As a matter of fact. Yes.
Finally, are you & DelphiUser going to try to continue convincing us that all this sleeping together with three slave girls by Abram & Jacob was an act of faith?
I thought I conveyed exactly the opposite point.
Now since I answered your questions answer this:
The Bible uses the same word for Wife to describe the relationship between Hagar and Abram that is used to describe the relationship between Adam and Eve and Abram and Sarai. So are you denying that the Bible teaches that Hagar was given by Sarai to Abram as a "wife"?
Let me answer that in two ways.
(1) The Bible is clear on respect of all authority--even in situations where the "authority" is a slave-holder. But that doesn't mean that authority is absolute. So I think there's still an open question here--and legitimately so--considering we're talking about a female slaveholder having the questionable absolute authority to order a slavegirl to sleep with her husband...whether or not the title of "wife" is mounted on the bedpost.
I mean, after all, to get back to the main thrust of this thread, isn't that already what we're talking about? With 19th century LDS and 20th & 21st century fLDS, what do we see? We see parents & church leaders coercing young girls into unwanted marriages. How is a mistress ordering a maidservant/slave woman into "wifely" surrogacy responsibilities any different from a coercement standpoint other than a slaveholder has even more authority to wield!!!
(2) Please see my post #1,862 -- the Q&A section. All five "witnesses" involved--Hagar, Sarah, Abraham, Angel of the Lord, and Moses--all five still reference her as nothing but a servant girl or slave girl or one who should submit to her mistress...and they do this after the conception!
The Bible uses the same word for Wife to describe the relationship between Hagar and Abram that is used to describe the relationship between Adam and Eve and Abram and Sarai.f
P, that's generally a good starting point--to compare contexts of word usages. However, you apparently looked @ 2 passages & perhaps stopped there when a broader survey of passages is needed. Let's do a quick rundown of how "issah" (wife, or woman is the translation) is used, context-wise.
Since "issah" is translated as "bride" in Gen. 29:21 and Deut. 20:7, you'd think (like what you say in your question), that we'd have a pretty safe understanding that we're talking only about a wife, right? (Wrong)
"Issah" is also translated as "concubine" in Judges 19:26. To make matters even more confusing, issah is even translated as a female mate of animals for Noah's ark in Gen. 7:2.
You and DelphiUser aren't going to start claiming that the mates (Hebrew underlying word--issah) of male clean & unclean animals are eligible to become plural wives, too, are you? :) [I think if I was the owner of a cow, and gave her as a "wife" (issah) to somebody already married, and if he had sex with the cow, I don't think we could jointly conclude that this man was a polygamist even if I did call the cow his "wife"!!!...which, BTW, is quite distinct from calling his wife his "cow"!!!:)]