Polygamy Advocate - Defending Torah Plural Marriage in the hope of fulfilling Yeshayahu 4:1. "And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying, “We shall eat our own food and wear our own clothes; only let us be called by your name, to take away our reproach.”"
Showing posts with label husband of one wife. Show all posts
Showing posts with label husband of one wife. Show all posts
10 June 2013
Updated! Now with closed-captioning!
07 April 2012
Untwisting the Twisting of Proverbs 31
Untwisting the Twisting of Proverbs 31
By The Ramyk
Rabbi Apostle Moshe Yoseph Koniuchowsky
Moon 9 Day 3 5971 SC (roughly)
Roman date November 27 2011
Many who have not yet had the revelation of the restoration of biblical marriage at the end of this
age, continue to misuse Proverbs 31, even as they do with Matthew 19. In Matthew 19, as we have
clearly shown elsewhere, Yahushua does not discuss monogamy over polygyny, or even that
monogamy was the original design. (We have shown elsewhere that a very strong case can be made from the
Book of Genesis that Adam had 2 wives. Therefore patriarchy, woman made for man and neither monogamy nor
polygyny was the original pattern.) Please see:
Adam the Polygamist
Did Adam Really Have Two Wives?
The Rebirth of Yisraelite Marriage pages 8-15:
In Matthew 19 the Moshiach warns the leaders against divorce on demand. He teaches that any man
that marries an undivorced woman commits fornication, causing the woman to commit adultery. Or
anyone that divorces their spouse for any reason other than unfaithfulness commits adultery.
Please see: The Rebirth of Yisraelite Marriage pages 7-8,289-292.
Since polygyny is blessed and many were in YHWH’s perfect will in its practice, Yahushua cannot
allegedly come along in Matthew 19 and simply curse or disallow what Torah calls a blessing when
properly regulated and done correctly. If that is what Yahushua allegedly did and taught, then He
could not qualify as the Messiah; for the Messiah would come to AFFIRM YHWH’S ways and not
override them in a new dispensation.
Yahushua said this in Matthew 5:17-18:
17 Think not that I am come to weaken, or destroy the Torah, or the neviim: I have not come to
weaken, or destroy, but to completely reveal it in its intended fullness.
18 For truly I say to you, Until the current shamayim and earth pass away, not one yud, or one
nekudah shall by any means pass from the Torah, until all be fulfilled.
Let’s now seek to untwist the traditional messy religious teachings of Mishle-Proverbs 31.
Chapter 31:
1The words of melech Lemu-El, a message that his eema taught him.
2 What, my son? And what, the son of my womb? And what, the son of my vows?
Marital vows that birthed her son and here is the patriarchal message!
3 Give not your strength to women, nor your halachot to that which destroys melechim.
The warning is that when a man takes more than one covenant wife that the patriarch does not turn
over lordship (strength) or his priesthood to these women. The very fact that she warns him about
women and not a single woman, shows that this is acceptable in Hebraic culture, which predates
Islam, Mormonism or any other kind of religious perversion.
4 It is not for melechim, O Lemu-El, it is not for melechim to drink wine; nor for rulers to drink strong
drink:
5 Lest they drink, and forget the Torah, and pervert the mishpat of any of the afflicted.
6 Give strong drink to him that is ready to perish, and wine to those that are of heavy levavot.
7 Let him drink, and forget his poverty, and remember his misery no more.
8 Open your mouth for those who cannot speak for themselves and are appointed to destruction.
9 Open your mouth, judge righteously, and plead the cause of the poor and needy.
This is why I have spoken publicly and prophetically at this point in time. So that my mouth may
speak forth and declare the ways of the Master Yahushua. And for those who cannot speak for
themselves and for those who are called to live a polygynous lifestyle, yet do not have the platform
that Yah has granted me. I would rather make enemies because I teach the truth in love, than to
allow the guiltless and the righteous that practice plural marriage continue to be castigated and
lumped in with the perverts of society. The media piles on an occasional abuse in the lifestyle, but
never highlights or accentuates the positive examples. They use unjust weights and measures against
plural marriage, without ever sighting the grandiose abuses in monogamy, and the overwhelming
fact that 99% of domestic, child and spousal abuses, with their subsequent restraining orders, are
perpetrated by monogamists, in a society bent on mandating monogamy. That is why we must speak
up and we must be heard!
10 Who can find a virtuous woman? 1 For her price is far above rubies.
Nowhere does this question limit the amount or number of covenant virtuous women. That has for
too long been read into the verse.
11 The lev of her husband does safely trust in her, so that he shall have no need of spoil.
12 She will do him tov and not evil all the days of her chayim.
She will serve his vision and his calling not her own.
13 She seeks wool, and linen, and works willingly with her hands.
14 She is like the merchants’ ships; she brings her food from far.
1 In this verse starts the eshet chayil, or “virtuous woman” chapter.
15 She rises also while it is still night, and provides food to her household, and a portion to her young
women.
Every patriarch needs a matriarch. The matriarch is the first wife who in my view should be the most
emotionally and spiritual mature one. She is to lovingly guide and teach the younger and the less
experienced in marriage. She prepares food or breakfast in this case before the day starts at sunrise,
for both her patriarchal husband as well as HER YOUNG WOMEN. In a biblical Hebraic family, the
younger women become her responsibility, as she mentors and provides for them, along with her
husband, their portions because she is the most virtuous. Now just because she is the matriarch and
called to be the esht chayil-virtous wife, that does not mean that there are not other virtuous
women-wives in the home being raised up and cared for by the first virtuous woman. Just the
opposite is true here, as we see other women sharing her home and assisting her in her business
ventures.
16 She considers a field, and buys it: with the fruit of her hands she plants a vineyard.
17 She girds her loins with strength, and strengthens her arms.
18 She perceives that her merchandise is tov: her lamp goes not out at night.
19 She lays her hands to the spindle, and her hands hold the linen.
She is a business lady within the confines of the home bringing business into the home. Her arms are
a metaphor for the other young women living and assisting in the home.
20 She stretches out her hand to the poor; yes, she reaches out her hands to the needy.
21 She is not afraid of the snow for her household: for all of her household is clothed in scarlet.
22 She makes herself quilts; her clothing is silk and purple.
23 Her husband is known in the gates, when he sits among the zechanim of the land.
Her submission along with his other wives brings him honor in the community.
24 She makes fine linen, and sells it; and delivers girdles to the merchants.
25 Strength and honor are her clothing; and she shall gilah in time to come.
26 She opens her mouth with chochmah; and on her tongue is the Torah of chesed.
27 She looks well to the halachot of her household, and eats not the lechem of idleness.
The virtuous woman is a Torah keeper guarding both her husband and the young wives entrusted to
her care. She contributes both Torah knowledge and kindness and mercy to both her husband and
sister wives.
28 Her children in Yisrael rise up, and call her blessed; her husband also, and he praises her:
29 Many daughters have done virtuously, but you have risen over them all.
A careful look at verse 29 again brings home the principle of Hebraic marriage. Who are these many
daughters? They are the daughters of Israel in the same home, under patriarchy, that are also called
virtuous. In context, these are NOT biological daughters, as children who are pre- puberty cannot be
mature enough emotionally or spiritually to be called virtuous. If we remain consistent in our
interpretation of Scripture and if the virtuous adjective applies to the first MORE VIRTOUS wife,
then the exact same description MUST apply to the other younger less virtuous wives! The first by
virtue of her matriarchal blessing and responsibility, is among the virtuous daughters’ of Zion, but
has risen above them all! Her husband praises her for her great love, character and selfless Hebraic
lifestyle as do her children.
30 Favor is deceitful, and beauty is vain: but a woman that fears YHWH, she shall be given tehilla.
31 Give her of the fruit of her hands; and let her own mitzvoth praise her in the gates.
It is not about who is the most beautiful, or the youngest, but who is the most virtuous. The most
virtuous who is able to rise above them all, she is the one that shall be praised; for she has risen
highest and with dignity and honor in her most noble calling.
With this correct and consistent view of Scripture, we can thank YHWH even more for His ways,
which remain eternally higher than our own ways and where the Yisraelite home is being restored
as the training center for virtuous Israelite men and women. The Israelite home must reflect
Yahushua’s home, where He deals with many wives, as seen in Matthew 25, some wise and
virtuous, some foolish. The Proverbs 31 model fits that of Yahushua and His patriarchal order, as
metaphorically taught and seen in Matthew chapter 25. Selah!
13 July 2011
Biblical Plural Marriages - Right or Wrong?
This is one of the best, most well written articles I have ever been blessed enough to discover. What surprised me the most was the fact that it was written by a woman. This article is a must read for everyone because it brings to light so many scriptural truths not only on the subject of polygamy but the very essence of the issue of obedience to YHWH.
26 April 2011
11 July 2010
The Husband of one wife.
What about 1 Timothy 3:2 which states that a "bishop" or "overseer" must be the "husband of one wife?" Isn't this a ban against polygamy in the Brit Hadashah?
Anti-polygamists are really trying to grasp at straws with this explanation. Because they cannot find a single verse of scripture which condemns polygamy, they attempt to use this verse as an implied command. When we look closer at this verse and read it in context, it becomes clear that it has nothing whatsoever to do with polygamy.
1) CONTEXT - In 1 Timothy 3: 1-10 we see that Rabbi Sha'ul is giving the qualifications for a man to serve as overseer of the local assembly.
1Timmothy 3:1-10 "Trustworthy is the word: If a man longs for the position of an overseer, he desires a good work. An overseer, then, should be blameless, the husband of one wife, sober, sensible, orderly, kind to strangers, able to teach, not given to wine, no brawler, but gentle, not quarrelsome, no lover of money, one who rules his own house well, having his children in subjection with all reverence, for if a man does not know how to rule his own house, how shall he look after the assembly of Elohim? Not a new convert, lest he become puffed up with pride and fall into the judgment of the devil. And he should even have a good witness from those who are outside, lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil. Likewise attendants are to be reverent, not double-tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy for filthy gain, holding to the secret of the belief with a clean conscience. And let these also be proved first, then let them serve, if they are unreprovable."
The first thing that must be pointed out is that if Sha'ul is banning polygamy for an overseer, it proves that there was polygamy in the assembly and further proves that it was NOT banned for all! Also, if a man must be monogamous to become an overseer, why is there not a requirement for him to REMAIN monogamous? Should he take a second wife, we would expect to see that he would thus loose his position. However, no such thing is mentioned.
But let's take a step back and find out what is being said here.
I must call your attention to the phrase "if any man desires the office of overseer, he desires a good work." People today have no idea what that means. When they hear the word "overseer" or "bishop" they immediately think of a modern day pastor sitting at the head of some congregation being honored and supported by his subordinates. Others may picture the televangelist with his hands covered in gold rings calling for people to donate to his needy ministry. That is NOT what this means at all! Being an overseer in the early assemblies was a very difficult job. Sha'ul implies as much by his "selling point" that the office is a "good work." The overseer was much the same as a modern sheriff or district attorney who functioned within the local assembly. It was an unpaid position, lacking the reverence we see given to modern pastors. Sha'ul then would not be banning an assembly overseer from being a polygamist in light of other assembly leaders in the TaNaK who were. Avraham, Dawid, Gideon, etc were all polygamist overseers of the congregation of Israel. Sha'ul would have no historical reference to make such a ruling.
Secondly, if this "implied ban" were required for ALL of the congregation then so would the other qualifications in this passage. By that logic, ALL who followed the way would be required to be married and have a family. If it is sinful for a congregation member to be a polygamist, it MUST THEN be sinful for him/her to be single and/or have disobedient children. You cannot have it both ways!
2) MEANING - What do the actual words in this passage mean? We have seen that an overseer is nothing like the modern wolf in sheep's clothing pastor. Let's define the other words in this phrase to get a better idea.
a) husband - "aner" simply means "man" or "male" it is translated "husband" when the context makes clear a married man is implied. However, there was no real word for "husband" at the time. This is a modern invention. So, to be true to the meaning we must translate this word as "man."
b) wife - "gune" is a more specific word which DOES imply a married female. (This is true the Scriptural context of a marriage) As opposed to "woman," "female" or "virgin" which are all status-distinguishing, a wife is a woman who belongs to a man (i.e. someone with whom sexual relations are forbidden to all but her "husband")
c) one - "mia" is an ordinal word meaning "first." I find it amazing that this word is used instead of the word "heis" which is the Greek numerical word for the singular value of one. That is the very word used in the same letter in 1 Timothy 5:9 to describe the "wife of ONE (heis) husband!" Almost the exact same phrase, but two different words are used for "one." The Israelite concept of marriage would mean that a man could have many wives, but a woman could have but ONE husband.
If we then construct the phrase according to the actual definitions of the words we get "a man married to his first wife." This sounds quite different than "the husband of one wife." To be an overseer, the man must know how to be responsible for his family. He MUST be a married man! It makes no difference if he has one wife or ten! If anything, this could be used to argue a ban on divorced men serving in the office of overseer. This falls perfectly in line with the other requirements which show the character of the man (as opposed to his marital status).
To further illustrate that Sha'ul wasn't banning polygamy, let's look at another verse:
1 Corinthians 5:1 "It is commonly reported that there is whoring among you, and such whoring as is not even named among the gentiles, so as one to have his father’s wife!"
Here, Rabbi Sha'ul is condemning someone in the assembly who was having relations with the wife of his father. This was prohibited in Vayikra 18:7-8. ‘The nakedness of your father or the nakedness of your mother you do not uncover. She is your mother, you do not uncover her nakedness. ‘The nakedness of your father’s wife you do not uncover, it is your father’s nakedness."
Notice that "mother" and "father's wife" are two separate people. Sexual relations are forbidden with either your mother or your father's wife. Sha'ul is condemning this forbidden act of fornication. Here is the perfect time for him to condemn polygamy (which was obviously going on the "New Testament") while addressing this reported concern, yet only the fornicating son is criticized. Nowhere is the slightest hint of the polygamist father being in the wrong in any way.
3) HISTORICAL - We have just seen a shining example of polygamy in the Brit Hadashah. The first century C.E. was when the sodomite Greeks and Romans began to make forced monogamy laws. This was because they saw that women were becoming more powerful with the freedoms they found in polygamous households. Women were viewed in these pagan societies as "a necessary evil to ensure procreation." In the Greek/Roman view, restricting a man to one wife would ensure him progeny while keeping the women as domestic slaves who would then be solely responsible for bearing and raising the children, cleaning house, washing, cooking, helping in the fields, etc. This was in sharp contrast to Israelite women who shared these duties with their sister-wives allowing them the time and freedom to pursue other endeavors. Love and romance would be found through homosexual relations with other Greek/Roman men. Forced monogamy has plagued this earth with untold misery and sin and has been the overwhelming force used to suppress women.
Some, such as pastor Don Milton, have pointed out that Sha'ul's seeming ban was actually a response to the Roman Lex Papia Poppaea edict of the first century.
We have seen that Rabbi Sha'ul was NOT banning polygamy to either the Overseers or the general assembly. The verse in question seems to be making the character of the potential candidate for the office come into question. For another view on this verse, I direct you to THIS article.
Anti-polygamists are really trying to grasp at straws with this explanation. Because they cannot find a single verse of scripture which condemns polygamy, they attempt to use this verse as an implied command. When we look closer at this verse and read it in context, it becomes clear that it has nothing whatsoever to do with polygamy.
1) CONTEXT - In 1 Timothy 3: 1-10 we see that Rabbi Sha'ul is giving the qualifications for a man to serve as overseer of the local assembly.
1Timmothy 3:1-10 "Trustworthy is the word: If a man longs for the position of an overseer, he desires a good work. An overseer, then, should be blameless, the husband of one wife, sober, sensible, orderly, kind to strangers, able to teach, not given to wine, no brawler, but gentle, not quarrelsome, no lover of money, one who rules his own house well, having his children in subjection with all reverence, for if a man does not know how to rule his own house, how shall he look after the assembly of Elohim? Not a new convert, lest he become puffed up with pride and fall into the judgment of the devil. And he should even have a good witness from those who are outside, lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil. Likewise attendants are to be reverent, not double-tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy for filthy gain, holding to the secret of the belief with a clean conscience. And let these also be proved first, then let them serve, if they are unreprovable."
The first thing that must be pointed out is that if Sha'ul is banning polygamy for an overseer, it proves that there was polygamy in the assembly and further proves that it was NOT banned for all! Also, if a man must be monogamous to become an overseer, why is there not a requirement for him to REMAIN monogamous? Should he take a second wife, we would expect to see that he would thus loose his position. However, no such thing is mentioned.
But let's take a step back and find out what is being said here.
I must call your attention to the phrase "if any man desires the office of overseer, he desires a good work." People today have no idea what that means. When they hear the word "overseer" or "bishop" they immediately think of a modern day pastor sitting at the head of some congregation being honored and supported by his subordinates. Others may picture the televangelist with his hands covered in gold rings calling for people to donate to his needy ministry. That is NOT what this means at all! Being an overseer in the early assemblies was a very difficult job. Sha'ul implies as much by his "selling point" that the office is a "good work." The overseer was much the same as a modern sheriff or district attorney who functioned within the local assembly. It was an unpaid position, lacking the reverence we see given to modern pastors. Sha'ul then would not be banning an assembly overseer from being a polygamist in light of other assembly leaders in the TaNaK who were. Avraham, Dawid, Gideon, etc were all polygamist overseers of the congregation of Israel. Sha'ul would have no historical reference to make such a ruling.
Secondly, if this "implied ban" were required for ALL of the congregation then so would the other qualifications in this passage. By that logic, ALL who followed the way would be required to be married and have a family. If it is sinful for a congregation member to be a polygamist, it MUST THEN be sinful for him/her to be single and/or have disobedient children. You cannot have it both ways!
2) MEANING - What do the actual words in this passage mean? We have seen that an overseer is nothing like the modern wolf in sheep's clothing pastor. Let's define the other words in this phrase to get a better idea.
a) husband - "aner" simply means "man" or "male" it is translated "husband" when the context makes clear a married man is implied. However, there was no real word for "husband" at the time. This is a modern invention. So, to be true to the meaning we must translate this word as "man."
b) wife - "gune" is a more specific word which DOES imply a married female. (This is true the Scriptural context of a marriage) As opposed to "woman," "female" or "virgin" which are all status-distinguishing, a wife is a woman who belongs to a man (i.e. someone with whom sexual relations are forbidden to all but her "husband")
c) one - "mia" is an ordinal word meaning "first." I find it amazing that this word is used instead of the word "heis" which is the Greek numerical word for the singular value of one. That is the very word used in the same letter in 1 Timothy 5:9 to describe the "wife of ONE (heis) husband!" Almost the exact same phrase, but two different words are used for "one." The Israelite concept of marriage would mean that a man could have many wives, but a woman could have but ONE husband.
If we then construct the phrase according to the actual definitions of the words we get "a man married to his first wife." This sounds quite different than "the husband of one wife." To be an overseer, the man must know how to be responsible for his family. He MUST be a married man! It makes no difference if he has one wife or ten! If anything, this could be used to argue a ban on divorced men serving in the office of overseer. This falls perfectly in line with the other requirements which show the character of the man (as opposed to his marital status).
To further illustrate that Sha'ul wasn't banning polygamy, let's look at another verse:
1 Corinthians 5:1 "It is commonly reported that there is whoring among you, and such whoring as is not even named among the gentiles, so as one to have his father’s wife!"
Here, Rabbi Sha'ul is condemning someone in the assembly who was having relations with the wife of his father. This was prohibited in Vayikra 18:7-8. ‘The nakedness of your father or the nakedness of your mother you do not uncover. She is your mother, you do not uncover her nakedness. ‘The nakedness of your father’s wife you do not uncover, it is your father’s nakedness."
Notice that "mother" and "father's wife" are two separate people. Sexual relations are forbidden with either your mother or your father's wife. Sha'ul is condemning this forbidden act of fornication. Here is the perfect time for him to condemn polygamy (which was obviously going on the "New Testament") while addressing this reported concern, yet only the fornicating son is criticized. Nowhere is the slightest hint of the polygamist father being in the wrong in any way.
3) HISTORICAL - We have just seen a shining example of polygamy in the Brit Hadashah. The first century C.E. was when the sodomite Greeks and Romans began to make forced monogamy laws. This was because they saw that women were becoming more powerful with the freedoms they found in polygamous households. Women were viewed in these pagan societies as "a necessary evil to ensure procreation." In the Greek/Roman view, restricting a man to one wife would ensure him progeny while keeping the women as domestic slaves who would then be solely responsible for bearing and raising the children, cleaning house, washing, cooking, helping in the fields, etc. This was in sharp contrast to Israelite women who shared these duties with their sister-wives allowing them the time and freedom to pursue other endeavors. Love and romance would be found through homosexual relations with other Greek/Roman men. Forced monogamy has plagued this earth with untold misery and sin and has been the overwhelming force used to suppress women.
Some, such as pastor Don Milton, have pointed out that Sha'ul's seeming ban was actually a response to the Roman Lex Papia Poppaea edict of the first century.
We have seen that Rabbi Sha'ul was NOT banning polygamy to either the Overseers or the general assembly. The verse in question seems to be making the character of the potential candidate for the office come into question. For another view on this verse, I direct you to THIS article.
26 June 2010
Oh see how they lie!!!
Imagine my righteous anger when I read THIS article! It was written by s.a.tan's minister Herbert W. Armstrong. In the article he claims:
1) Avraham was NOT a polygamist.
2) Yitzchak had only one wife
3) Ya'akov had only one wife after conversion
4) Polygamy was a worldly custom not permitted to Israeli kings.
5) Dawid repented of polygamy
6) Concubines were not allowed
7) YHWH condemned the "sin" of polygamy
8) Polygamy was not the "original intent" of marriage
9) Yahushua is not a polygamist
Let's expose these blasphemies to the light of truth one at a time:
1) Avraham was NOT a polygamist
While Mr. Armstrong may think that all of his readers are simpletons, I have the proof of Scripture bearing testimony against him.
B'reisheet 16:3 "And Sarai, Aḇram’s wife, took Haḡar her female slave, the Mitsrite, and gave her to her husband Aḇram to be his wife, after Aḇram had dwelt ten years in the land of Kenaʽan."
Now, To me it seems plain that since Abram's 1st wife Sarai GAVE him his 2nd wife Hagar - that makes him married to two women at once! i.e. he WAS a polygamist.
Did YHWH condemn this heinous "sin?" NO!!! In fact, he was given the brit milah (covenant of circumcision) while married to BOTH of these women without a single word of "You disgusting pervert, how dare you take two wives!?!" Mr. Armstrong called Avraham "The father of the faithful" an adulterer and claimed that his son Ishmael was "illegitimate." I challenge you reading this today to find one verse of scripture that names Avraham an adulterer! This is the man that our savior promised the faithful would sit with in the reign of Elohim! I wonder if Mr. Armstrong's lies will comfort him in the lake of fire?
Revelation 21:8 “But as for the cowardly, and untrustworthy, and abominable, and murderers, and those who whore, and drug sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, their part is in the lake which burns with fire and sulphur, which is the second death.”
Let's also not forget that Avraham had at least one more wife and at least two concubines! (See B'reisheet 25: 1-6) He definitely was a polygamist and not an adulterer!
2) Yitzchak had only one wife
While it is true that Yitzchak married only Rivkah, this doesn't condemn polygamy in the slightest. If anything, it stands as proof that monogamy is a valid form of marriage (contrary to modern FLDS teachings which state that a man must take a minimum of three wives to obtain salvation). Armstrong goes on to make an allegory concerning Yahushua and the assemblies. (more on that latter)
3) Ya'akov had only one wife after conversion
What a stretch of both logic and reason to make claims such as "Leah was Ya'akov's only true wife" when scripture tells us that he took TWO wives and two slaves who bore him children. How can he claim to know that "In YHWH's sight he wasn't married to Rachel?" This is the basis of all anti-Semitic beliefs! YHWH's chosen people came from the offspring of these four women of Ya'akov! Armstrong then purposely takes events out of chronological order. Please note that Ya'akov is blessed by YHWH by having his name changed to Yisra'el WHILE HAVING TWO WIVES AND TWO SLAVE-GIRLS WHO BORE HIM CHILDREN!!! Again, not once is he condemned or punished for polygamy! Mr. Armstrong, you are of your father the devil!
4) Polygamy was a worldly custom not permitted to Israeli kings.
What a foot-in-the-mouth argument! Assuming it is true that KINGS couldn't marry more than one woman - what about the other millions of Yisraeli men who weren't king? If YHWH had to make a special law for the king, did he forget about the common man? Since I am not King of Israel, may I have plural wives, Mr. Armstrong? However, he makes one out-of-context citation:
Devarim 17:17 “And he is not to increase wives for himself, lest his heart turn away"
So then, a king may have only one wife because it says "He is not to increase wives for himself." Strangely, he makes no mention of what comes immediately before and after that quote.
Devarim 17:16-17 “Only, he is not to increase horses for himself, nor cause the people to return to Mitsrayim to increase horses, for יהוה has said to you, ‘Do not return that way again.’ “And he is not to increase wives for himself, lest his heart turn away, nor is he to greatly increase silver and gold for himself. "
So, there you have it! The King of Israel was limited to one wife, one horse, and one piece of silver and gold. What a moron! See how he purposely omitted these things because it throws some light on the true meaning. But the key to what is really being said lies in the previous verses:
Devarim 17:14-15 “When you come to the land which יהוה your Elohim is giving you, and shall possess it and shall dwell in it, and you shall say, ‘Let me set a sovereign over me like all the gentiles that are around me,’ you shall certainly set a sovereign over you whom יהוה your Elohim shall choose. Set a sovereign over you from among your brothers, you are not allowed to set a foreigner over you, who is not your brother."
The issue here is idolatry. No foreigner was to rule as king who was not of the covenant people. Horses were a common gift (bribe) to kings. Wives were sometimes taken for diplomatic reasons, money was also something that was used to bribe. Notice the reason for not multiplying wives was so that his heart wouldn't be turned away. This was the case with Shlomo who married many PAGAN women who turned his heart away to serve strange Elohim. (see #6 below) This was not a ban on polygamy, this was a warning not to be persuaded into idolatry. Because the king ruled the people, this special admonition was given to him because of his potential to lead all of Israel astray (as we see many times in Scripture) For another perspective on this issue read THIS article.
5) Dawid repented of polygamy
Again, with complete lies and twisting of Scripture, the liar Armstrong claims that Dawid repented for his "sin" of polygamy. The "sin" of Dawid was ADULTERY and MURDER!!! Bathsheva was the wife of Uriah. Dawid had sexual relations with a married woman. This is ADULTERY!!!! The king then had Uriah sent to the front lines where he would be abandoned and killed. This is MURDER!!! YHWH would then send Nathan HaNavi to him to tell him the story of a rich man with many flocks and herds and a poor man with one ewe. He did not say that it was wrong for the rich man to have flocks. What was wrong was that the rich man stole the poor man's one ewe and used it to have a feast. Look at the condemnation given to Dawid (who was already a polygamist)
2Shmuel 12:8-9 ‘And I gave you your master’s house and your master’s wives into your bosom, and gave you the house of Yisra’ĕl and Yehuḏah. And if that were not enough, I also would have given you much more! ‘Why have you despised the Word of יהוה to do evil in His eyes? You have killed Uriyah the Ḥittite with the sword, and his wife you took to be your wife, and you have killed him with the sword of the children of Ammon."
Did YHWH condemn Dawid for polygamy??? NO!!! In fact he says "I gave you wives and would have given you much more!" He wasn't condemned for the wives he had given to him by YHWH! He was condemned for Adultery and Murder and punished by having his child die. This is what Dawid repented from. Adultery and murder. NOT polygamy!!! Dawid was called PERFECT by YHWH himself WHILE HE WAS A POLYGAMIST!!! The score is now YHWH's word 5 - Armstrong's lies 0!
6) Concubines were not allowed
The minister of s.a.tan, Armstrong now uses the "proofs" that Dawid put away his concubines and his son, Shlomo did evil in the sight of YHWH by taking so many wives and concubines.
2Shmuel 20:3 "And Dawiḏ came to his house at Yerushalayim. And the sovereign took the ten women, his concubines whom he had left to look after the house, and put them in a protected house and supported them, but did not go in to them. So they were shut up to the day of their death, living in widowhood."
This was done in response to what his son, Abshalom had done to them.
2Shmuel 16:21-22 "And Aḥithophel said to Aḇshalom, “Go in to your father’s concubines, whom he has left to look after the house. And all Yisra’ĕl shall hear that you have made yourself a stench to your father. And the hands of all who are with you shall be strong.” So they pitched a tent for Aḇshalom on the top of the house, and Aḇshalom went in to his father’s concubines before the eyes of all Yisra’ĕl."
His other claim is that Shlomo HaMelech did evil by being polygamous. Let's see what the Scriptures say:
1 Melachim 11:1-11 "And Sovereign Shelomoh loved many foreign women in addition to the daughter of Pharaoh: Mo’aḇite, Ammonite, Eḏomite, Tsiḏonian, and Ḥittite women; from the nations of whom יהוה had said to the children of Yisra’ĕl, “You do not go into them, and they do not go into you, for they shall certainly turn away your hearts after their mighty ones.” Shelomoh clung to these in love. And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines. And his wives turned away his heart. And it came to be, when Shelomoh was old, that his wives turned away his heart after other mighty ones. And his heart was not perfect with יהוה his Elohim, as was the heart of his father Dawiḏ. And Shelomoh went after Ashtoreth the mighty one of the Tsiḏonians, and after Milkom the abomination of the Ammonites. Thus Shelomoh did evil in the eyes of יהוה, and did not follow יהוה completely, like his father Dawiḏ. Then Shelomoh built a high place for Kemosh the abomination of Mo’aḇ, on the hill that is east of Yerushalayim, and for Moleḵ the abomination of the children of Ammon. And so he did for all his foreign wives, who burned incense and slaughtered to their mighty ones. Therefore יהוה was enraged with Shelomoh, because his heart had turned away from יהוה Elohim of Yisra’ĕl, who had appeared to him twice, and had commanded him concerning this word, not to go after other mighty ones. But he did not guard what יהוה had commanded. And יהוה said to Shelomoh, “Because you have done this, and have not guarded My covenant and My laws, which I have commanded you, I shall certainly tear the reign away from you and give it to your servant."
Was Shlomo's sin polygamy or idolatry? Even a third grader could answer that question. His sin was marrying pagan women out of the nations from which Israel was commanded not to marry. These pagan women turned his heart away from YHWH to follow strange elohim. Had he married 700 Israelite women, would there have been a problem? NO!!! Again, the Anti-Polygamy movement uses deliberate lies to attempt to legalize their unscriptural pagan Roman custom.
7) YHWH condemned the "sin" of polygamy
Not one verse of scripture can be given in support of this statement. I challenge you to find it! See THIS article to find out the true sin of polygamy.
8) Polygamy was not the "original intent" of marriage
I have these articles posted to deal with this topic.
9) Yahushua is not a polygamist
Lastly, Armstrong contends that Yahushua is not a polygamist. His proof texts are that Yahushua is to marry the twelve tribes of Yisrael and that ministers are to be the husband of one wife. As I was already planning articles on these very topics, I will refrain from commenting on them here.
The Anti-polygamy pagans cannot prove their side from scripture. They must make up their "facts" and twist scripture around to their own destruction. Herbert Armstrong is a perfect example of these tactics. The witness of YHWH's word proves that polygamy was NEVER condemned or called sin. The only sin here is lying!
1) Avraham was NOT a polygamist.
2) Yitzchak had only one wife
3) Ya'akov had only one wife after conversion
4) Polygamy was a worldly custom not permitted to Israeli kings.
5) Dawid repented of polygamy
6) Concubines were not allowed
7) YHWH condemned the "sin" of polygamy
8) Polygamy was not the "original intent" of marriage
9) Yahushua is not a polygamist
Let's expose these blasphemies to the light of truth one at a time:
1) Avraham was NOT a polygamist
While Mr. Armstrong may think that all of his readers are simpletons, I have the proof of Scripture bearing testimony against him.
B'reisheet 16:3 "And Sarai, Aḇram’s wife, took Haḡar her female slave, the Mitsrite, and gave her to her husband Aḇram to be his wife, after Aḇram had dwelt ten years in the land of Kenaʽan."
Now, To me it seems plain that since Abram's 1st wife Sarai GAVE him his 2nd wife Hagar - that makes him married to two women at once! i.e. he WAS a polygamist.
Did YHWH condemn this heinous "sin?" NO!!! In fact, he was given the brit milah (covenant of circumcision) while married to BOTH of these women without a single word of "You disgusting pervert, how dare you take two wives!?!" Mr. Armstrong called Avraham "The father of the faithful" an adulterer and claimed that his son Ishmael was "illegitimate." I challenge you reading this today to find one verse of scripture that names Avraham an adulterer! This is the man that our savior promised the faithful would sit with in the reign of Elohim! I wonder if Mr. Armstrong's lies will comfort him in the lake of fire?
Revelation 21:8 “But as for the cowardly, and untrustworthy, and abominable, and murderers, and those who whore, and drug sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, their part is in the lake which burns with fire and sulphur, which is the second death.”
Let's also not forget that Avraham had at least one more wife and at least two concubines! (See B'reisheet 25: 1-6) He definitely was a polygamist and not an adulterer!
2) Yitzchak had only one wife
While it is true that Yitzchak married only Rivkah, this doesn't condemn polygamy in the slightest. If anything, it stands as proof that monogamy is a valid form of marriage (contrary to modern FLDS teachings which state that a man must take a minimum of three wives to obtain salvation). Armstrong goes on to make an allegory concerning Yahushua and the assemblies. (more on that latter)
3) Ya'akov had only one wife after conversion
What a stretch of both logic and reason to make claims such as "Leah was Ya'akov's only true wife" when scripture tells us that he took TWO wives and two slaves who bore him children. How can he claim to know that "In YHWH's sight he wasn't married to Rachel?" This is the basis of all anti-Semitic beliefs! YHWH's chosen people came from the offspring of these four women of Ya'akov! Armstrong then purposely takes events out of chronological order. Please note that Ya'akov is blessed by YHWH by having his name changed to Yisra'el WHILE HAVING TWO WIVES AND TWO SLAVE-GIRLS WHO BORE HIM CHILDREN!!! Again, not once is he condemned or punished for polygamy! Mr. Armstrong, you are of your father the devil!
4) Polygamy was a worldly custom not permitted to Israeli kings.
What a foot-in-the-mouth argument! Assuming it is true that KINGS couldn't marry more than one woman - what about the other millions of Yisraeli men who weren't king? If YHWH had to make a special law for the king, did he forget about the common man? Since I am not King of Israel, may I have plural wives, Mr. Armstrong? However, he makes one out-of-context citation:
Devarim 17:17 “And he is not to increase wives for himself, lest his heart turn away"
So then, a king may have only one wife because it says "He is not to increase wives for himself." Strangely, he makes no mention of what comes immediately before and after that quote.
Devarim 17:16-17 “Only, he is not to increase horses for himself, nor cause the people to return to Mitsrayim to increase horses, for יהוה has said to you, ‘Do not return that way again.’ “And he is not to increase wives for himself, lest his heart turn away, nor is he to greatly increase silver and gold for himself. "
So, there you have it! The King of Israel was limited to one wife, one horse, and one piece of silver and gold. What a moron! See how he purposely omitted these things because it throws some light on the true meaning. But the key to what is really being said lies in the previous verses:
Devarim 17:14-15 “When you come to the land which יהוה your Elohim is giving you, and shall possess it and shall dwell in it, and you shall say, ‘Let me set a sovereign over me like all the gentiles that are around me,’ you shall certainly set a sovereign over you whom יהוה your Elohim shall choose. Set a sovereign over you from among your brothers, you are not allowed to set a foreigner over you, who is not your brother."
The issue here is idolatry. No foreigner was to rule as king who was not of the covenant people. Horses were a common gift (bribe) to kings. Wives were sometimes taken for diplomatic reasons, money was also something that was used to bribe. Notice the reason for not multiplying wives was so that his heart wouldn't be turned away. This was the case with Shlomo who married many PAGAN women who turned his heart away to serve strange Elohim. (see #6 below) This was not a ban on polygamy, this was a warning not to be persuaded into idolatry. Because the king ruled the people, this special admonition was given to him because of his potential to lead all of Israel astray (as we see many times in Scripture) For another perspective on this issue read THIS article.
5) Dawid repented of polygamy
Again, with complete lies and twisting of Scripture, the liar Armstrong claims that Dawid repented for his "sin" of polygamy. The "sin" of Dawid was ADULTERY and MURDER!!! Bathsheva was the wife of Uriah. Dawid had sexual relations with a married woman. This is ADULTERY!!!! The king then had Uriah sent to the front lines where he would be abandoned and killed. This is MURDER!!! YHWH would then send Nathan HaNavi to him to tell him the story of a rich man with many flocks and herds and a poor man with one ewe. He did not say that it was wrong for the rich man to have flocks. What was wrong was that the rich man stole the poor man's one ewe and used it to have a feast. Look at the condemnation given to Dawid (who was already a polygamist)
2Shmuel 12:8-9 ‘And I gave you your master’s house and your master’s wives into your bosom, and gave you the house of Yisra’ĕl and Yehuḏah. And if that were not enough, I also would have given you much more! ‘Why have you despised the Word of יהוה to do evil in His eyes? You have killed Uriyah the Ḥittite with the sword, and his wife you took to be your wife, and you have killed him with the sword of the children of Ammon."
Did YHWH condemn Dawid for polygamy??? NO!!! In fact he says "I gave you wives and would have given you much more!" He wasn't condemned for the wives he had given to him by YHWH! He was condemned for Adultery and Murder and punished by having his child die. This is what Dawid repented from. Adultery and murder. NOT polygamy!!! Dawid was called PERFECT by YHWH himself WHILE HE WAS A POLYGAMIST!!! The score is now YHWH's word 5 - Armstrong's lies 0!
6) Concubines were not allowed
The minister of s.a.tan, Armstrong now uses the "proofs" that Dawid put away his concubines and his son, Shlomo did evil in the sight of YHWH by taking so many wives and concubines.
2Shmuel 20:3 "And Dawiḏ came to his house at Yerushalayim. And the sovereign took the ten women, his concubines whom he had left to look after the house, and put them in a protected house and supported them, but did not go in to them. So they were shut up to the day of their death, living in widowhood."
This was done in response to what his son, Abshalom had done to them.
2Shmuel 16:21-22 "And Aḥithophel said to Aḇshalom, “Go in to your father’s concubines, whom he has left to look after the house. And all Yisra’ĕl shall hear that you have made yourself a stench to your father. And the hands of all who are with you shall be strong.” So they pitched a tent for Aḇshalom on the top of the house, and Aḇshalom went in to his father’s concubines before the eyes of all Yisra’ĕl."
His other claim is that Shlomo HaMelech did evil by being polygamous. Let's see what the Scriptures say:
1 Melachim 11:1-11 "And Sovereign Shelomoh loved many foreign women in addition to the daughter of Pharaoh: Mo’aḇite, Ammonite, Eḏomite, Tsiḏonian, and Ḥittite women; from the nations of whom יהוה had said to the children of Yisra’ĕl, “You do not go into them, and they do not go into you, for they shall certainly turn away your hearts after their mighty ones.” Shelomoh clung to these in love. And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines. And his wives turned away his heart. And it came to be, when Shelomoh was old, that his wives turned away his heart after other mighty ones. And his heart was not perfect with יהוה his Elohim, as was the heart of his father Dawiḏ. And Shelomoh went after Ashtoreth the mighty one of the Tsiḏonians, and after Milkom the abomination of the Ammonites. Thus Shelomoh did evil in the eyes of יהוה, and did not follow יהוה completely, like his father Dawiḏ. Then Shelomoh built a high place for Kemosh the abomination of Mo’aḇ, on the hill that is east of Yerushalayim, and for Moleḵ the abomination of the children of Ammon. And so he did for all his foreign wives, who burned incense and slaughtered to their mighty ones. Therefore יהוה was enraged with Shelomoh, because his heart had turned away from יהוה Elohim of Yisra’ĕl, who had appeared to him twice, and had commanded him concerning this word, not to go after other mighty ones. But he did not guard what יהוה had commanded. And יהוה said to Shelomoh, “Because you have done this, and have not guarded My covenant and My laws, which I have commanded you, I shall certainly tear the reign away from you and give it to your servant."
Was Shlomo's sin polygamy or idolatry? Even a third grader could answer that question. His sin was marrying pagan women out of the nations from which Israel was commanded not to marry. These pagan women turned his heart away from YHWH to follow strange elohim. Had he married 700 Israelite women, would there have been a problem? NO!!! Again, the Anti-Polygamy movement uses deliberate lies to attempt to legalize their unscriptural pagan Roman custom.
7) YHWH condemned the "sin" of polygamy
Not one verse of scripture can be given in support of this statement. I challenge you to find it! See THIS article to find out the true sin of polygamy.
8) Polygamy was not the "original intent" of marriage
I have these articles posted to deal with this topic.
9) Yahushua is not a polygamist
Lastly, Armstrong contends that Yahushua is not a polygamist. His proof texts are that Yahushua is to marry the twelve tribes of Yisrael and that ministers are to be the husband of one wife. As I was already planning articles on these very topics, I will refrain from commenting on them here.
The Anti-polygamy pagans cannot prove their side from scripture. They must make up their "facts" and twist scripture around to their own destruction. Herbert Armstrong is a perfect example of these tactics. The witness of YHWH's word proves that polygamy was NEVER condemned or called sin. The only sin here is lying!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)