But the Bible seems to indicate that all of these things are good, or at least, not sinful in and of themselves.

It frustrates me to see some people try and tout the Bible as the literal and infallible code of conduct for our daily lives, when it contains all of the above as commands from God. I believe the Bible is inspired and holy. But it also contains some very questionable morals and commands that no Christians follow (despite claiming to follow "every word" of the Good Book).

 

[plmarquette]

So you would embrace the life of the Islamofascists?...dress wives in burkha's...and live in a tent, ride a camel....and how would you suport these wives?

How would you accomplish what is called "polygamy" and illegal in USA...

In that day, in that culture....what was the fruit...civil war....family feuds...
war....

didn't Jesus speak of marriage and of Moses, and of people insisting upon divorce...
isn't it written in Genesis and Gospel ... a man will leave his parents and cleave to his wife (not wives)...

 

[cubinity]

So you would embrace the life of the Islamofascists?...dress wives in burkha's...and live in a tent, ride a camel....and how would you suport these wives?

How would you accomplish what is called "polygamy" and illegal in USA...

In that day, in that culture....what was the fruit...civil war....family feuds...
war....

didn't Jesus speak of marriage and of Moses, and of people insisting upon divorce...
isn't it written in Genesis and Gospel ... a man will leave his parents and cleave to his wife (not wives)...

Tolerant, eh?

 

[SullivanZ]

So you would embrace the life of the Islamofascists?...dress wives in burkha's...and live in a tent, ride a camel....and how would you suport these wives?

How would you accomplish what is called "polygamy" and illegal in USA...

In that day, in that culture....what was the fruit...civil war....family feuds...
war....

didn't Jesus speak of marriage and of Moses, and of people insisting upon divorce...
isn't it written in Genesis and Gospel ... a man will leave his parents and cleave to his wife (not wives)...

I think you need to read my last post here, right above yours.