|
|
Post by bryce on Jul 28, 2009 16:20:47 GMT -8
I believe that polygyny is specifically commanded in the  in the case where a married man seduces a virgin. The word used is generic for man and does not specify that the man in question is single. Further, there are no other commandments that relieve a married seducer from having to marry the virgin he's taken advantage of. |
|
|
|
Post by jewishjediguy on Jul 28, 2009 22:58:55 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.. hiya brig  i agree, polygamy isn't a good thing. |
|
|
|
Post by jewishjediguy on Jul 29, 2009 0:34:56 GMT -8
I believe that polygyny is specifically commanded in the in the case where a married man seduces a virgin. The word used is generic for man and does not specify that the man in question is single. Further, there are no other commandments that relieve a married seducer from having to marry the virgin he's taken advantage of. Scripture reference please If it is D'varim 22:28,29 - This is not a specific command for polygamy. Please follow along... "If a man find a young woman, a virgin, who is not betrothed, and he takes hold of her (Uth'Phasah - indicating surprise and force, not seduction and manipulation) , and lie with her, and they be found; then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her (Innah - that is he afflicted her, dealt harshly with her, ravished her violently) , he may not put her away all his days." D'varim 22:28,29 Essentially, if this is specifically commanded polygamy, it is also an implied specific ordinance that rape is an okay course of action to acquire a second wife! If it is Sh'moth 22:15,16 - then this one indicates seduction... "And if a man entices (Y'phatteh) a virgin that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife." Look at the language of this, the root Pathah, meaning to "open wide", "loosen up", contracted (seemingly and by interpretation) with Yaphah, "Beauty", indicating the seduction of charm, appealing to the beauty of the virgin to disarm her. But it couldn't be this one in Sh'moth you were referring to, for you have stated: Further, there are no other commandments that relieve a married seducer from having to marry the virgin he's taken advantage of. And this scripture goes on to say: "If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him, he shall [still] pay money according to the dowry of virgins," therefore relieving that "married seducer" The generic term "Ish" for "Man", being either married or not, is not an issue. It's a generic term, thus indicating a general understanding. |
|
veggirl
Full Member
Greetings!
Posts: 103
|
Post by veggirl on Jul 29, 2009 9:58:30 GMT -8
I am upset :*(
I don't like the fact people think its ok to have more then one wife, I don't like how it was in the bible either.
God does not want us to, its gross!
Men like this because they want more sex! That is what it comes down to, NOt what has been said here...
Men will have to pay for there Mistakes!
|
|
|
|
Post by bryce on Jul 29, 2009 10:12:20 GMT -8
i agree, polygamy isn't a good thing. Do you think that polygyny isn't good in all cases, or just some of the cases? |
|
|
|
Post by bryce on Jul 29, 2009 10:28:10 GMT -8
Men like this because they want more sex! That is what it comes down to, NOt what has been said here... Men will have to pay for there Mistakes! Actually, I believe Christian men resist polygyny because some of them want to only have one wife and the freedom to mess around without having to face the consequences. Exodus 22:16-17 requires a man to marry a woman he's seduced — unless her father utterly refuses. Why would a father refuse? Perhaps the man is a terrible person and he wants to protect his daughter. But, what if the father believes that the man would be a good husband for her and he would allow her to become his second wife? If all parties are in agreement then we will have a marriage. This might not happen in North America, but it could certainly happen in countries like Nigeria. If Christian men knew that they would have to marry the young ladies they seduced there would be less sexual immorality in the congregation of Hashem. Instead, these men seduce young women and then "repent" instead of attempting to marry the lady. In our Western societies this concept has become alien to us, but most cultures of the world allow for polygyny because they haven't been corrupted by the monogamy-only teachings that we inherited from the Roman Catholic Church. |
|
|
|
Post by bryce on Jul 29, 2009 10:29:53 GMT -8
John,
When I spoke of "taking advantage" of the virgin I was talking about the instance of seduction. I see that as a man taking advantage of a woman. Yes, and thanks for pointing out my error. I meant to say that the verse is generic, as you have said. The commandment applies to both single and married men equally.
Please, let's not talk about rape. It isn't a pleasant topic.
Shalom,
brYce
|
|
|
|
Post by jewishjediguy on Jul 29, 2009 13:05:30 GMT -8
John, When I spoke of "taking advantage" of the virgin I was talking about the instance of seduction. I see that as a man taking advantage of a woman. Yes, and thanks for pointing out my error. I meant to say that the verse is generic, as you have said. The commandment applies to both single and married men equally. Please, let's not talk about rape. It isn't a pleasant topic. Shalom, brYce Do you think that polygyny isn't good in all cases, or just some of the cases? Bryce, It seems you are not completely understanding what I had shown concerning the possible reference you are talking about (you didn't give the scriptural reference). The first reference I presented from D'varim is plain in its language, it is literally talking about rape, not seduction or taking advantage of. Therefore, anything that portion speaks of doesn’t apply to your view of seduction. The second reference I gave talks of seduction, however I have concluded, based upon your statement, Further, there are no other commandments that relieve a married seducer from having to marry the virgin he's taken advantage of, that it couldn't be this reference you were referring to because of the relieving of that "married seducer" from being obligated to marry her. As far as I know, these are the only two references that closely speak in these terms and manners of which you have presented. The commandment doesn't apply to both single and married men. If a man who is married rapes or even seduces a virgin, it is adultery, plain and simple, and he is the breaking the Mitz'vah: You shall not commit adultery, and, if caught, will be judged accordingly by the judges of Yis’rael. This is common sense and there is no way around it. While the Scripture speaks in generalities of the woman committing adultery, it applies also to the man, as taught by the Rabbis, who were & are the rightful descendents of these judges appointed by Mosheh, being the San’hed’rin, as Yeshua himself says: “The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Mosheh's seat, so practice and observe whatever they tell you...etc” If it is that you give any honour to Yeshua’s statement concerning the Rabbis sitting in Mosheh’s seat, and what it means, then know that the Rabbis of the San’hed’rin did not encourage polygamy, saying things like: “If an additional wife is taken, it will be said that one is the wife and the other is a harlot!” (Kethuboth 62b). Though they recognized that polygamy is not commanded against, they also recognized that it isn't something that is validated in . In fact, not one Rabbi has ever had more than one wife... well, at least not at the same time. Now, concerning your question: Do you think that polygyny isn't good in all cases, or just some of the cases?In these days, polygamy is useless in light of its original intent (by man, I might add, not God). The history of what polygamy was in ancient times, and what it is today are two different things. In ancient times the additional “Ishah” – woman – was not equal with the first wife, and was usually acquired because the first wife could not procreate. But, I might add, additional women were added only with the consent of the first wife. This is a custom that seems to be overlooked in our modern considerations of polygamy. The main focus for multiple concubines (which are not really wives at all) was for the procreation of more children, which, in the near east of that time, was a man’s wealth, even above gold. The awe of a man having many, many wives was not that he had many, many wives, but it was because of the potential to have many, many children, specifically sons. |
|
|
|
Post by bryce on Jul 29, 2009 13:25:38 GMT -8
Sorry, but it is not adultery for a married man to have a second wife. You can't take something a rabbi said in the Talmud and presume that it speaks for all the rabbis. You also cannot presume that what the rabbis said is true to . And, I think we both know that the view you've presented is not the view of the majority of rabbis. You can't presume that what was taught hundreds of years after our Master came was what was taught when He walked around the Galilee. "In fact, not one Rabbi has ever had more than one wife... well, at least not at the same time." Just because you can't find an example of that does not mean that it isn't true. Further, I care more about the men of God that are spoken of in Scripture than I do of the rabbis who are spoken of in the Talmud. Kindly do not reply to me again in a similar manner. I would appreciate it if you would respect me enough to not use arguments that are false. Please, just stick to the facts. Do we agree that the does not forbid a man to have more than one wife? Do we agree that a man with more than one wife is not an adulterer? You seem to think he is if he seduces or rapes a lady, but what about other circumstances? What about a married man who marries his deceased brother's widow? |
|
|
|
Post by bryce on Jul 29, 2009 14:25:06 GMT -8
I would like to go on record as saying that I do not encourage polygyny. I merely present polygyny as an acceptable alternative for some people. While it is ideal for a man to have only one wife, I believe that under some circumstances taking another wife is certainly preferable to divorcing the first wife or allowing unloved single mothers to go without a husband to love them and a father to care for their children. Ideally, there would be no need for some men to have more than one wife. However, we have a world that is corrupted by sin and sometimes it is needed. For example, a German parliament allowed for some men to have more than one wife after a time of war: "On February 14, 1650, the parliament at Nürnberg decreed that, because so many men were killed during the Thirty Years’ War, the Christian churches for the following ten years could not admit any man under the age of 60 into a monastery. Priests and ministers not bound by any monastery were allowed to marry. Lastly, the decree stated that every man was allowed to marry up to ten women. The men were admonished to behave honorably, provide for their wives properly, and prevent animosity among them." (http://www.familysearch.org/Eng/Search/Rg/images/Ger_BMD_RefDoc_HandbookGermanResearch.pdf, found on page 59) I think that those Germans were very wise when they admonished the men to behave honourably, provide for their wives properly, and prevent animosity among them. I imagine that the Jewish leaders throughout the history of Israel gave similar direction to their polygynous men. In 1780, Reverend Martin Madan wrote, "Thelyphthora; Or, a Treatise on Female Ruin, Its Causes, Effects, Consequences, Prevention, and Remedy", where he argued that polygyny was needed in situations where men seduced virgins (Exodus 22:16-17). He served as Chaplain for London's Lock Hospital, which was the first hospital for treating venereal diseases. So, he saw closely the effects of sin and heard the tragic stories of young women who started out as mistresses and then were later discarded and left with few choices outside of prostitution. This grave injustice should have been prevented by society compelling men who seduced these young women to marry them. He wrote about it and became an outcast for it. Please, read about this remarkable man's life. He was an accomplished musical composer and the Godfather of Samuel Wesley, the son of Charles Wesley. He was also friends with Handel. You can find interesting information about him at the following link: christianmarriage.com/home/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=114Here is what Chabad has to say about polygyny: www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/558598/jewish/Does-Jewish-law-forbid-polygamy.htmHere is a link to some interesting opinions from modern-day Jews concerning polygyny: www.jewcy.com/tags/polygamy |
|
|
|
Post by jewishjediguy on Jul 29, 2009 16:16:23 GMT -8
Sorry, but it is not adultery for a married man to have a second wife. When did I say that??? Stick to the subject please. Besides, with Yeshua bringing to fullness the (Mattai 5:17), and in accordance to His teaching, it is implied that it is adultery when Yeshua speaks about a man divorcing and then taking another wife and calls it adultery. And in relation to Yeshua speaking about the divorce-adultery thing, if it is adultery for a man to divorce and marry another, then it is moreso adultery for him to remain married and marry another. The reason being is because divorce without proper cause is not valid, and therefore they are still married. As such one who is married who marries another commits adultery.You can't take something a rabbi said in the Talmud and presume that it speaks for all the rabbis. You also cannot presume that what the rabbis said is true to . And, I think we both know that the view you've presented is not the view of the majority of rabbis. You can't presume that what was taught hundreds of years after our Master came was what was taught when He walked around the Galilee. "In fact, not one Rabbi has ever had more than one wife... well, at least not at the same time." Just because you can't find an example of that does not mean that it isn't true. Further, I care more about the men of God that are spoken of in Scripture than I do of the rabbis who are spoken of in the Talmud.
As for your godly men reference, I have never disagreed that many had more than one wife. My debate is whether or not sanctions it. And since states nothing concerning it, then doesn’t sanction it. It is something that simply was (is) during that time as a social institution, and not a spiritual one in line with .Kindly do not reply to me again in a similar manner. I would appreciate it if you would respect me enough to not use arguments that are false. Please, just stick to the facts.
You cannot answer the references of that I corrected for you from your false assumptions for polygamy. The reference you present, without a scriptural designation i might add, has turned out not to refer to anything polygamous at all. The whole polygamy thing you are spinning is completely based upon implied notions. Does God want us to imply things about His Word or use common sense in the Matter?
And please do not talk to me about how I should talk with you. I have not in any instance disrespected you in any correspondence. You’ve been offended because you chose it, not because I sought to do it.Do we agree that the does not forbid a man to have more than one wife? Do we agree that a man with more than one wife is not an adulterer? You seem to think he is if he seduces or rapes a lady,
And yes, on the same token it is adultery if he rapes her as well. And it isn’t because he seduced or raped, or even whom it was he seduced or raped, that he is an adulterer, it is because he is already married that he is an adulterer. but what about other circumstances? What about a married man who marries his deceased brother's widow? It was also customary for the father of the deceased husband to take in the widowed wife if there were no siblings to take her as a wife, either because they were already married or non-existent. There are no scriptural references, or examples, that I can find saying that an already married man took his brother’s widow as an added wife. And, in contrast, just because you can't find an example of that does not mean that it is true. And, there is a big difference between taking in a widow and marrying her. It was a common practice to simply take them in when a sibling was not available for marriage. Your view of the living brother (who is married) taking as a wife the dead brother’s widow is an implied thing, and causes more questions and debates concerning matters of . Since it is that you refuse the counsel of the Rabbinate in such a matter (which says it is not to be done in such a manner – contrary to your desire of interpretation), It cannot be verified either way in this discussion. Follow the instruction of the Word, and “avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the ; for they are unprofitable and vain.” (Titus 3:9). You seem to want to justify this whole thing by reading things into it and not accept the plain text of Scripture. You deny any kind of validity of Rabbinical teachings on the matter, which would reflect the culture, and yet desire to expound upon these things in the manner of the Rabbis. “Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.” 1 Timothy 1:7 I would like to go on record as saying that I do not encourage polygyny. I merely present polygyny as an acceptable alternative for some people. While it is ideal for a man to have only one wife, I believe that under some circumstances taking another wife is certainly preferable to divorcing the first wife or allowing unloved single mothers to go without a husband to love them and a father to care for their children.
You say you do not encourage polygyny. [That you] merely present polygyny as an acceptable alternative for some people. This is contradictory. Do you see what I'm saying here?
about your links:
Your links do nothing to add to or take away from the discussion at hand. It was never denied by me concerning polygamic practices.
I noticed in a link the mention of the Sephardim and their views of polygamy. Being Sephardic, Polygamy is not even an issue within the confines of our rite or interpretive view of . As it always has been, It's not spoken against, but neither is it sanctioned. As such, the political government, the kenesset in Israel for example, needs to decide upon this social issue. If the government allows it, then I suppose doesn't condemn it. But if it is ruled against, then condemns it. For even the writings of the Sh'lichim are considered . |
|
veggirl
Full Member
Greetings!
Posts: 103
|
Post by veggirl on Jul 29, 2009 16:40:10 GMT -8
Yes it is adultery for a man to have a second wife,
We have to obey the law of the land.. and its against the law!
|
|
|
|
Post by bryce on Jul 29, 2009 16:41:18 GMT -8
If a man who is married rapes or even seduces a virgin, it is adultery, plain and simple, and he is the breaking the Mitz'vah: You shall not commit adultery, and, if caught, will be judged accordingly by the judges of Yis’rael. This is common sense and there is no way around it. This paragraph of yours suggests that you believe that a man is guilty of adultery if he has more than one wife. Please, explain yourself. You seem to see a difference between a married man who seduces a virgin and a married man who takes another wife but not through seduction. How is one instance adultery and the other not adultery? |
|
veggirl
Full Member
Greetings!
Posts: 103
|
Post by veggirl on Jul 29, 2009 16:43:11 GMT -8
brYce,
name one time in the bible where polygyny was a good thing?
Please for give me, I get upset because I just really don't understand these odd Ideas..
I still love ya if u believe in this...
peace&love Bri'gette
|
|
|
|
Post by bryce on Jul 29, 2009 16:50:29 GMT -8
name one place in the bible where polygyny was a good thing? Without polygyny there would have been no prophet Samuel. There also would not have been the 12 tribes of Israel. There would have been no King Solomon. |
|
in the case where a married man seduces a virgin. The word used is generic for man and does not specify that the man in question is single. Further, there are no other commandments that relieve a married seducer from having to marry the virgin he's taken advantage of.
