Replies

You are splitting hairs here. This passage in no way provides any support whatsoever that God ever condoned or permitted polygamy. Neither does any other passage for where-ever you find polygamy in the bible you also find a household mess. In every example you have 2 or more women fighting each other for the love of their husband seeking to be first because of jealousy. You also find clear examples (i.e., Solomon) where those who practiced this sin were led astray after other gods. In summary in the Bible where-ever you find polygamy you also find sin, a great deal of it. To suggest that because someone committed a sin and God blessed the sinner in SPITE of his sin somehow makes that sin acceptable to God is not only absurd its blasphemy. David committed adultery with Bathsheba, then had her husband killed to cover that sin. God did bless David because David repented, does that mean adultery and murder are now condoned by God becaused David did it???? That's the tactic you take when you seek to excuse polygamy as anything other than sin merely because some men practiced it in the Bible.

If polygamy were God's design He would have created more women for Adam than just Eve (and please don't bring up mythological Lillith as some LDS apologists seek to do)....and He would not have pronounced the one-flesh concept were a plurality of spouses the design. This command of one wife was also handed down in Deut. 17:17 as the Law was given -17Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away: neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold.

Any man hereafter who did so sinned against the Lord and God dealt with them accordingly...David's entire household was destroyed just as one example.

Christ taught in further detail when He stated that if you get a divorce and re-marry then you are committing adultery. How much more so if you were to marry again without getting divorced? Seems this passage is clear proof that God does not recognize plural marriages as anything other than adultery.

This is expanded even more in Ephesians 5: -
31For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.....the word here is TWO SHALL BE ONE, not 3, or 4, or 34 or 44 but TWO. And the word wife is singular, again not plural wives. It does not say joined unto his wives. 32This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.

The relationship between Christ and His Church (Singular, not plural) is the same as God's design for marriage. It doesn't say 'brides' of Christ does it???? (Rev. 21:9; Eph. 5:22-32)

And its further summarized in 1 Timothy 3:2 for the position of being a leader in the church - 2A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, - God established one wife to hold a position of leadership, not plural wives. That's a pretty cut and dried case for monogamy in God's viewpoint.

Oh the depths that men will go to excuse sin out of the depravity of their own hearts..............

You are splitting hairs here.

All I did was to quote 14 separate major translations which all described the relationship of Hagar to Abram as "WIFE."

This passage in no way provides any support whatsoever that God ever condoned or permitted polygamy.

Go through all my posts and show me ONCE where I even hinted at that suggestion. It seems to me that YOU are the one splitting hairs. I am simply pointing out the obvious.

Oh the depths that men will go to excuse sin out of the depravity of their own hearts..............

Was that comment directed to me?