Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Colofornian

You bring up only tangentially associated points. Yes there are several restrictions. must be male must be brother must be....

That does not change the original requirement of the law. Further, it misses the point of my post. The original comment that I was responding to was the assertion that God only tolerated polygamy and never commanded it. Deu 25: 5-6 flatly rebuts that assertion.

Further, you are reaching when you attempt to assert that the culture may have assumed that the marriage would not have been allowed. This is because we KNOW that Jews practiced polygamy. While it was not widespread due to the need to support those “extra” wives, the practice was never banded under OT law. Further, there are OT laws about not only the treatment of wives, but concubines as well. See Exod 21:7-10

As for Deu 17:17 go back and read 17:16 as well. It says he must not multiply horses and then it says he must not multiply wives. Do you really think it is a reasonable assertion to limit the king to ONE horse? Kind David was a man after God’s own hart (Acts 13:22), yet we know he had two wives and possibly others before he was anointed king.


55 posted on 07/13/2013 10:18:40 AM PDT by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]


To: taxcontrol
That does not change the original requirement of the law.

'LAW' gets trumped when the Living Prophet® speaks...






In conclusion let us summarize this grand key, these “Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet”, for our salvation depends on them.


1. The prophet is the only man who speaks for the Lord in everything.
2. The living prophet is more vital to us than the standard works.
3. The living prophet is more important to us than a dead prophet.
4. The prophet will never lead the church astray.
5. The prophet is not required to have any particular earthly training or credentials to speak on any subject or act on any matter at any time.
6. The prophet does not have to say “Thus Saith the Lord,” to give us scripture.
7. The prophet tells us what we need to know, not always what we want to know.
8. The prophet is not limited by men’s reasoning.
9. The prophet can receive revelation on any matter, temporal or spiritual.
10. The prophet may advise on civic matters.
11. The two groups who have the greatest difficulty in following the prophet are the proud who are learned and the proud who are rich.
12. The prophet will not necessarily be popular with the world or the worldly.
13. The prophet and his counselors make up the First Presidency—the highest quorum in the Church.
14. The prophet and the presidency—the living prophet and the First Presidency—follow them and be blessed—reject them and suffer.

I testify that these fourteen fundamentals in following the living prophet are true. If we want to know how well we stand with the Lord then let us ask ourselves how well we stand with His mortal captain—how close do our lives harmonize with the Lord’s anointed—the living Prophet—President of the Church, and with the Quorum of the First Presidency.

Ezra Taft Benson

(Address given Tuesday, February 26, 1980 at Brigham Young University)     http://www.lds.org/liahona/1981/06/fourteen-fundamentals-in-following-the-prophet?lang=eng

61 posted on 07/13/2013 10:50:39 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies ]

To: taxcontrol
...you are reaching when you attempt to assert that the culture may have assumed that the marriage would not have been allowed. This is because we KNOW that Jews practiced polygamy.

You are reaching, time-wise, when you superimpose much later Solomonic & Davidic practices into the time span when Deuteronomy 25 was written.

If you look @ Dt. 26:1, it reads: "When you have entered the land the Lord your God is giving you..."...IOW, the Israelites were not even YET settled into their land God was giving them!

What we're talking about in Deut 25 was STILL part of the trek out of Egypt...wandering in the wilderness...

So, of course, God would set up special "tent-like" arrangements for such people on the move...often (by force) living in close proximity.

...we KNOW that Jews practiced polygamy.

So, tell us, up until Deut. 25...who practiced polygamy -- and in what circumstances?

(1) Jacob...hoodwinked into polygamy by his deceptive father-in-law...what? Do you think God uses deception to institutionalize polygamy?

(2) Was Isaac? (No) Moses? (No) Others?

(3) What about Abraham?

Was Abraham sleeping with Hagar God-sanctioned?

Where do you find that?

(a) God never told Abraham to sleep with Hagar for a night. The Angel of the Lord--whom most commentators think is the pre-incarnated Son of God, told Hagar post sleepover to return to her mistress (master Sarai) and to submit to mistress Sarai. (He never said to return to "your husband, Abram"...see Genesis 16) Two more things re:

(b) Hagar, even after sleeping with Abram once (that's all it's mentioned) continues to be labeled as a servant/slave by none other than…
…Abram,
…Sarai,
…the Angel of the Lord (who some say is the pre-incarnated Son of God),
…Moses (Gen. 25),
…even the apostle Paul (Gal. 4:21-31),
…and Hagar herself.

Sarai labels Hagar as a gift as a "wife" to Abram, but I question if a woman has the authority to "consent" on behalf of a slave.
Hagar was considered a slave both "before" and "after" sleeping with Abram. Why does the "before" matter? Just as a minor cannot "consent" to sex, a slave is in no better situation to "consent" to--or deny--her master's commands for sex. And in this case, the command didn't come from her husband, Abram; it came from her mistress (female word for "master"), Sarai (Sarai is twice referenced as "mistress"--Gen. 16:4,8).

Why does the "after" matter?

Because it shows she didn't become a "transformed" person--from slave to wifely status! Gen. 16:6,8,9; 21:11; 25:12; and Gal. 4:21-31 all are still referencing her as either a "slave" (twice in 21:11), "servant," or one who was told by the Angel to submit to her mistress (female word for "master"). By Gen. 25, Abraham is married to Keturah with no mention of Hagar (25:1) and is then buried with Sarah (25:10).

So, if we were to call all the key witnesses to the stand, and hear what they have to say:

Q Hagar, after Sarai gave you to Abram and Ishmael was conceived, did you still acknowledge Sarai as your "mistress" in your conversation with the Angel of the Lord? [female master]
A Yes. (Gen. 16:8)

Q Sarai, when you were in your early nineties when Isaac was a toddler, how did you characterize Hagar?
A I told Abraham, Get rid of that slave woman and her son, for that slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with my son, Isaac. (Gen. 21:10)

Q Abraham, after Sarah gave you Hagar and you slept with her, how did you characterize Hagar?
A I told Sarah, as mistress (master) of her servant, Your servant is in your hands. Do with her whatever you think best. (Gen. 16:6)

Q When Sarah began to mistreat her servant, Hagar, did you intervene like what we might expect a husband to do?
A No. Hagar was Sarah's servant.

Q Angel of the Lord, when you called to Hagar after she conceived Ishmael, how did you reference her?
A Servant of Sarai (Gen. 16:8)

Q And when you conversed with Hagar, did you, Angel of the Lord, acknowledge that she was released from her servant role to Sarai?
A No. In fact, I told her Go back to your mistress and submit to her. (Gen. 16:9)

Q Moses, since you wrote Genesis, how did you identify Hagar in her last reference of that book? Did you link her to Abraham?
A No. I identified her as "Sarah's maidservant" (Gen. 25:12).

Q So in that same passage, you link Ishmael to Abraham, but you link Hagar only to Sarah?
A Yes.

Q Apostle, Paul How did the Holy Spirit lead you to interpret the Old Covenant as expressed through Abraham?
A For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman. His son by the slave woman was born in the ordinary way; but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a promise. These things may be taken figuratively, for the women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother...Now you brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. At that time the son born in the ordinary way persecuted the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now. But what does the Scripture say? 'Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman's son.' Therefore, brothers, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman. (Gal. 4:21-31)

67 posted on 07/13/2013 11:21:57 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies ]

To: taxcontrol
As for Deu 17:17 go back and read 17:16 as well. It says he must not multiply horses and then it says he must not multiply wives. Do you really think it is a reasonable assertion to limit the king to ONE horse?

16 The king, moreover, must not acquire great numbers of horses for himself or make the people return to Egypt to get more of them, for the Lord has told you, “You are not to go back that way again.” 17 He must not take many wives, or his heart will be led astray.

Taxcontrol...tis obvious that much greater allowance on the number of horses is there...notice "great numbers of horses..." ...Deut 17:17 doesn't say "great numbers of wives," now does it?

And notice the REASON..."or his heart will be led astray." (Which is EXACTLY how 1 Kings 11:3 describes Solomon's polygamy)

Your conversion of not allowing GREAT NUMBERS of horses into "single-horse" status is reductionism.

Yes, I know...not having "Many wives" can still be interpreted into a two-wife man...but that would be implied...not overtly sanctioned...by God.

68 posted on 07/13/2013 11:28:39 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson