Posted on 01/22/2016 10:24:34 AM PST by detective
Gotta love this "it's Biblical" argument!
First of all, Solomon actually had 700 wives, not "only" 500. And 300 concubines to boot. (So now you're going to advocate concubinage, FTLB? 'Cause ain't that 'Biblical', too?)
The Bible says even more directly that God had Hosea marry Gomer, a flesh trafficker (namely her own flesh). And Gomer cont'd such a "cottage industry" postmarriage. By analogy, I suppose, Forward the Light Brigade, you would then have us believe that just because God directed Hosea to marry a prostitute...one who remained one postmarriage...that if some sect rose up directing its members to marry active (continuing) prostitutes that, "Hey since the Bible sanctions it...it's AOK?" Really?
What else, sexually speaking, is 'Biblical' (defined by what the Bible covers)
The Bible talks about...
...rape in Genesis (Tamar);
...David sleeping with Bathsheba;
...so...due to these precedents does that mean we are to "go thou & do likewise?"
Therefore, are you suggesting that God somehow sanctions prostitution within the marriage bed? I mean, exactly what is your goal in promoting polygamy as "Biblical."
Just because all kinds of sexual sin is in the Bible, doesn't make it sanctioned by God. (Has that ever dawned on you?)
First wife cheated and betrayed me and my second wife died leaving me with a three year old child. At 62 I quit. I subscribe to the axiom, Women, can't live with them, can't live with them. .
I tried dating but the women at my age that were available were terribly dishonest and money grubbers.
First of all, let's deal with the suggested premise here by way of analogy: Moses was used of God & encountered Him face-to-face. But Moses was also a manslaughterer. (You wouldn't stoop to citing Moses' relationship with God as some means to justify manslaughter, would you?)
Secondly, let's review David's woman/concubine/wife track record, shall we?
Besides infamous Bathsheba, who were the women David slept with?
(1) David's first wife was Michal, daughter of Saul. Saul took Michal, however, and gave her to another man (1 Sam. 25:44) at a point when no other women were part of David's life.
(2) Concubines who David inherited when he took over Saul's kingdom. (They came with the "palace," so to speak.) How do we know they were concubines? 2 Sam. 16:21-22 convincingly shows us that those referenced in 2 Sam. 12:8 were concubines. 2 Sam. 16:21-22 shows us they weren't sexually loyal to David (and David made no personal fuss to his son, whom these concubines slept with in broad daylight on roof for all of the community to see). Were concubines usually considered as "wives"? (No -- concubines is another word for servant girls or slaves).
So you don't think sleeping with slave girls or servant girls is transferrable to modern times, do you TaxControl?
(3) During that era --David & the next two generations -- who you slept with wasn't simply a "changing mores" issue as much as a royal alliance issue...tribal heads would give a daughter or another member of that tribe to another king or even future king as an issue of being part of a peace pact.
Is there such an example we know of with David? Yes. Absalom was his son born of Maacah, daughter of Talmai, king of Geshur.
So you don't think sleeping with daughters being traded for political peace purposes is transferrable to modern times, do you TaxControl?
(4) Bathsheba. We know that circumstance. What we don't know with Bathsheba is how many of David's previous wives were still alive when he married her. In fact, Nathan, when he confronts David about that, doesn't mention his four or five earlier wives, one of whom was given to another man by the father of that woman. Nathan only mentions concubines David inherited as part of the kingdom. Certainly, we know how he slept with her when she was another man's wife. You don't think sleeping with another woman whose the wife of another man is transferrable to what we should do in modern times, do you, TaxControl?
(5) OK, of all the women that David slept with in 2 Sam. 3 that resulted in sons, and believe me, he slept with several, who's conspicously not "identified" as his "wife?" Answer? Haggith and Abital who are listed before Eglah (Eglah is identified as his wife).
IOW, we don't know if Haggith and Abital were his wives, or concubines. (That passage in 2 Sam. 3 immediately goes on to talk about Saul's concubines)
So, not knowing these two women's status (or Maacah above) that leaves only two WIVES whom we know of for certain that were simultaneously married to David (Ahinoam and Abigail) -- 1 Sam. 25.
So, we know David had a lot of wives; and we know he had some concubines. But we don't know the timing for each of them (especially Eglah in comparison to Ahinoam and Abigail). How many of them were wives simultaneously (vs. serially). Except for Ahinoam and Abigail, we don't know.
Bottom line: So you're going to defend an entire instititution (polygamy) based upon David taking a second wife and a series of what may have been serial wives?
Mark and Matthew are NOT part of the Torah!
What do you think Jesus is citing in Matthew 19:4?
4 "Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,'..."
Do you plead open New Testament ignorance?
I don't care what he was or wasn't quoting. Jesus is not relevent to the the Mosaic law. Mark and Matthew are not part of the Torah. Neither is Kings for that matter.
The Torah is Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. That’s it. That’s all there is.
I found one that wasn't, at the same age you quit!
Perhaps you were...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAyDmJvjxbg
How could you leave out ABISHAG, the Shunammite ?
#1...I did cite Deuteronomy FIRST in post #100: Dt. 17:17.
#2...I did cite Genesis SECOND in post #100: Gen. 2:24.
Only THEN did I add: "cf. Mark 10 and Matthew 19"
In Matthew 19:4, Jesus IS citing Genesis 2:24. (Hence the "cf")
FYI: "cf" = confer, or compare. 'Twas all a "compare" reference, not an original reference for you to unnecessarily get all bent out of shape from...
Go deal with the Torah texts I gave -- Dt. 17:17 & Gen. 2:24 -- instead of getting all bent out of shape just because I also citing where Jesus quoted Gen. 2:24.
Otherwise, to be consistent, you would need to get all bent out of shape each time a person partially references the Torah...since THEY are also "not the Torah."
Well, good Q...cause the text tells us so:
4 The woman was very beautiful; she took care of the king and waited on him, but the king had NO sexual relations with her. (1 Kings 1)
That’s why I HIGHLIGHTED ‘slept’.
(well, at least I clarified it for any given 'drive-by' reader) :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.