|
|
Post by lawrenceofisrael on Jul 27, 2009 1:55:19 GMT -8
But what i don´t understand then is: Why did no prophet explicitally speak out against the common polygamy in ancient Israel. Why did King David (who is called the beloved of the Lord) have multiple wifes but the scriptures say that his only sins were the adultery with Bathsheba and the murder of Uria and that one counting thing with the Israelite army. There is not anywhere mentioned that his poligamous life was wrong. And no prophet ever explicitally spoke out against it.
See brothers and sisters i think we have a case of tradition vs. faith here. Surely western tradition taught us monogamy. Im personally not even saying that i want to have more than one wife. But i do not want my sister to be public property in case that women one´s more in the german history outnumber men.
Peace and blessings be upon us.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Jul 27, 2009 4:32:07 GMT -8
First, I wouldn't justify David's conduct by saying he was a man afetr God's own heart. David was also a murderer.
I don't believe that polygamy was as commonplace in the Scriptures as you may have been led to believe. It was noteworthy that men had more than one wife because it was uncommon, not because it was the norm- and often presented as a validation of one's failings in character. It is never potrayed in Scripture as a positive circumstance.
Also, you might read through the 613 mitzvot and underline all the commands that are not mentioned. You'll find that there are a great many more absent than that are present. But to my mind and to my understanding, the issue is more than covered in the number of times, particularly in Ezekiel and Hosea that "lewdness" and "fornication" are condemned. In the tight specifity that Bryce has defined "adultery" these descriptions are explained away as something other than what is trying to be defended. Yet, the underlying principles of Scripture are not supportive of sexual relations beyond the covenant with one's only wife.
Why didn't I listen to my mentors, or take my teachers seriously? My life is ruined! I haven't one blessed thing to show for my life!" Do you know the saying, "Drink from your own rain barrel, draw water from your own spring-fed well"? It's true. Otherwise, you may one day come home and find your barrel empty and your well polluted. Your spring water is for you and you only, not to be passed around among strangers. Bless your fresh-flowing fountain! Enjoy the wife you married as a young man!
(Proverbs 5:13-18 MSG)
"'I'll put an end to sluttish sex in this country so that all women will be well warned and not copy you. You'll pay the price for all your obsessive sex. You'll pay in full for your promiscuous affairs with idols. And you'll realize that I am GOD, the Master.'"
(Ezekiel 23:48-49 MSG)
They ask questions of a dead tree, expect answers from a sturdy walking stick. Drunk on sex, they can't find their way home. They've replaced their God with their genitals.
(Hosea 4:12 MSG)
|
|
|
|
Post by bryce on Jul 27, 2009 5:15:48 GMT -8
I think that a man can cleave unto more than one woman. You think that a man cannot. However, are your ideas provide enough evidence for your mind to say a man is committing sexual immorality? You base your idea on that eisegesis of Genesis 2:24? Do you think that a court of elders would convict a man of sexual immorality based on your ideas?
|
|
|
|
Post by bryce on Jul 27, 2009 5:20:06 GMT -8
Hashem condemned ONLY David's actions concerning Uriah, Bathsheba's husband. King David had seven wives before he murdered a man to cover up his adultery. Hashem said this concerning King David, "because David did what was right in the sight of the LORD, and had not turned aside from anything that He commanded him all the days of his life, except in the case of Uriah the Hittite." (1 Kings 15:5, NASB) The ONLY thing that Hashem faulted King David on was his actions surrounding Uriah. This is testimony from Hashem concerning the life of the great King David. Surely our Master would have mentioned his gross sexual immorality if it was something that transgressed the  . |
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Jul 27, 2009 6:15:54 GMT -8
Wow, Bryce. Are you saying that David was only condemned as a murderer and not as an adulterer, even though he fits your own definition?
I don't think it matters whether my understanding of Scripture would hold up before any court of elders, nor yours (there are courts who would agree with both sides); but how it stands by God's standards as how we are to treat those around us. I think the position I have taken is solid and that the evidence is overwhelming. It's not my job to convince you that you are wrong; but to adaquately defend what I consider a more balanced understanding of what the Scriptures to be saying. I think you've demonstrated your position pretty conclusively as well. Let others judge for themselves; but don't ask me to say that what I believe the Scripture clearly condemns is okay.
|
|
|
|
Post by bryce on Jul 27, 2009 8:21:45 GMT -8
No, I didn't say that. I said he was only condemned for what he did in the sins involving Uriah. I imagine that Hashem included murder, adultery, lying, and other nasty things he did that were connected with that incident all together. The fact is that men are permitted more than one wife and it is not sinful. People who call it sinful are adding to the . |
|
|
|
Post by Rachel on Jul 27, 2009 8:42:54 GMT -8
I did read the definition. I understand what you are saying. It may have been an allowable practice, but not necessarily a wise one. BUT, what does woman who's husband finds another, do if she disagrees? And how does this follow the command to nourish and cherish your wife? I don't think women back then were all that different from me (Western ideals or not). I would not feel cherished, but angry, hurt and disgusted. It may not be a sin for a man to take another wife, but it would certainly cause me to sin. Jealousy, anger, hatred, depression, etc. are not fruits of the spirit! And murder could be added.....
What about Mat 5:28? "But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already comitted adultery with her in his heart."
How does a man go about picking a new wife? He likes what he sees so he goes after it? That is lust, no?
Shalom, Rachel
|
|
|
|
Post by lawrenceofisrael on Jul 27, 2009 12:24:57 GMT -8
See sister Rachel the reason to marry a woman should never be lust.Men are not permitted to even glance at a woman with lust.
And again. Nobody says that polygamy should become a common practice or that i personally would want to do it. The fact (no offense meant) it doesnt actually matter what we personally think about God´s ways. See one of the righteous jugdes of the scriptures swore an oath to God that if he´d defeat the enemy he´d sacrifice the first thing he´d meet on his way home. He defeated the enemies of Israel and came home where he met his daughter on the way. He had to burn her. God didnt prevent him or her. We may not understand it but sometimes we can´t.
As i said this all doesnt mean that we have to conduct polygamy. Because we also cannot force a woman to marry a man that is already married.
To the King David topic. Yes he sinned and he was a murderer. Nonetheless we should not lack any respect in our speech about the great men and women of faith in the bible regardless of what they did.
We should love them, defend them and think of them.
As much as we should love each other and defend each other and remember each other in prayer.
Nobody here recommends polygamy to be the best possible and practicable way for us in here.
But i personally know about quite alot cultures and people also here in germany (i mean women) who would not mind their husband taking another wife.
But as i said we do not force anyone, or recommend it etc.
We recommend Shema Yisrael adonai elohenu adonai echad.
This is just a small topic we should discuss in a respectful way not calling anyone names or feeling bitternis towards each other. Even if everyone in here disagreed with my pov i still love y´all more than myselfs because you are my brothers and sisters in faith.
Having said that Shalom aleichem b´shem Yeshua.
In keep me in your prayer for im visiting poland (in particular Ausschwitz) the next days. Please pray that this helps me to understand the guilt of my people better for what they did to the jews and that no curse of the Lord would come upon me.
Peace and blessings be upon us all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Jul 27, 2009 12:57:32 GMT -8
This was passed on to me by someone who visited butu does not wish to join the forum: Bryce's link to "*the* Jewish understanding of adultery" is a modern, non-Orthodox one. In the first century any Jew in the Land (not sure about the Egyptian or Babylonian populations) would consider sexual intimacy with an unmarried woman as adultery against her future husband. No one applied Exodus 22:... Read More16-17 to married men. You could have also cited Matthew 5:32 and 19:9 to support monogamy. These verses claim unjustified divorce is not recognized by God, so the someone leaving an unjustified divorce will be (in God's eyes) committing adultery when they remarry even if the divorce was against their wishes! (This is indeed harsh, but like other unintentional or undesired offense is tempered by God's grace and forgiveness.) Polygamy is obviously incompatible with this teaching. Finally, scripture does not mention God scolding David for neglecting Pesach (2nd Kings 23:22) although this surely grieved God's heart. To whom does God point out every sin? And so 1st Kings 15:5 must be about what God personally told David, and says nothing about how completely David followed . |
|
|
|
Post by jewishjediguy on Jul 27, 2009 13:30:45 GMT -8
it comes down to this... doesn't say it is wrong to have a polygamous marriage. In fact there are a couple mitz'voth geared towards the polygamous situation. However, nowhere in the does it command polygamy, nor does it even say that it's okay, it is merely implied that polygamy is okay by the couple of mitz'voth pertaining to it. But, in looking at these mitz'voth in which the polygamous situation is involved, they really have nothing to do with the polygamy, they are dealing with the subject of the mitz'voth. One, for example, being the rights of the firstborn. And because polygamous marriage is not on a high standard as a precept, ordinance or commandment, it is not binding in any way at all. doesn't sanction it. That is, it does not ratify nor give any validity to it as a must need be done act or doctrine. Since it is that polygamy is not something that is sanctioned by , then if the "law of the land" says it is illegal, we have no need for "righteous" indignation, screaming that it is wrong for that governing authority to make it illegal, and so villify that governing authority as being anti- . It is simply written: Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience. For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed. Romans 13:1-7 Remind them to be submissive to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good work, to speak evil of no one, to avoid quarreling, to be gentle, and to show perfect courtesy toward all people. For we ourselves were once foolish, disobedient, led astray, slaves to various passions and pleasures, passing our days in malice and envy, hated by others and hating one another. But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by his grace we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life. Titus 3:1-7 Be subject for the Lord's sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good. For this is the will of God, that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people. Live as people who are free, not using your freedom as a cover-up for evil, but living as servants of God. Honor everyone. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor. 1 Peter 2:13-17 |
|
|
|
Post by lawrenceofisrael on Jul 27, 2009 23:38:02 GMT -8
To Mark: King David (may the Lord remember him) as far as i know didn´t know that much about pesach. The scroll of the law was lost till it was found under the rule of King Yoshia and that was the first time they celebrated pesach after a long time. Please correct me if im wrong here.
To Yochanan. Your completely right that if the government of the country were living in prohibits something we have to submit. In the case of our topic we should definitly submit to the local rules.
But one thing to that. If i had lived 60 years ago in Germany would you have expected me to join the Wehrmacht or the SS and kill innocent people because that were the local rules. Probably not. Thats why we gotta differ between laws of the state that contradict commandments of our faith. For example if the parliament would prohibit the giving the poor we could not accept that.
Peace and blessings be upon us all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Jul 28, 2009 3:18:07 GMT -8
I have a very dear friend who did live in Germany 60 years ago. History is not always so monolithic as it is often described to us.
Those who suggest that polygamy was commonplace, normal and acceptable, choose the history that fits their own agenda, not necessarily the accurate one.
As for David, the falling away from the worship you seem to refer to did not occur until after his grandson.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rachel on Jul 28, 2009 8:26:20 GMT -8
Lawrence, I didn't mean to come off as bitter or angry. I apologize if I sounded that way. I'm still learning about Jewish law and all it entails. Those are just questions that popped up for me so I asked. Yochanan, Very good post! Everyone else, I can see that we all have a strong opinion about this (I know I do  . So I'm agreeing to disagree and finding another topic to fight about, I mean discuss  . Love to you all and may G-d give us wisdom, grace and peace towards each other. Rachel |
|
veggirl
Full Member
Greetings!
Posts: 103
|
Post by veggirl on Jul 28, 2009 10:00:38 GMT -8
Oh my,, how can polygamy be a good thing, I am not understanding this at all.
Just because they did it in the bible don't mean we have to do it.. People were queer in the bible also so do u think its ok to do it? NO way..
|
|
|
|
Post by lawrenceofisrael on Jul 28, 2009 11:53:49 GMT -8
|
|
.
