[prayforpeaceofJerusalem]

“but it boils down to do the scriptures actually say Hagar was Abraham’s wife anywhere?”

She was just a sleepover, at Sarah’s insistence.
She became a reject, also, as a sleepover, because Sarah said to send her away. If Abraham was considered married to Hagar, as a second wife, then Abraham was a divorced man, and monogamous, after YHWH said to Abraham; “listen to Sarah, and send Hagar away”!
So to claim Abraham was married is to admit that Abraham was then divorced! -They can’t have it both ways.

Then, after Sarah died, Abraham took another wife, Keturah, and fathered six sons by her. But Abraham was monogamous even then.
LDS has no biblical support for polygamy for the priesthood, either, as the priests were under strict rules for marraige -all of which rules the LDS founders themselves broke to pieces while claiming a priesthood for themselves, which is non-existent in the Word of God.

[DelphiUser]

I Said: “but it boils down to do the scriptures actually say Hagar was Abraham’s wife anywhere?”

U Said: She was just a sleepover, at Sarah’s insistence.

Gen 16:3

3 And Sarai Abram’s wife took Hagar her maid the Egyptian, after Abram had dwelt ten years in the land of Canaan, and gave her to her husband Abram to be his wife.

Th bible says she was a wife.

U Said: She became a reject, also, as a sleepover, because Sarah said to send her away.

A rejected wife is still a wife unless you divorce her.

U Said: If Abraham was considered married to Hagar, as a second wife, then Abraham was a divorced man, and monogamous, after YHWH said to Abraham; “listen to Sarah, and send Hagar away”!

U Said: So to claim Abraham was married is to admit that Abraham was then divorced! -They can’t have it both ways.

Did he give her a bill of divorcement? No she was still his wife...

U Said: Then, after Sarah died, Abraham took another wife, Keturah, and fathered six sons by her. But Abraham was monogamous even then.

LOL! It must be nice living in that rose colored world, but reality has another story: Gen. 25: 6

6 But unto the sons of the concubines, which Abraham had, Abraham gave gifts, and sent them away from Isaac his son, while he yet lived, eastward, unto the east country.

Thus we see yet another "Defense" come crashing down, face it Abraham was polygamous, and was approved by God while he was, the only reason Moses who was also polygamous mentioned it was that the wanted to make it clear the the sons of the concubines were sent away before Abraham died and had no part in Issac's inheritance. This backs up my postulate here that more people in the Bible would be recorded as being polygamous except it was as common as dirt and unremarkable.

U Said: LDS has no biblical support for polygamy for the priesthood, either, as the priests were under strict rules for marraige -all of which rules the LDS founders themselves broke to pieces while claiming a priesthood for themselves, which is non-existent in the Word of God.

The Bible is rife with support, but because of our culture some here refuse to see it. I saw similar problems while in Taiwan and in Japan and Jerusalem, we call such "Tourists" ugly Americans after the book of the same name.

You can say whatever you like, but the scriptures plainly state that Polygamy was allowed and is still allowed today, the only prohibition being not a moral one, but a legal one.

A few Quotes:

Martin Luther: "I confess that I cannot forbid a person to marry several wives, for it does not contradict the Scripture. If a man wishes to marry more than one wife he should be asked whether he is satisfied in his conscience that he may do so in accordance with the word of God. In such a case the civil authority has nothing to do in the matter." (De Wette II, 459, ibid., pp. 329-330.)

Tertullian "As I think, moreover, each pronouncement and arrangement is (the act) of one and the same God; who did then indeed, in the beginning, send forth a sowing of the race by an indulgent laxity granted to the reins of connubial alliances, until the world should be replenished, until the material of the new discipline should attain to forwardness: now, however, at the extreme boundaries of the times, has checked (the command) which He had sent out, and recalled the indulgence which He had granted; not without a reasonable ground for the extension (of that indulgence) in the beginning, and the limitation of it in the end.

Justin Martyr "And this one fall of David, in the matter of Uriah's wife, proves, sirs," I said, "that the patriarchs had many wives, not to commit fornication, but that a certain dispensation and all mysteries might be accomplished by them; since, if it were allowable to take any wife, or as many wives as one chooses, and how he chooses, which the men of your nation do over all the earth, wherever they sojourn, or wherever they have been sent, taking women under the name of marriage, much more would David have been permitted to do this.

Augustine "Again, Jacob the son of Isaac is charged with having committed a great crime because he had four wives. But here there is no ground for a criminal accusation: for a plurality of wives was no crime when it was the custom; and it is a crime now, because it is no longer the custom. There are sins against nature, and sins against custom, and sins against the laws. In which, then, of these senses did Jacob sin in having a plurality of wives? As regards nature, he used the women not for sensual gratification, but for the procreation of children. For custom, this was the common practice at that time in those countries. And for the laws, no prohibition existed. The only reason of its being a crime now to do this, is because custom and the [secular] laws forbid it.

Argue all you want (you will anyway) you will still be provably wrong...