TOPICS: FOREVER MARRIAGES CROSS CULTURALLY, FORMAL AND INFORMAL CHRISTIAN MARRIAGE, COMMON LAW MARRIAGE, CHRISTIAN DIVORCE, CHRISTIAN REMARRIAGE, CHRISTIAN CONCUBINES, CHRISTIAN POLYGYNY (POLYGAMY), RACISM, ETHNOCENTRICITY, AND THE SWEARING OF OATHS TITLE: DIVORCE, REMARRIAGE, CONCUBINES, & JESUS; Another Look for Christians. COPYRIGHT © JANUARY 14, 1995 All rights reserved. Copyright © 01/14/'95; 01/12/Õ96 (Revised) This file, in its entirety, may be posted on or copied off of computer networks like Internet or WWW by anyone so inclined. This is an ASCII text only copy of a Macintosh MicrosoftWord5 file made for non-Macintosh folks, so it is very plain and basic in its form (footnotes, indentation and page layout). The document is 6" wide and Palatino 12 plain font in the original. So when your text only version comes up with Palatino 14, just select all and change it to Palatino 12 or 10. There are no bold or underline options. The distinctions between footnotes of sources and footnotes of reference are lost. So please be patient with the footnote numbering. The footnotes are put at the end of the paragraphs instead of in the text itself, making it more readable. You may find extra >Õs and some >Õs where rÕs should be. DidnÕt get to proof that far yet. Please be patient. By L. Tyler P.O. Box 620763, SanDiego, CA 92162- 0763 polyboy@delphi.com This work is dedicated with love and honor to Carol Lynn McIntyre of Camelot (3/24/'49), Beverly Landers Tyler(4/11/'52), Keith Adams, Diane Tava Lovelady, Lua Nguyen, Marilyn Tyler (7/27/'49) and Paula Dugas. It is also dedicated to all those who have suffered through divorce and the complexities of remarriage, and to all of the following: 1. The shattered African polygynist husbands and their families who are made to feel like second class citizens in the local church because of their polygyny, made to feel less loved by Christ and made to feel less a child of God by the local "Christians". 2. The broken hearted Chinese polygynist wives and their children in their local churches who are shunned by the proper members and made to feel less welcome and spiritually inferior because of their polygynous families. 3. The devastated Burmese polygynist husbands who believe in and have received the Lord Jesus Christ, but who are rejected and shunned by the local "Christian" church/leader because they love their wives too much to divorce them. 4. The grieved, stumbled, offended and broken hearted born-again and Spirit sealed Indian wives and children of the born-again and Spirit sealed husband who loved his wives and children too much to renounce and repudiate them in order to be baptized and accepted by the local"Christian' church, and so now live in Christ, denied fellowship by their local congregation of "Christians". 5. The discouraged Mid-Eastern polygynist husbands who genuinely wanted to know Christ and the fellowship of the saints but who were embittered and kept from saving faith by the campaign of "Christian" leaders/churches against them and their polygyny. It would be no surprise if they were the most active in the community in resisting the Gospel and those who preach it. Talk about closing a door and making an enemy of the Gospel! 6. The troubled Liberian polygynist wives and children who genuinely wanted to know Christ and the fellowship of the saints but who were embittered and kept from saving faith by the campaign of "Christian" leaders/churches against them and their polygyny. It would be no surprise if they were the most active in the community in resisting the Gospel and those who preach it. Talk about closing a door and making an enemy of the Gospel! 7. The broken hearted, stumbled, offended and grieved Kenyan polygynist wives and their children whose husbands and fathers were forced to reject and renounce them in order to be baptized and join the local "Christian" church.; especially in the case where a carnal husband used the church rule as an excuse to get rid of a wife and children he didn't want. 8. The disconsolate Pakistani polygynist husbands who are stumbled, grieved, offended and broken in their faith and love for the Lord Jesus Christ because of how badly they and their loved ones have been treated by the local "Christian" leader/church. 9. The grief stricken Bengali polygynist wives and children who are stumbled, grieved, offended and broken in their faith and love for the Lord Jesus Christ because of how badly they and their loved ones have been treated by the local "Christian" leader/church. 10. The miserable Thai polygynist husbands who, with grave doubts and troubled hearts, succumbed to "Christian" pressure to renounce and reject (Malachi 2:13-17) all of their wives except one to satisfy the demands of some misguided "Christian" leader, or association of "Christians". TABLE OF CONTENTS ( Everybody's computer is potentially different, and if you Select All Font to "clean it up", reducing it to Palatino 12 or Geneva 10, you should probably use Find to find, by chapter number, any particular chapter/appendix you are interested in.) I. INTRODUCTION: PRIORITIES RECONSIDERED. P. 4 II. DIVORCE! A PLAGUE AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. P. 8 III. DIVORCE DEFINED. P. 23 IV. VARIETIES OF MARRIAGE IN THE BIBLE, OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS -- LET THE WORD SPEAK ABOUT POLYGYNY AND CONCUBINES! P. 25 V. WHAT DO CHRISTIAN LEADERS SAY ABOUT CONCUBINES & POLYGYNY? P. 50 VI. ADULTERY DEFINED: A SURPRISE! ISNÕT POLYGYNY ADULTERY? P. 66 VII. SO, WHAT ABOUT CONCUBINES & POLYGYNY TODAY IN MY COUNTRY? P. 73 VIII. ARE POLYGYNISTS AND CONCUBINES LIVING IN ERROR TODAY? P. 82 IX. MARRIAGE, CONCUBINES, CIVIL LAW, PERSONAL LIBERTY AND A LOVING CONSCIENCE! P. 87 X. DOES GOD FORGIVE BROKEN VOWS, DIVORCE AND ADULTERY? P. 91 XI. CAN YOU COME BACK TOGETHER & REMMARY AFTER ADULTEROUS REMARRIAGE? P. 99 XII. WHAT ABOUT THE HEALTH QUESTIONS INVOLVED IN SUCH REUNIONS? P. 108 XIII. CAN ADULTERY, DIVORCE, VOWS AND REPENTANCE RESULT IN POLYGYNY/CONCUBINAGE? P. 112 XIV. ADULTERY, DIVORCE, CONCUBINES, POLYGYNY AND THE UNSAVED. P. 119 XV. THE MARRIED MAN WHO WOULD ADD WIVES/CONCUBINES TO HIS "HAREM". P. 121 XVI. ARE POLYGYNY & CONCUBINES OPTIONS FOR THE ABANDONED MAN? P. 126 XVII. POLYGYNISTS, CONCUBINES AND THE LEADERS OF GOD'S PEOPLE. P. 129 XVIII. POLYGYNY & CONCUBINES AND THE WESTERN CHRISTIAN WOMAN. P. 130 XIX. WHAT'S WRONG WITH POLYANDRY? P. 134 XX. HUSBAND RULE OVER THE WIFE? IF SERVANT- TEACHERS RULE .P. 137 XXI. THREE CHEERS FOR MONOGAMY! THE BEST FOR MOST! P. 141 XXII. LISTEN TO THE WORD! P. 145 XXIII. BIBLIOGRAPHY P. 147 APPENDIX ONE -- WHAT ABOUT INTERRACIAL AND INTERETHNIC MARRIAGE? P.150 APPENDIX TWO -- WHAT DO YOU THINK? THE FEEDING OF TWO LEGGED OXEN. P.157 APPENDIX THREE -- A WEDDING COVENANT FOR NONSWEARERS - P. 159 APPENDIX FOUR -- WHAT MAKES A WEDDING/MARRIAGE? - P. 161 APPENDIX FIVE -- MARRYING THE UNSAVED AND "SAINTS" LIVING IN ERROR. - P.163 APPENDIX SIX -- WHEN DO I HAVE TO MARRY? - P. 167 APPENDIX SEVEN -- THE ERRR OF SWEARING, OF OATHS AND SWEARING OATHS. -P.182 APPENDIX EIGHT--BLACK POLYGYNY RESOURCES I. INTRODUCTION: PRIORITIES RECONSIDERED This study is the result of my own marital experience where I was divorced from my wife and both of us claimed sincerely and earnestly that we were born again believers in the Lord Jesus Christ. I was faced with the question, "What does a Christian do about his/her need to marry when in a divorced- from-one and wanting-to- marrry-another situation, and he believes that he/she and the Christian exmate are bound to each other maritally by the Lord until death parts them?" Or ---- "What does a Christian do in a divorced-from-one and remarried-to-another situation, and he/she believes that he/she and the Christian exmate are bound to each other maritally by the Lord until death parts them?" And the moral question: "Is it adultery or is it something else?" Our relationships with our mates and our children are second in importance and emotional intensity only to our relationship with Jesus. In San Diego's Union- Tribune several months ('95) ago they reported on a study of the effects of divorce that involved thousands and lasted over 20 years. The social scientists screened the participants so that they had two groups that basically differed as follows, one whose parents had divorced or separated and the other group whose parents did not divorce or separate. They found that the average life expectancy was five years longer for the group whose parents did not divorce. Divorce made a five year difference in the life expectancy of the two groups. Dr. Griffith Banning conducted a study of 800 Canadian children. It was reported that their parents' divorce, death or separation, resulting in the children's felt lack of love and affection, did greater damage to their growth and development than disease and all other factors combined.>a [>a Love, by Leo Buscaglia, Fawcett Crest, NY,1972,p.78 What we do with our marital relationships has a profound effect not only on us, but on our children, for a lifetime. We already know that a divorce, statistically, usually results in serious health problems ranging from ulcers and cardiovascular problems to hormonal and emotional problems. Divorce can devastate us and our loved ones. How can we afford to let our marriages, which Jesus intended to arenas filled with love and testimonies of His life changing all-sufficiency, become instead arenas of suffering, bitterness and hatred --- trophies for the enemy of our souls? Yet look at the relationship most of us have with our loved ones and our God. Most of us live our lives devoid of the life changing power and compassionate cherishing of our living and reigning God. Most of us are falling short of compassionately cherishing our mates and children. We wonder why we donÕt see the power of God in our lives. Yet how can Jesus bless us miraculously and and powerfully intervene in our lives when we have let ourselves become so entangled in the cares and affairs of our daily lives that the Spirit in us is chocked and rendered fruitless. It is not just a matter of seeking first the Kingdom of God and His righteousness, which most of us fall short of by letting TV or other personal pleasures rob us of the time we could spend with Jesus. It goes even beyond that. For many of us the question is , ÒWhy is our relationship with our living and powerful God so lifeless and embarrassingly weak?Ó ÒWhy is there such a great discrepancy between the the life changing power of God we believe in, and the disastisfying mediocrity and ineffectiveness of most of our lives?Ó We know that if we walk in His will and do those things that are pleasing in His sight, He hears our prayers and supernaturally intervenes in our lives (1Jn3:21-24; 5:14,15), so when we fail to walk in His will and fail to do those things that are pleasing to Him we should not be surprised at the spiritually impotent lives and testimonies we have. What a tragedy to lose the battle for the souls of our children and loved ones because we stuck with bad or foolish choices. Specifically with this study I try to discover and share what I understand to be His will for us maritally. I try to show that an adulterous marriage, an adulterous remarriage, and or an adulterous divorce can gut our walk in the power of our God, leaving us with an impotent and sterile life and testimony that is bad enough in and of itself; but when you add the chastening of our God to an impotent and sterile life, it can be enough to break your heart and spirit. But isnÕt that why He sends the chastening of weakness and sickness (1 Cor. 11) or the chastening of poverty, strife, diseases and animal attacks (Ezek 14) ---- to break our stiff necks and hard hearts so He, as the potter, can remake us in our confession and repentance? Are you experiencing this chastening? Do you think it might be due to an ungodly divorce or marriage? Do you wonder what you should do about it? Please read this study. This study is written as a wake up call to Christians who have fallen into marriages, divorces and remarriages that are contrary to the will of God and now want to know what they should do. A child of God wants to do the will of God (1Jn2:3,4,5).We know that our God has told us in 1 Pet. 3 that if we fail to live wisely with our wives, our prayers will be hindered. He has told us that in Isaiah 59:1,2 that he wont hear our prayers if we fall into disobedience and fail to be Ambassadors of His Love. This study is for the person who is not sure about the will of God facing a divorce, marriage or remarriage. This study is for the divorced, the married and the remarried who find themselves in a situation that neither affords them the peace nor the joy of the God who longs to fill their lives with both. Hopefully this study will be used of God to shed some light on those heartbreaking and unfulfilling situations. Please hear the Word in this study, and be brave in the Lord to do His will, no matter what the cost. Dear reader, I exhort you to test, try, prove, examine, scrutinize and check against the Word every idea or concept in this document that seems questionable, doubtful or radical. Stay with what you understand the Word to say. What you will read is where I have arrived in the quest for His will. It is very controversial and I believe it is controversial because I came to this quest as a scholar, an anthro- pologist and a child of God who earnestly wants to know his Father's will. So "Here I stand!" ---- until further enlightenment from the Father. This study is based on the understanding of the Word of God that a godly marriage of two godly people is for life, and that they are bound by God to each other maritally until death dissolves the marriage. It is an attempt to catch the mind of the God who hates divorce and who hates the breaking of wedding covenants. It is an attempt to understand the marital will of the God who doesnÕt want us to be foolish vow breaking fools in whom he has no pleasure. This document is written from a "Christian", fundamental, evangelical, dispensationalist, etc. point of view for those who understand that point of view. The followers, or disciples, of Jesus Christ are called "Christians", and for them loving obedience to their Lord and King is the paramount issue in all matters of human life. What does "Christian" mean? Who is the God of one who is called a "Christian"? Jesus is God revealed in the flesh-blood-bone body, God's only incarnate Son, physically begotten of the virgin Mary, God's Mediator of the New Covenant, Savior and Redeemer of all who obediently believe, King of Kings, Lord of all soon to return visibly, Creator of all things that have ever existed (including Michael, Lucifer, Satan, Gabriel), and Judge of all humans soon to return visibly in His resurrected flesh and bone body. What is a "Christian"? Without controversy the Word is clear that we are saved and born again Spiritually as a result of the following: (1) His unearned compassion He had for us even before we know Him, which compassion moved Him to give His only begotten Son to bear our sins and die in our place. (2) His enlightening us about who He is, convincing us of our sins and His righteous judgment of sin, and constraining us to accept Him while we are still spiritually dead in our sins. [John 1:9,12; 16:7-11] (3) His giving us the gift of belief/faith in God (revealed as Jesus Christ, His miraculous birth, His holy life, His undeserved and substitutionary death, and His resurrection demonstrating His victory over death and sin) in spite of our spiritual blindness and death [James 1:17] (4) Our willingness >1 to accept and use His gift of belief is met with His enabling >2 us to have and exercise genuine faith in Him as our King, God and Savior in every area of our life. [>1 2 Corinth. 8.; >2 Phil. 2:13; 4:13.] (5) Since all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags there is no work or deed that we can do to earn GodÕs salvation. Our part is to genuinely believe in, accept and submit to His gracious gift in Jesus Christ. Okay, so that is what a Christian is . WhatÕs next? I believe that it is obvious that a Christian should not lean to his own understanding>3 and should not just do that which seems right to himself>4. I believe that those who are born of God are led by the Spirit of God Spiritually>5 and by the Word>6 I believe that the believer must acknowledge Christ's Lordship in every area of his/her life for Christ to be the real and actual LORD/KING of that believer>7. I agree with the Bible that a Christian's obedience is his birthmark, the vital and critical proof of having been truly born again of God>8 . Besides all of that, Jesus said that if I loved Him, I would obey Him, showing my love by my obedience>9 so of course I want to show my love for Him and show proof of my rebirth in Him by obeying Him. [Footnotes:>3 Prov. 3:5,6; >4 Prov. 16:24; >5 Romans 8:13,14.; >6 Psalm 119:9,11,24,32,72,89, 93,101, 104,105 ,166,167; >7 Prov. 3:5,6; Romans 12:1,2; 1 Cor. 6:19, 20 etc; >8 (1John 2:3,4,5; 3:10, 24; 5:2,3; Hebrews 5:8,9); >9 (John 14:15,21).] Yes, I realize that obeying Him is not necessarily obeying Christian leaders and teachers because if they teach the traditions and commandments of men>10 instead of or along with the commandments and traditions of God, they make the Way of God null, void and ineffective. Yes, I know that God can use godly men and Christian leaders/teachers to show us His Way>11 but surely it is our responsibility to be like the Bereans>12, testing-trying-examining- scrutinizing>13 all of their teachings and leadership to see if it conforms to the Word of God, holding fast to what we find to be true/good. We need to diligently search the Word to find the will of God, especially in the matter of controversial and questionable things. [Footnotes:>10 (Matthew 15:1-9; Mark 7:1-15); >11 (Hebrews 13:7; >12 of Acts 17:11.31; >13 1 John4:1-4 and 1 Thess. 5:21.] Finally, why does God allow us to experience such heart breaking and soul-rending experiences as those that accompany divorce, separation, and adultery? Please consider the point about 1 Cor. 10:13. He doesn't allow you to be tried more than you can bear, because you are stronger, have a better understanding of spiritual warfare and a deeper faith, the trials will be greater--but never more than you can bear. Consider the trials of John the Baptist and all the apostles except John. They all died violent deaths at the hands of those who hate them, but never more than they could bear. An exercise is no exercise if it doesn't challenge you at the point where you have to strain and go aerobic, sometimes painful. The same with "spiritual" muscles, the trial has to produce stress, strain and even pain for you to become stronger, more capable, more useful and fruitful. The fruitful vine looks terrible when it is pruned, and it would feel terrible if it could feel, but because it is pruned it has the potential of being more fruitful, and I know you want more fruit of the Spirit in your life. I know that you want to compassionately cherish God and others even more than you do now, and that's how you get there. This life is boot camp and the war, which, thank God, is shortened for our sakes. Our resurrected life with Jesus Christ is worth the struggle. To rule the earth with Him enthroned in Jerusalem for a 1000 years (Rev. 20: 2-7), to walk around as His agents enabled to raise the dead, open the eyes of the blind, to bind up the broken limbs and hearts, to counsel the broken hearted with wisdom inspired of God, to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to teach in power the lost how they can be found etc etc etc etc. I can hardly wait! Please consider attending a Christian divorce/grief recovery support group. You are still deeply grieving inside over your ex and those "saints" that so deeply and carnally broke your heart. I know that I desperately needed and greatly benefited from the free one I attended at Del Cerro So. Bapt. Church. It was critical in my recovery and in my readiness to be healed and in my learning how and where I needed to grow, to forgive my ex, and to prepare my heart for my next. Most denominations have free support groups that are usually extremely helpful, it taught by qualified staff and anointed of the Lord. Please call around for times and places and pray about attending and let the Lord minister to you through the saints. But why does He allow us to suffer, to grieve so deeply and have hearts so broken than you can feel the pain throughout your chest? Here are some reasons that I have become aware of and they are all for our good. Please consider them and, in each, ask if its goal was accomplished in your life. WE HAVE SUFFERED ---- 1. So that we can know that we belong to Christ. 2 Tim 3:12; 1 Pet. 2:19,20; Mat. 13:21,22,23 2. Because we are followers of Christ. John 15:19,20 3. So that evil doers will not come to God just to escape from Hell and suffering in this life. He wants sinners to come to Him because they love Him who first loved them, not because they forgot to join the Noah's Ark Club. Noah's flood + Rev. 21:27 4. So that we wont miss (be homesick, want to look/go back like Lot's wife did) this social system when we are in Heaven or ruling with Christ. To love the world's social system is to be God's enemy. 1 John 2:15; Heb. 11:l3- 19. 5. So that we can know how and why to choose- between the good and the evil. Deut. 30:15-20 6. Because of our own sins. 1 Cor. 5 and 1 Cor. 11:30- 32; Hebrews 12. 7. To cause us to learn to be humble. 2 Cor. 12:7-10 8. To caution us against arrogant or ignorant presumption in our prayers and to exhibit to us His all-sufficiency in the affairs of our personal lives. 2 Cor.12: 7-10; Rom5:3,4 9. To learn and acquire patience, experience and hope in the compassionate cherishing of God. Rom. 5:3,4 10. Because of His Name- Because of His Truth - Because of His Life - Because of the shining Light of His Truth, an honor to be counted worthy of suffering with and for Him if God permits. Acts 5:41; Rom 8:17 11. So that we may have the honor of being glorified together with Him. Rom. 8:17 12. So that we may be perfected, completed, and matured. Heb. 2:10; 1 Pet. 5:10 13. So that we may learn to Love Jesus and His Way enough to obey Him even when it hurts. Heb. 5:8,9; Psalm 15:4 14. So that we may be established, strengthened and settled in Christ. 1 Peter 5:10 15. Because they hated and killed Jesus they will hate and try to kill the Jesus in us. Lk. 6:22; John 15:18,19 16. To end the cycle of hate and violence in our lives at us, we being shock absorbers for the evil around us, so that it will stop at us and we will learn not to pass it on. He has called us to turn the cheek, go the second mile and bless and pray for those who curse and abuse us. Matt. 5; Luke 6; Romans 12; 1 Cor. 6 17. So that our enduring and genuine faith may bring praise, honor and glory at His appearing in the presence of all the angels, demons, cherubim, seraphim and those with Christ. 1 Pet. 1:7 18. So that we could experience God's solutions and faithfulness and comfort for our griefs and trials so we will have learned how to share His comforting solutions with the others He leads us to who are experiencing similar grievous trials. It is preparation for ministry now and in the 1000 year reign of Christ on earth. 2 Cor. 1:3-5 ; Revelation20:1-6 II. DIVORCE! A PLAGUE AND ITS CONSEQUENCES . St. Augustine (4th Cent AD) had a powerful way of stating the permanent nature of the marriage of two who married after being born again, lovingly obedient to Jesus and fruitful in the Spirit--- ÒTo such a degree is that marriage compact entered upon a matter of a certain sacrament, that it is not made void even by separation itself, since, so long as her husband lives, even by whom she hath been left, she commits adultery, in case she be married to another: and he who hath left her, is the cause of this evil. . . Seeing that the compact of marriage is not done away by divorce intervening; so that they continue wedded persons one to another, even after separation; and commit adultery with those, with whom they shall be joined, even after their own divorce, either the woman with a man, or the man with a woman. . . But a marriage once for all entered upon in the City of our god>14, where, even from the first union of the two, the man and the woman, marriage bears a certain sacramental character, can no way be dissolved but by the death of one of them. . . Therefore the good of marriage throughout all nations and all men stands in the occasion of begetting, and faith of chastity: but, so far as pertains unto the People of God, also in the sanctity of the sacrament, by reason of which it is unlawful for one who leaves her husband, even when she has been put away, to be married to another, so long as her husband lives, no not even for the sake of bearing children: . . . not even where that very thing, wherefore it takes place, follows not, is the marriage bond loosed, save by the death of the husband or wife.Ó>15 [Footnotes:>14 This footnote mark etc. is not St. Augustine's or Arthur Haddan's. I insert it just in case the reader is not aware of the fact that all marriages between real saints take place "in the City of our god" not according to St. Augustine, but according the the Holy Spirit in Hebrews 11:10,13-19, where they are already seated with Christ in the Heavenlies according to Eph. 1 & 2. >15 St. Augustin: On The Trinity; pp. 402, 406, 412.] In Matt. 5 Jesus made it plain divorce was permitted for the hardness of human hearts and Malachi 2 makes it plain that God hates the treacherous breaking of marital covenants that results in divorce. In Matt. 5 Jesus permits the husband to divorce his wife is she is guilty of fornication, but does not command it. There is no command to divorce one's mate for fornication, but after Acts 1 there is the command to separate (not divorce) yourself from a saved mate who is snared in sexual sin>16. Before Acts 1 Jesus allowed divorce for the hardness of hearts >17. The compassionate heart of the Spirit filled Christian would respond to a mate's fornication according to the Word>18. . The goal of such compassion for one's mate snared in sexual sin would be the goal of godly sorrow described in the following:2 Cor. 7 and 1 Corinthians 5:5 . . . deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction [ruin , damage] of the flesh, so that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. [Footnotes:>16. 1 Cor. 5:9-11; 2 Thes. 3:6-14; 1 Tim. 6:1-5; 2 Tim. 3:1-5; >17. Mat. 19:6-9; >18. 1 Corinth. 5:5-11; Matthew 18:15-18; Gal. 6:1; John 8: 1- 10; 1 Tim. 5:20,21; 2 Th. 3:6-14] MKJV 2 CORINTHIANS 2: 5 ¦ 6 This punishment by the majority [is] enough for such a one; 7 so that, on the contrary, you should rather forgive and comfort [him], lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overwhelming sorrow. 8 So I beseech you to confirm [your] love toward him. 9 For to this end I also wrote, that I might know the proof of you, whether you are obedient in all things. 10 But to whom you forgive anything, I also [forgive]. For if I forgave anything, for your sakes I forgave [it] to him in the person of Christ; 11 so that we should not be overreached by Satan, for we are not ignorant of his devices. MKJV 2 CORINTHIANS 7: 8 For even if I grieved you in the letter, I do not regret; if indeed I did regret; for I see that that letter grieved you for an hour. 9 Now I rejoice, not that you were grieved, but that you grieved to repentance. For you were grieved according to God, so that you might suffer loss by nothing in us. 10 For the grief according to God works repentance to salvation, not to be regretted, but the grief of the world works out death. 11 For behold this same thing (you being grieved according to God); how much it worked out earnestness in you; but [also] defense; but [also] indignation; but [also] fear; but [also] desire; but [also] zeal; but [also] vengeance! In everything you approved yourselves to be clear in the matter. 12 ¦ Then, though I wrote to you, [it was] not on account of the one who did wrong, nor on account of the one who suffered wrong, but for the sake of revealing our earnestness on your behalf, for you before God. Even though Jesus apparently allows a genuinely believing husband to divorce his wife snared in adultery and then go ahead and remarry, I wouldn't want to stand before the judgment seat of Christ and tell the God of Love I divorced my wife for fornication because of the hardness of my heart. The motivation of a hardened heart doesn't square with Eph. 4 or I Cor. 13 or Romans 15. MKJV EPHES. 4: 15 But that you, speaking the truth in love, may in all things grow up to Him who is the Head, [even] Christ; . . 25 Therefore putting away lying, let each man speak truth with his neighbor, for we are members of one another. 26 Be angry, and do not sin. Do not let the sun go down upon your wrath, 27 neither give place to the Devil. . . . 30 And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you are sealed until [the] day of redemption. 31 Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and tumult and evil speaking be put away from you, with all malice. 32 And be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake has forgiven you. 1 CORINTH. 13: 4 ¦ Compassionate cherishing has patience, is kind; compassionate cherishing is not envious, is not vain, is not puffed up; 5 does not behave indecently, does not seek its own, is not easily provoked, thinks no evil. 6 Charity does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices in the truth, 7 quietly covers all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. 8 ¦ Compassionate cherishing never fails. MKJV ROMANS 15: 1 ¦ Then we who are strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak, and not to please ourselves. 2 Let every one of us please [his] neighbor for [his] good, to building up. 3 For even Christ did not please Himself; but as it is written, "The reproaches of those who reproached You fell on Me." 4 For whatever things were written before were written for our learning, so that we through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope. 5 ¦ And may the God of patience and consolation grant you to be like minded toward one another according to Christ Jesus, 6 so that with one mind [and] one mouth you may glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. 7 ¦ Therefore receive one another as Christ also received us, to [the] glory of God. Being forgiven by God for sins worthy of death (Rom. 1) how can we not forgive our mate if he/she falls in adultery and then repents? How can we say anything besides "Go on with your life and sin no more!">19 if the Godly repentance described in the following is evident? That's the example He left for us (1Pet.2:20,21). There is no greater Love than to lay down and deny your life/will for another's good. [>19. John 8:1-10.] MKJV 2 CORINTHIANS 7: 8 For even if I grieved you in the letter, I do not regret; if indeed I did regret; for I see that that letter grieved you for an hour. 9 Now I rejoice, not that you were grieved, but that you grieved to repentance. For you were grieved according to God, so that you might suffer loss by nothing in us.10 For the grief according to God works repentance to salvation, not to be regretted, but the grief of the world works out death. 11 For behold this same thing (you being grieved according to God); how much it worked out earnestness in you; but [also] defense; but [also] indignation; but [also] fear; but [also] desire; but [also] zeal; but [also] vengeance! In everything you approved yourselves to be clear in the matter. MKJV 2 CORINTHIANS 2: 6 This punishment by the majority [is] enough for such a one; 7 so that, on the contrary, you should rather forgive and comfort [him], lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overwhelming sorrow. 8 So I beseech you to confirm [your] love toward him. 9 For to this end I also wrote, that I might know the proof of you, whether you are obedient in all things. 10 But to whom you forgive anything, I also [forgive]. For if I forgave anything, for your sakes I forgave [it] to him in the person of Christ; 11 so that we should not be overreached by Satan, for we are not ignorant of his devices. When I have approached Christian leaders here in my area, most of them fall back on a rationalization of scripture to defend or at least conform to the worldly norms of separation/divorce/ remarriage in contemporary society. So they accept divorces, where those put together by God are put apart by man, and remarry "believers" who have been divorced or separated from "believers". They are sincerely and earnestly concerned about stumbling the weak and are reluctant to ask of the saints what seems to the world's eyes to be impossible for many saints, to accept the Word that genuine believers are bound maritally as long as both live. The particular case in point is the situation caused by the plague of divorce among Christians. I understand the following scriptures to indicate that genuine believers in the Lord Jesus Christ who were free to marry each other in the Lord and did marry each other are bound maritally to each other as long as both live ------- 1 CORINTH. 7:10* ¦ And to the married I command (not I, but the Lord), a woman not to be separated from [her] husband. 11* But if she is indeed separated, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to [her] husband. And a husband is not to leave [his] wife. 12 But to the rest I speak, not the Lord, If any brother has a wife who does not believe, and she is pleased to dwell with him, do not let him put her away. 13 And the woman who has a husband who does not believe, if he is pleased to dwell with her, do not let her leave him. . . .15 But if the unbelieving one separates, let [them] be separated. A brother or a sister is not in bondage in such [cases], but God has called us in peace. 39* ¦ The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband lives, but if her husband is dead, she is at liberty to be remarried to whom she will, only in the Lord. MKJV ROMANS 7: 2* For the married woman was bound by law to the living husband. But if the husband is dead, she is set free from the law of [her] husband. 3* So then [if], while [her] husband lives, she is married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress. But if the husband dies, she is free from the law, [so that] she is no adulteress by becoming another man's wife. MKJV MARK 10: 6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. 7 For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother and shall cleave to his wife. 8 And the two of them shall be one flesh. So then they are no longer two, but one flesh. 9 Therefore what God has joined together, let not man put apart. . . . 11 And He said to them, Whoever shall put away his wife and marries another commits adultery against her. 12 And if a woman shall put away her husband and marries to another, she commits adultery. I believe they state that a Spiritually reborn man and a Spiritually reborn woman who are free to marry each other in the Lord and do marry each other are bound to each other by the Word of the Lord as long as both their bodies are alive. What is the case in the Bible? Gen. 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall be one flesh.>20. There are three acts described here: [Footnote>.(20. The Holy Scriptures According to the Masoretic Text] (1) From the following it is clear that it means leaving the parents' presence, authority and control; MKJV PSALM 45:10 ¦ Listen, O daughter, and look; and bow down your ear; and forget your own people and your father's house. 11 And cause the King greatly to desire your beauty, for He [is] your Lord, and you shall worship Him. . . . 13 The king's daughter [is] all glorious within; her clothing [is] trimmed with gold. . . . 16 Your sons shall be in the place of your fathers; you will make them princes in all the land. 17 I will make Your name to be remembered in all generations; therefore the people shall praise You forever and ever. (2) Cleaving is the act of the will making marital covenants and vows that bind them maritally before God>21; [Footnote:>21 Ezekisl 16:7,8; Malachi 2; Matt. 1:18-25 where Mary and Joseph are declared to be husband and wife even before the actual wedding and cohabitation. "Cleave" in the Hebrew means "cling or adhere; . . . abide fast, cleave (fast together), follow close (hard after), be joined (together), keep (fast), overtake, pursue hard, stick, take." (Strong''s Exhaustive Concordance.) J. Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon says it means "to glue upon, glue to" ] (3) Becoming one flesh is the sexual act of coitis or sexual penetratio and one can become one flesh with one's wife or with an adulteress or with a harlot>22. Becoming one flesh is not what makes a relationship a marriage. For the permanence of the relationship of marriage the focus is on the word "cleave" which in the Hebrew means "cling or adhere; . . . abide fast, cleave (fast together), follow close (hard after), be joined (together), keep (fast), overtake, pursue hard, stick, take.">23. Thayer says it means "to glue upon, glue to">24. If God commands the husband to conduct himself as if he were being joined together with her, clinging, adhering, cleaving and glued to her in this manner towards his wife, then he had better do it if he wants a good future with God, because to disobey would be death>25 . Being under this command would certainly bind a man to his wife as long as both lived. [Footnotes:>22 1 Cor. 6:13-20; >23. Strong''s Exhaustive Concordance; >24. Greek English Lexicon of the New Testament; Joseph Henry Thayer, D.D.; American Book Co., New York, 1889; >25 Rom. 6:23; 1:31,32; Malachi 2:14-17.] The Jewish Septuagint (third century B.C.) for Gen. 2:24 uses the same word for "cleave" that Jesus uses in Matt. 19:5. The word used for cleave in the LXX's Gen. 2:24 and Jesus' Matt. 19:5 means the following: 1. According to Thayer --- "to join one's self to closely, cleave to, stick to"; and 2. According to Arndt & Gingrich ---"adhere closely to, be faithfully devoted to, join tini someone". The Greek tense in both is future indicative passive which means that this is what they shall have themselves doing in the future on a regular basis. Some say that it is not a command. Jesus seems to differ with them both in Malachi 2, where He says the husband who breaks his marital agreement with his wife is under His wrath, and in Matt 19:6 where Jesus says "So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, man must not separate." It is the marital commitments and covenants between the husband and wife that is the glue that binds them, and it is the solemn and disciplined honoring of those commitments that reinforces and maintins that glued bond that binds them. Every legal>26 and moral>27 marriage of two who are morally free in Christ to marry is ordained or allowed by God and takes place under His control>b, so indeed God has joined them, based on the truth of the following: [Footnote: >26 Legal= recognized and accepted as legal by one's culture and law enforcers Rom. 13; 1 Pet. 2:13-17; >27 moral= free from all others maritally and free in the Lord's kingdom to marry according to His Word. >b Eph. 1:11; Rom. 8:28] MKJV Romans 8: 27 And He searching the hearts knows what [is] the mind of the Spirit, because He makes intercession for the saints according to [the will of] God. 28 And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to [His] purpose. MKJV ROMANS 13: 1 ¦ Let every soul be subject to the higher authorities. For there is no authority but of God; the authorities that exist are ordained by God. 2 So that the one resisting the authority resists the ordinance of God . . . MKJV Ephes. 1:10. . . to head up all things in Christ, both the things in Heaven, and the things on earth, [even] in Him, 11 in whom also we have been chosen to an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His own will, . . . That's why we can trust God that we are to remain married to the person we are married to when we are saved. He gave Adam his Eve, and if you are His child, He worked in you to want to marry your mate>c, He lead you to marry your mate>d, and He worked all things so that you did marry you mate>e. So you can understand why 1 Cor. 7 speaks of the binding nature of marriage. [>c Phil. 2:12,13; Heb.13:20,21. >d Romans 8:9,14; Acts 16:6,7; Isa. 30:21. >e Eph. 1:11; Rom. 8:28; Mt. 10:29; Prov. 16:1,9; Isa. 46:9-13; Neh. 9:6] MKJV 1 CORINTHIANS 7:17 ¦ But as God has distributed to each one, as the Lord has called each one, so let him walk. And so I ordain in all churches. 18 [Was] any called having been circumcised? Do not be uncircumcised. Was anyone called in uncircumcision? Do not be circumcised. . . . 20 Let each one remain in the calling in which he was called. 21 Were you called as a slave? It does not matter to you, but if you are able to become free, use [it] rather. . . . 24 Each in whatever way he was called, brothers, in this remain with God. So Jesus makes binding>28 the cleaving >29 and the one flesh experience that we know as marriage. Since the only terms of divorce are given in Deut 24:1-4 (which were superseded by Matt. 19:1-15 and 1 Cor. 7:10-15,39), it is clear that marriage is a life long relationship based on the covenants of the couple and on God's command not to be put asunder or put asunder the relationship. Rather than abide by this believers-married-for-life principle, most Christian churches/ pastors today are telling their divorced and divorcing communicants that they should forget the things that have happened in the past trusting God's forgiveness to cover it all and press on into the future with their new mates and lives. [Footnotes:>28 (Mt. 19:6); >29 (Mt. 19:5) ] They say it would do more harm than good to tell Christian mates that they need to leave their new mates, married in adultery, and new kids and go back to the Christian mates they divorced contrary to the Word>f. I believe that we are to live by every Word of God, and not by unscriptural traditions of men that put asunder what God said must not be put asunder, that tell couples they are loosed from each other when God says they are bound for life>30 . How dare we say "You are loosed" when God Himself says she is "bound as long as her husband lives"? [Footnotes:>f in 1 Corinth. 7; Romans 7 and Mark 10 >30 (Matt. 19:5; Rom. 7:1-5; 1 Cor. 7:10,11,39)] What are the responsibilities of still being bound to someone when you have loosed yourself according to human law but remain bound according to the Law of Christ? Wouldn't they be responsible for parenting both their children by the mates to whom they are bound by the Lord, as well as their children by their adulterous>31 new marriage. Wouldn't they be responsible for keeping whatever promises they made and can keep in the Lord--that they made to their mates in the Lord and to their mates in adultery>32 ? They can't keep their adulterous promises of marital intimacy with their adulterous mates, but they can keep the promise to AgapŽ Love them, cherish them, honor and respect them, pray and fast earnestly and fervently for them, and clothe and feed them if they are destitute and in need. Jesus instructs us to do these things even to our enemies>g. There is no question that they are responsible for the parenting, provision and care of any children by their adultery, as God and man's law allow(Eph. 6; 1 Tim. 5:8; Heb. 12; 1Jn.3:16,17). [Footnotes:>31. Mark 10:11,12; >32 (Psalm 15:4; Ezek. 17:15;Eccles.5:1-7) >g Luke 6; Mt 5; Isa. 59; 1 tim. 2; James 2; 1 Peter 2,3,4] I submit that the commandment of God in Romans 7:1-3 and the following passage below (binding the saved husband to his saved wife until death separates them) is laid aside to hold manÕs tradition, making of no effect the Word of God.: MKJV MARK 10:6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. 7 For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother and shall cleave to his wife. 8 And the two of them shall be one flesh. So then they are no longer two, but one flesh. 9 Therefore what God has joined together, let not man put apart. . . . 11 And He said to them, Whoever shall put away his wife and marries another commits adultery against her. 12 And if a woman shall put away her husband and marries to another, she commits adultery. MKJV 1 CORINTH. 7: 4 The wife does not have authority over [her] own body, but the husband. And likewise also the husband does not have power [over his] own body, but the wife. 5 Do not deprive one another, unless [it is] with consent for a time, so that you may [give yourselves to] fasting and prayer. And come together again so that Satan does not tempt you for your incontinence. . . . 7 For I would that all men were even as I myself am. But each has his proper gift from God, one according to this manner and another according to that. 8 I say therefore to the unmarried and the widows, It is good for them if they remain even as I. 9 But if they do not have self- control, let them marry; for it is better to marry than to burn. 10* ¦ And to the married I command (not I, but the Lord), a woman not to be separated from [her] husband. 11* But if she is indeed separated, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to [her] husband. And a husband is not to leave [his] wife. . . . 39* ¦ The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband lives, but if her husband is dead, she is at liberty to be remarried to whom she will, only in the Lord. I submit that those passages mean exactly what they say, that the obediently believing wife is bound by law as long as her obediently believing husband lives. No qualifiers! No exemptions! Instead many Christian leaders tell the saved divorced that if they just confess the sin of the divorce to God, God will forgive them and they are no longer bound to their departed saved mate so they can go on and remarry someone new. So they set aside GodÕs command to keep their own tradition. Can God bless and anoint with His miraculous power a person, a couple or a church sets aside His will and Word so they can keep their own tradition? Not the Jesus I know. Yes Jesus allowed the Jews under Moses to divorce their mates (Mt. 5) but it was for the hardness of their hearts and you can be sure that a just and holy God chastened the hard of heart. If I were an insurer, I sure wouldn't want to sell them any life insurance (1Cor.10). He never commanded a genuine believer to divorce a genuine believer. It just is not in the Word. He never commands His child to divorce His other child after He has put them together. But there is a commanded separation or standing back or break in fellowship that is required by Jesus when one's mate is snared in the sins described below ----- not a divorce, but some form of separation. Consider the following about sinners (for those married to the unsaved) and about "saints" snared in sin: MATTHEW 5: 32* But I say to you that whoever shall put away his wife, except for the cause of fornication, causes her to commit adultery. And whoever shall marry her who is put away commits adultery. Romans 16: 17. . . mark them who cause divisions and causes of offense contrary to the doctrine which you have learned, and avoid them. 1 Timothy 6:1-5 If any man. . . . consent not to . . . . the Words of our Lord Jesus . . . withdraw yourself from such. 2 Timothy 3:1-5: For men shall be lovers of their own selves.........avoid such. 1 CORINTH. 5: 9 ¦ I wrote to you in the letter not to associate intimately with fornicators; 10 yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then you must go out of the world. 11 But now I have written to you not to associate intimately, if any man called a brother [and is] either a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such a one not to eat. 2 THESSALONIANS 3:6 ¦ Now we command you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw yourselves from every brother who walks disorderly, and not after the teaching which he received from us. . . . 14 And if anyone does not obey our word by this letter, mark that one and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed. 15 Yet do not count [him] as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother. Yes there is an avoiding or withdrawing from such spouses but we will see below how 1 Cor. 7:10-15 and Mark 10 etc. exclude the option of marital separation or divorce except under very specific conditions. He never said that they were no longer bound to each other as Christian husband and Christian wife according to the scriptures>33 . You and I know that a married couple can avoid or withdraw from each other in many ways without getting a divorce. They withdraw emotionally or socially. A saint can't join the sinning spouse in the sin, so right there is a withdrawal or avoidance. [Footnote: >33 (Matt. 19:5; Rom. 7:1-5; 1 Cor. 7:10,11,15,39)] According to 1 Cor. 5 it is a whole different ball game if the spouse is often doing, practicing, regularly or habitually doing any of the following: adultery, fornication, sexual perversion (sodomy, homosexuality, bestiality, incest), greediness or covetousness, the worship of false gods, reviling (verbal abuse), drunkeness or intoxication, robbing, swindling, and/or extorting. The saved spouse is under command NOT to associate, keep company or be intimate with a spouse who does the above and is claiming to be genuinely saved, a genuine believer in the Lord Jesus Christ, a born again child of God. This may take the form of the husband divorcing such a "believing" wife and remarrying (Matt: 19:9) or it may take the form of the wife chastely and maritally separating herself from such a "believing" spouse (1 Cor. 7:10,11). The reason for this difference in options will be discussed in the chapter dealing with adultery and its definition. I believe the saved wife of an unsaved husband, who is involved in the sins listed above in this section, has the same chaste separation option, from the context of 1 Cor. 7:10-15. I understand this kind of separation from such sinning mates involves the cessation of sexual intimacy, until either the sinning spouse repents as in 2 Cor 2 & 7 or the Lord takes the life of the sinning spouse so as to save his spirit. Let's take another look at this. What do you do about your spouse who is snared in adultery, fornication, lesbianism, sodomy, bestiality, incest or etc.? Consider the following: MKJV JOHN 8: 4 they said to Him, Teacher, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. 5 Now Moses in the law commanded us that such should be stoned. You, then, what do you say? . . . 7 But as they continued to ask Him, He lifted Himself up and said to them, He who is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone at her. . . . MATT.5:32* But I say to you that whoever shall put away his wife, except for the cause of fornication, causes her to commit adultery. And whoever shall marry her who is put away commits adultery. 9 And hearing, and being convicted by conscience, they went out one by one, beginning at the oldest, until the last. And Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. 10. . . Did not one give judgment against you? 11 And she said, No one, Lord. And Jesus said to her, Neither do I give judgment. Go, and sin no more. MKJV 1 CORINTH. 5: 1 ¦ Everywhere [it is] reported [that there is] fornication among you, and such fornication as is not named among the nations, so as one to have [his] father's wife. . . . 3 For as being absent in body but present in spirit, I indeed have judged already [as though I were] present [concerning] him who worked out this thing; 4 in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered together, with my spirit; also, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ; 5 to deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. . . . MATT. 5:32* But I say to you that whoever shall put away his wife, except for the cause of fornication, causes her to commit adultery. And whoever shall marry her who is put away commits adultery. 7 ¦ Therefore purge out the old leaven so that you may be a new lump, as you are unleavened. . . . 11 But now I have written to you not to associate intimately, if any man called a brother [and is] either a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such a one not to eat. 12 . . . Do you not judge those who are inside? 13 . . . Therefore put out from you the evil one. These show that such a separation can be an exercise in Church discipline, delivering the Christian offender's body for the destruction of the flesh (chastening) to the end that the erring saint should be effectively chastened and stop sinning and in godly sorrow repent of the fornication. The sinning saint is chastened>34 into weakness, sickness or sleep (death) by the Lord. If weakness or sickness results in godly sorrow and repentance, then the repentant one is restored as in the following: [Footnote: >34 (1 Cor. 5 &/or 11; Heb.12) MKJV 2 CORINTHIANS 7: 8 For even if I grieved you in the letter, I do not regret; if indeed I did regret; for I see that that letter grieved you for an hour. 9 Now I rejoice, not that you were grieved, but that you grieved to repentance. For you were grieved according to God, so that you might suffer loss by nothing in us. MKJV 2 CORINTHIANS 2: 6 This punishment by the majority [is] enough for such a one; 7 so that, on the contrary, you should rather forgive and comfort [him], lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overwhelming sorrow. 8 So I beseech you to confirm [your] love toward him. . . 10 But to whom you forgive anything, I also [forgive]. For if I forgave anything, for your sakes I forgave [it] to him in the person of Christ; 11 so that we should not be overreached by Satan, for we are not ignorant of his devices. They would both still be saved and both still be bound to each other maritaly no matter who else they married or how many kids they might have had in the meantime. There is nothing in scripture that would indicate the the marital bond between two genuine Christians is broken by sexual immorality. If adultery required a marital-bond breaking divorce/separation, then Matt 5:32 would read as follows: But I say to you that whoever divorces his wife for any reason except sexual immorality causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a woman who is divorced for any other reason than sexual immorality commits adultery. This would imply that it would NOT be adultery to marry a woman divorced/separated for sexual immorality. But what did Jesus say to genuine believers? He said "... whoever marries a woman who is divorced commits adultery.">h He gives no qualifier or exception except for 1 Cor. 7:12-15 in the case of the believer divorced/ desserted by the unsaved mate. No matter what the reason for the divorce except 1 Cor. 7:15, including sexual immorality, "whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery." "And if a woman divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery." (Mk.10:12). It is adultery to marry a woman divorced from her legitimate husband except in the case of 1 Cor. 7:15, in which case God has loosed her from her husband. It is adultery to marry a genuinely believing woman divorced from her genuinely believing man if they were free to marry in the Lord when they married, because when they married they became maritally bound to each other until death parts them (1Cor. 7:39) Later in this study we will deal with the issue of why the Word does not say ".....whoever divorces her husband, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.......". In the other cases presented in this chapter that require a separation because of the misconduct of one's mate, I believe the believing mate has to avoid/withdraw from the erring spouse in such activities and usually can do so without leaving their house. We'll see below that the avoidance/ withdrawal does not include marital intimacy and affection (1 Cor. 7:1-15). Dealing with the adulterous mate is discussed below, so please be patient and read on. What should be the spouse's attitude be when married to one to whom she/he is commanded to be manifesting some form of avoidance or withdrawal? The key is in 2 Thess 3:15 above where we enjoined to "not count [him] as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother." or in 1 Pet. 3:1 where the wives are instructed to "be submissive to your own husbands so that, if any obey not the Word, they also may without a word be won by the behavior of the wives . . . . ". Consider the following: Luke 17:3 Take heed to yourselves. If your brother wrongs you, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him. Galatians 6:1 Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, you who are spiritual restore such a one in the Spirit of meekness . . . John 13:10-15 . . . . you also ought to wash each other's feet, for I have given you an example, that you should do as I have done to you. Ephes. 4:15 . . . speaking the Truth in Love . . . . Ephes 5:6-11 . . . because of these things comes the wrath of God upon the sons of disobedience. Therefore don't be partakers with them. . . .And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness but, rather, reprove [them]. 1 Tim. 5:20,21 Them that sin rebuke before all, that others may fear. . 2 Tim. 2:24 And the servant of the Lord must not strive, but be gentle unto all, able to teach, patient, in meekness instructing those that oppose them . . . . . 1 Pet. 3:1 . . . be submissive to your own husbands so that, if any obey not the Word, they also may without a word be won by the behavior of the wives . . . . The command is "Man must not put apart what God has put together". Even if they are divorced/separated, people "must not put apart what God has put together." The genuine Christian wife is maritally bound to her genuine Christian husband as long as they both live>i . [>h Mat.5:32; 19:9. >i (1Cor.7:39;Mark 10).] There is a parallel in the relationship of the Body of Christ to Christ. When a brother becomes part of the Bride of Christ Jesus is bound by His own Word in the relationship, not to put apart what God has put together (John 17:2, 6, 9, 10, 20, 21).So when a brother stumbles into fornication>35, instead of cutting off the relationship and disowning him, Jesus Loves him and has promised to chasten him in that Love>36. There is a break in fellowship, a separation, in that Jesus doesn't respond to his usual prayers>37 and releases his body to Satan for the destruction of his body>38 in order to save his spirit>39. He still belongs to Jesus because he shows that his spirit will be saved even if the chastening doesn't result in repentance>40. No one, neither himself nor Jesus, can take him out of Jesus hand>41. So the brother is chastened>42 and genuinely repents>43, resulting in his restoration to good standing and fellowship in the Bride of Christ and with Jesus. [Footnote: >35. 1 Cor. 5; 2 Tim. 2:24,26. >36. 1 Cor.5; Hebrews 12. >37. Isaiah; Mat. 6:16; 1 Pet. 3:7; 1 Jn. 3:22,23. >38. 1 Cor. 5:5; 11:27-32; Heb. 12. >39. 1 Cor. 5:6; 11:27-32 >40. 1 Cor. 5:5; 11:27-32. >41. John 10:28,29. >42. 1 Cor. 5 & 2 Cor. 2. >43. 2 Cor. 2 and 7]. Another parallel is Jesus and the nation Israel. Israel became the bride of Jehovah/Jesus>44. When Israel misused their bodies/temple, Jehovah/Jesus allowed their bodies to suffer>45. He didn't end His relationship/promises with the nation Israel, even though He allowed many of them to suffer/die and allowed the temple to be destroyed. When Israel repented genuinely, He restored His fellowship and blessings to the genuinely repentant, even allowing them to rebuild the temple for full fellowship>46. Jehovah/Jesus' bond with the nation Israel was not annulled and broken by their sin nor the chastening He allowed>47. [Footnote: >44. (Ex. 20; Ezek. 16:7; 23:1-6). >45. 1Cor. 10:9,10 >46. Ezra, Nehemiah. >47. Ezekiel 16 and 23; Hosea] In American reality, because of the wretchedly poor Bible teaching today Christians, divorce and remarry almost as much as J.Q Public. The Christian wife divorces her Christian husbandand remarries in adultery reaping the chastening of the Lord until she dies>48 or repents in reconciliation or celibacy if she is genuinely born again. The Christian man divorces his Christian wife and remarries. If he really repudiates his Christian wife for another and marries another he commits adultery>49 and reaps the Lord's chastening. At this point we need to define our terms. [Footnotes:>48. (1 Cor 5 and 11:29-32); >49 (Mark 10, Luke 16, Matt 5, 1 Cor 7)] III. DIVORCE DEFINED. Let me try to clarify the word "divorce" at this point since it has so many definitions in our current culture. The Greek word apoluo >1 used by Jesus in Mark 10:11 & 12 means TO SEND OR PUT AWAY, DISMISS (FROM ONE'S PRESENCE), RELEASE AND REPUDIATE. It could be done informally or formally and legally as divorce. [Footnote: .>III.1 See also Matt. 1:19; 5:31; 19:3,7-9.] The Greek word choridzo >2 , used in Mark 10:9 of the saved couple and in 1 Cor. 7:10 &11 of the saved wife , and in v. 15 of the unsaved mate, means TO SEPARATE ONESELF FROM ANOTHER, BE SEPARATED; LEAVE, PART OR DEPART FROM, PUT ASUNDER AND DIVIDE. It could be done informally or formally as a divorce. God allows the Christian wife to choridzo her husband as second best but still affirms that she is bound maritally to her husband as in v. 39. [III. footnotes: >III.2. See also active: Matt. 19:6; Mark 10:9; Rom. 8;35,39;---passive: 1 Cor. 7:10,11,15;Acts 1:4; 18:2] The Greek word afeeaymee >141, used of the man in l Cor. 7:11 and 12 and of the woman in v. 13, means TO SEND AWAY, ASK TO GO AWAY OR LEAVE, TO RELEASE, AND TO LEAVE. This can be done informally or as a formal divorce. So the word divorce can mean many different things depending on one's culture, society, motivation, intent and purposes. But the bottom line is that the husband is commanded not to send his wife away, nor to ask his wife to leave, nor release her nor leave her. Even if she asks or commands him to leave, He is under the Lord's command not to leave. Even if she gets a court order, he is under God's order not to leave her voluntarily. If the marshals/officials remove him and his belongings, then he didn't leave voluntarily. He was removed, but he did not relase or leave her. Separate rooms, sleeping separately or etc. is not leaving or releasing her as long as he is obeying 1 Cor. 7:1-5 with her.l [Footnote: .^141 See also Mat. 13:36;; Mark 4:36.] In summary we see the following: (1) the Christian husband must not divorce/send away/release [See apoluo or afeeaymee above] his Christian wife to whom he is bound as long as they both live. 1 Cor. 5:10,11 and 2 Thess. 3:6 & 14 may require a separation that doesn't involve sending her away, asking her to go away or leave, releasing her from their marriage bond, or leaving her ---- but they are still bound for life. I experienced such a separation without leaving with the mother of my children. The last two years we were together we slept inthe same king size bed but she never let me touch her, kiss her, hold her or make love with her. Now that is separation without leaving. But for the male under 1 Cor. 5:ll and 2 Thess. 3:6,14 commands to "stand apart" from his sining wife would still be bound by the commands in 1 Cor. 7:2,3,4,5 which could require him to be maritally intimate with her, so the "separation" would have to be in other areas ---- always in the Spirit of 2 Tim. 2:24-26; Galat. 6:1,2,3; and Luke 6 ---- like not eating together, not hanging out together, not dating, not socializing together , not spending your leisure time together or etc. (2) the saved husband must not divorce/send away/ask to leave/leave [See afeeaymee above] his unsaved wife as long as she agrees or consents or is willing to dwell/live /house with him. (3) the Christian wife must not divorce/send away/dismiss/repudiate[See apoluo above] and should not (but may) divorce/separate from/leave/put apart [See choridzo above] her Christian husband. The saved wife must not divorce/send away/ask to leave/leave [See afeeaymee above] her unsaved husband as long as he agrees or consents or is willing to dwell/live/house with her. Because of the definition and 1 Cor. 7:11 some believe that the saved wife also can divorce/separate from/leave/put apart [choridzo] her unsaved husband in faithful separation, but still not divorce/send away/ask to leave/leave [afeeaymee] him, in the event of spousal abuse, fornication or etc. These actions find many different legal and informal forms and expressions in many different cultures and subcultures. So when you see the word ÒdivorceÓ in your Bible, it at least means Òsend away, releaseÓ, "leave" or Òbe separated, put asunder, divideÓ informally or formally. If Mark 10:8-12; 1 Corinthians 7:10,11,39 and Romans 7:1-3 are taken quite literally, a genuinely saved Elias who legally married (with no vow of exclusivity such as Òforsaking all othersÓ & Òkeeping yourselves only to each other until death do you partÓ) and was legally divorced by several genuinely saved Jane Does who just wanted to live as singles again>142 would have to deal with the question, "Are they still my wives in God's eyes?". They all divorced him exercising their scriptural option and whatever he felt or wanted would be irrelevant in terms of 1 Cor. 7:11,39. What if these genuinely saved but carnal Jane Does became engaged to others and maritally vowed to forsake all others including their Elias and to keep themselves only to their new mates until death part them? It would be adultery and their vows would be sinful because those vows would be invalidated by God's statement in Mark 10:8-12 and 1 Corinth. 7 :11,39 that they are bound to Elias as long as they both live. [Footnote: >142 (1 Cor. 7:11) ] But wait a minute! Wouldn't it be adultery for Elias to remarry even if his Christian wife divorced him? I mean wasn't he still bound to her even if she dumped him and never saw him again, living single in separation? Wouldn't Elias still be bound to his departed and separated Christian wife (according to1 Corinthians 7:10,11,39) even though her departure for other reasons than prayer and fasting leaves him subject to Satan's temptations due to his not having the gift of celibacy (1Cor.7:5)? Why is she allowed to disobey 1 Cor. 7:5 by leaving him indefinitely (1 Cor. 7:10,11) for some other reason than prayer and fasting? To find the answers to these questions, let's take a look at what the Bible says about the institution of marriage in its various forms and over time. IV. VARIETIES OF MARRIAGE IN THE BIBLE --- LET THE WORD SPEAK! Let me share with you the way I understand the Biblical record and please correct me with clear and specific scriptures where and when I am in error. Any discussion of divorce has to deal with the complexities of remarriage. I believe the following discussion is necessary to understand what the Bible has to say about adultery and remarriage. Please read the following with an open mind withholding judgment until the end of this section, because I believe the following information is critical to understand what the Bible has to say about adultery and remarriage. The first mention of marriage in the Bible is where God miraculously provided Eve to Adam in the Garden of God. Monogamists say that if God approved of polygyny God would have given Eve, Eyvette, Eva and Evellyn to Adam. On the other hand, just like with you and I, if we have more than one good option, we donÕt need to exercise all of them, just the one that is best at the time. There is no quarrel with the fact that God has ordained that the male leaders of his Church are to have one wife>33 , and that even in the Old Testament the leaders were instructed not to ÒmultiplyÓ wives to themselves. To be a valid prefigure of Christ (as Òthe first AdamÓ) you would expect Adam to have one wife, just as Christ, the Òlast AdamÓ, has one wife the Church. [Footnote: >33 1 Tim. 3; Titus 1] In the Old Testament Jesus, as Jehovah>34 , presents Himself as the husband of one wife remembering their wedding day and the exchange of the vows at Mt. Sinai in the desert>35 . Reflecting the reality of how Israel and Judah divided after Solomon died, Jesus (as Jehovah) presents Himself as the husband of two wives in the following: [Footnotes:>34 in Ezek. 16; >35 Exodus 19, 20,21 MKJV EZEKIEL 23: 1 ¦ The word of the LORD came again to me, 2 Son of man, there were two women, the daughters of one mother. 3 And they fornicated in Egypt; they whored in their youth, their breasts were handled, and there their Oholibah, her sister. And they were Mine, EZ 16:8 And I swore to you and entered into a covenant with you, says the Lord Jehovah. And you became Mine, and they bore sons and daughters. And their names: Samaria [is] Oholah, and Jerusalem [is] Oholibah. God never presents Himself as sin or sinner to us except for when holy Christ became sin for us on the cross. In Ezek. 23, the sinners were His wives and He was righteous as the husband of two wives. It was only two wives in accordance with His own Law that decreed that the ruler must not multiply wives to himself. Polygyny , even GodÕs polygyny , is NEVER labeled or declared to be sin or sinful in the Bible. For this paper a distinction is made between a mistress and a concubine. I understand a mistress to mean a human female who has sexual (breast &/or vagina) intimacy with another human with whom she has no marital covenants/vows/ commitment. So a mistress is in the same category as a whore, harlot, prostitue etc. except that she might be having sexual intimacy with only one person during a specific period. I attempt to show at length, later in the paper, that in the Bible a concubine has the status of a wife, even though it may be by informal marital covenants/vows/ commitments. And so, continuing the discussion . . . . .. Having one wife/concubine is said to significantly complicate oneÕs life and distract one who is waiting on God>37 , so of course we understand that any godly man with more than one wife/concubine would be significantly more distracted from waiting on God and would have a significantly greater struggle in his spiritual life with God. In the New Testament in accordance with His law for church leaders, Jesus presents Himself to His people as having only one wife, the Church>38 because believing Jews and believing Gentiles were reconciled into one Body, the Church, to be one unified and united Bride to Christ. [Footnotes:>37 1 Cor. 7; >38 (1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1) ] But no where is this example made mandatory or commanded by God. Not all are called to be leaders of GodÕs people. In fact most of us are called to be followers/imitators of these leaders. Besides how can a leader do a good job both of leading the believers and of caring for his wives if he has more than one or a few wives? Any married man and any reader of 1 Corinthians 7 knows that WIVES (like one's children and best friends) TAKE TIME if the marriage is to be successful and godly. A polygynist shouldnÕt have time to be a leader in the local church because of the time it takes him to be the spiritual leader of his wives/concubines and his children in his own home. The polygynist has his ministry in his own home to his own family. Next we read that Cain knew his wife and she conceived. No word of the wedding or the nature of the wedding. The first mention of polygyny in the Bible is in a passage with the Cain cloud over it where Lamech (Wild man) takes two wives>39 but there is no denunciation of this in the context. As Jerome (340-420AD) put it, "Lamech, a man of blood and a murderer, was the first who divided one flesh between two wives.">3 Some maintain that polygamy was much less common in the Old Testament than is frequently thought to be the case, though its practice usually seemed to have a valid reason >4. [Footnotes:>39 MKJV GEN. 4: 19 ¦ And Lamech took two wives to himself. The name of the first one [was] Adah, and the name of the other [was] Zillah; >.3 A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of The Christian Church,Vol. VIII; p. 358. >4. Please see THE INTERNATIONAL BIBLE COMMENTARY; p.119.] One reason is the common belief held by many that a breast feeding mother in primitive and rural settings would refrain from intimacy until her baby is weaned for fear that if she would become pregnant her milk flow would stop and she would be unable to feed her baby and so lose it. Believing this, the father also would not want his breast-feeding wife to become pregnant and lose the nursing child for lack of her milk. Knowing his own passion for vaginal sex with her and the chance that in the heat of passion his reason might not prevail over his desire for vaginal insertion, he would not risk being intimate with her even for the satisfying of her sexual needs by breast &/or clitoral stimulation. His wife would self- stimulate herself to satisfy her sexual needs rather than risk losing her milk for her nursing child. Knowing that he would be subject to Satan's sexual temptations by abstaining from sex with his breast- feeding wife>40, for sexual fulfillment he turns to his other wife/concubine who was not breast feeding. The sexual needs of the husband and both of the wives could be met in this way. So polygyny allows them to save and feed their children and also meet their sexual needs in marriage. Modern birth control techniques could make such an arrangement unnecessary for some, but many people living at or below the poverty level in underdeveloped nations still face these problems without modern aids. [Footnote: >40 1 Corint. 7:4,5] Is guilt by association a valid condemnation of polygyny ? I would think not, given that the next incident is where Sarai gave her slave/maid "to her husband Abram to be his wife", not concubine, but ÒwifeÓ. Consider the following points that appear to be made in one commentary: (1) It was Sarai's idea>* ; (2) it was a common at the time for a wife to obligate herself to get an heir by providing a slave girl to her husband so he could have his heir by the slave girl; (3) this was legal but left a tangle of emotions due to the heartlessness of conventional law; (4) polygamous marriages cause damage of a psychological nature; (5) there is no reproof of Abram for fathering Ishmael who, in his turn, was blessed of God and became the father of an important nation.>5. By the way there is no proof or documentation given that proves that polygamous marriages cause psychological damage. [Footnotes:>* MKJV GEN. 16: 2 And Sarai said to Abram, Behold now, the LORD has kept me from bearing. I pray you, go in to my slave woman. It may be that I may be built by her. And Abram listened to the voice of Sarai. 3 And Sarai, Abram's wife, took Hagar her slave woman, the Egyptian, and gave her to her husband Abram to be his wife (after Abram had lived ten years in the land of Canaan); >5. THE INTERNATIONAL BIBLE COMMENTARY; Editor, F.F.Bruce; pp. 126ff] I understand the same commentary to make these points: (1) Abraham was reluctant because of the customs and the laws of his society, valid concerns about his reputation; (2) very old documentation reveals that normally it was not correct or legal to get rid of one's concubine and children in this way; (3) God intervened and instructed him so that he was assured that Ishmael's rights and his mother's prospects were ensured.>6. [Footnote: >6. THE INTERNATIONAL BIBLE COMMENTARY; Editor, F.F.Bruce; p. 129] Yes it is obvious that Sarai apparently acted on her own and there was no divine guidance in this move, but there was also no divine condemnation. God intervened and sent Hagar back into the marital situation with Abram and Sarai>41 When God next spoke to Abraham>42 there was no condemnation of his polygyny , but instead God blessed him with an even greater blessing than before. In response to the blessing he takes his son by Hagar and circumcised him>43 . But I understand a Christian elder to maintain that there was no blessing from God on Abraham's polygamy, that the Biblical record of it is a criticism of Abraham's conduct. >7. He gives no references so look at the Word for yourselves -- "in all things the Lord had blessed Abraham" (Gen. 24:1). [Footnotes:>41 (Gen 16:9-16.); >42 (Gen. 17:1--); >43 (Gen. 17:23-25); >7. MY WIFE MADE ME. . . .p.20.] Consider the following: ". . . a man's 'house' might consist of his mother; his wives and the wives' children; his concbines and their children . . . and slaves of both sexes. Polygamy was in part the cause of the large size of the Hebrew household; in part thecause of it may be found in the insecurity of early times, when safety lay in numbers . . . Polygyny and bigamy were recognized features of the family life. From the Oriental point of view there was nothing immoral in the practice of polygamy. The female slaves were in every respect the property of their master and became his concubines; except in certain cases, when they seem to have belonged exclusively to their mistress . . . At all events, polygyny was an established and recognized institution form the earliest times">8 HASTINGS DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE; p.259. God blessed Sarah with fertility in polygyny>44 and God blessed Hagar and Ishmael even though she was cast out of Sarah's house at Sarah's confirmed request because of the question of an heir, not polygyny>45 . Abraham had another concubine after Hagar, named Keturah>46 by whom Abraham had six children without any condemnation or denunciation by God. What about a Christian elder's apparent assertion that polygamy is a breeding ground for contemptuous, jealous, quarrelsome conduct in a marriage resulting in alienation between wife and husband<9 Forgive me if I sound a little naive (I'm only in my 50's and have experienced marriage for only 24 years) but divorce court records and sociological studies of divorce indicate that those vices are quite common in monogamy in America today. Does that make monogamy evil? I think not. Contempt, jealousy, quarreling and estrangement are sinful works of the flesh and need to be dealt with Spiritually, just like any other sins involving more than one person. Sin and the flesh are the evils, not polygamy or monogamy. [Footnotes:>44 (Gen 21:1-7); >45 (Gen. 21); >46 (1 Chron.1:32) ; >9. See Gen. 16 and 21 as well as HASTINGS DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE;p.259] Culturally it is interesting that Nahor, Abraham's brother, also was a polygamist having a concubine>47. Abraham had at least another concubine besides Keturah under God's blessing>48 although he diligently protected the heir status of Isaac. HezronÕs Caleb had two concubines>49. [Footnotes:>47 (Gen. 22:20-24); >48 (Gen. 25:1-6); >48 (Gen. 25:1-6)] In the Bible's reality is a concubine the same as a mistress? In the following paragraphs I believe you will see that a concubine has marital status in God's eyes even though socially and culturally she doen't have as high a status as a wife who was married publicly and according to the laws of the culture. The difference between a wife and a concubine is discussed in the next paragraph. On the other hand a mistress is a female who lets "her man" relate to her sexually by means of her breasts>50 and/or genitals>51 without them making or agreeing to any marital "for life" commitments or covenants>52. So a mistress provides sex and affection to her partner without marital commitments or covenants. [Footnotes:>50 Prov. 5:19,20,21; Ezek.23:3,8,21; >51 1 Cor. 6:15,16, 17,18; >52 Prov. 2:16,17,18,19; 5:3,4,5,6; 6:24,25,26; 7; Ezek. 16; 23] The only differences I can detect between a concubine and a wife are: (1) that the concubine's marriage is confirmed by a solemn covenant between the husband and concubine>53 without a public wedding, (2) the concubineÕs rights were protected by God (see below), and (3) their status as concubines spared them certain penalties>54 . The Holy Spirit by the writer of Judges 19 declared the Levite to be the concubine's "husband", declared the father of the concubine to be the Levite's "father-in-law", and declared the Levite to be the "son-in-law" of the concubine's father. This is a very strong legitimization of the husband-concubine marital status. It is the same legitimization of the relationship that the Holy Spirit used in Matthew 1, calling the espoused Mary "wife" and the espoused Joseph "husband". If God so recognizes them and describes them, then who are we to do any less. By the Holy Spirit here in Judges 19 we see that a concubine had a "husband" who was the "son-in-law" of her father, his "father-in-law". A wife has a "husband" who is the "son-in-law" of her father, her husband's "father-in-law". [Footnotes:>53 (Ezek. 16 and Malachi 2); >54 (Lev. 19:20 vs. Deut. 22)] Eerdmans' Douglas' New Bible Dictionary: ÒConcubine. A secondary wife acquired by purchase or as a war captive, and allowed in polygamous society such as existed in the Middle east in biblical times....Where marriages produced no heir, wives presented a slave concubine too their husbands in order to raise an heir (Gen. 16). Handmaidens, given as a marriage gift, were often concubines (Gen. 29:24,29). Concubines were protected under Mosaic law (Exod. 21:7-11; Dt. 21:10-14), though they were distinguished from wives (Jdg. 8:31) and were more easily divorced (Gen.21:10-14)." [Footnote: >10 1962, IVCF, Editor J.D.Douglas; W. B. Eerdmans Publishing] FUNK & WAGNALLS NEW ENCYCLOPEDIA: CONCUBINAGE, Òrefers to the cohabitation of a man and a woman without sanction of legal marriage. Specifically, concubinage is a form of polygyny in which the primary matrimonial relationship is supplemented by one or more secondary sexual relationships. Concubinage was a legally sanctioned and socially acceptable practice in ancient cultures, including that of the Hebrews; concubines, however, were denied the protection to which a legal wife was entitled. . .. In Roman law, marriage was precisely defined as monogamous; concubinage was tolerated, but the concubine's status was inferior to that of a legal wife. Her children had certain rights, including support by the father and legitimacy in the event of the marriage of the parentsÓ [>11 1986, Funk & Wagnalls] HASTINGS DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE: ÒThe relative positions of wives and concubines were determined mainly by the husband's favour. The children of the wife claimed the greater part, or the whole, of the inheritance; otherwise there does not seem to have been any inferiority in the position of the concubine as compared with that of the wife, nor was any idea of illegitimacy, in our sense of the word, connected with her children. . . . The female slaves were in every respect the property of their master, and became his concubines; except in certain cases, when they seem to have belonged exclusively to their mistress, and could not be appropriated by the man except by her suggestion or consent (Gn 16:2,3). The slave- concubines were obtained as booty in time of war (Jg 5:30), or bought from poverty-stricken parents (Ex 21:7); or, possibly, in the ordinary slave traffic with foreign nations.Ó >12 [Footnote: >12. HASTINGS DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE; p.259.] Ò The difference between a wife and a concubine depended on the wife's higher position and birth, usually backed by relatives ready to defend her.Ó >13 [Footnote: >13. 1989, HASTINGS DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE; p.585.] Both David and Abraham recognized all the rights and responsibili-ties of the concubines as if they were official wives. The bottom line is what does God say and how does He view concubines. Reflect on the following: MKJV 2 Sam.12: 11 ÒSo says the LORD, Behold, I will raise up evil against you out of your own house, and I will take your wives before your eyes and give [them] to your neighbor. And he shall lie with your wives in the sight of this sun.Ó MKJV 2 Sam 16: 21 ÒAnd Ahithophel said to Absalom, Go in to your father's concubines, that he left to keep the house. And all Israel shall hear that you are abhorred by your father. And the hands of all who [are] with you will be strong. 22 And they spread Absalom a tent on the top of the house, and Absalom went in to his father's concubines in the sight of all Israel.Ó MKJV2Sam.20:3 ÒAnd David came to his house at Jerusalem. And the king took the ten women, [his] concubines, whom he had left to keep the house, and put them in ward, and fed them but did not go in to them. And they were shut up till the day of their death, living in widowhood.Ó In these passages you see God calling and recognizing as "wives" DavidÕs concubines. If that is the way God sees them, only a fool would treat them as less than a wife (Malachi 2). Malachi 2 makes it pretty clear how God feels about those who break their covenants with their concubines and wives. Lamech, the bad guy, and Abraham, the good guy, both marry polygamously on their own initiative without God's explicit leading or condemnation. You cannot condemn the polygyny because their kids turned out bad because so did Adam's Cain, Isaac's Esau and Eli's kids in monogamy. Next we have another bad guy polygamist, Esau, and a good guy polygamist, Jacob. Esau's polygyny >55 was not condemned but his unequal yoke was the point of grief to his mother. EsauÕs son had a concubine>56 . A dear brother reminds us that the two wives of Esau embittered life for his parents, especially his mothe>57 . The passage cited shows it was a disobedience, parents and in-law problem. Again American divorce courts and sociological studies document that monogamy does very well in producing sinful and carnal problems between mates and the parents-in-law. The problem is still sin and the flesh, not monogamy or polygamy. [Footnotes:>55 (Gen. 26:34,35; 28:9); >56 (Gen. 36:12); >57 (Gen. 26:35)] Jacob marries Rachel and Leah>58 , and goes on to have children by his concubines as well>59. Sure, treachery was involved in the Rachel and Leah marriage, but it appears that the treachery stands alone as the evil since at the first mention of the polygyny option,>60 Jacob has no moral objection and nowhere does God denounce the development. Yes Lev. 18:18 shows that much later in the time of Moses, God forbade two sisters being wives to one husband at one time and makes rivalry the issue. God deliberately involved Himself in the polygyny of Jacob by blessing Leah with fertility>61. God repeated himself in this way with the mother of Samuel without denouncing her polygyny>62 . God intervened and granted fertility to Rachel in her polygyny>63 . God not only blesses Jacob with fertility but also with miraculous prosperity in his polygyny> 64 . God not only blessed Jacob in his polygyny but also delivered him from evil and harm as a polygynist>65 [Footnotes:>58 in Gen 29 & 30; >59 (Gen. 35:22; 37:2);. >60 (Gn. 29:27,29). >61 (Gn. 29:31,32; 30:17); >62 (l Sam 1:1-6); >63 (Gn. 30:22); >64 (Gn. 30:41-31:10); >65 (Gn. 31:24, 29,42)] Consider what Saint Augustine said in the fourth century AD. "But here there is no ground for a criminal accusation: for a plurality of wives was no crime when it was the custom; and it is a crime now, because it is no longer the custom. There are sins against nature, and sins against custom, and sins against the laws. In which, then, of these senses did Jacob sin in having a plurality of wives? As regards nature, he used the women not for sensual gratification, but for the procreation of children. For custom, this was the common practice at that time in those countries. And for the laws, no prohibition existed. The only reason of its being a crime now to do this, is because custom and the laws forbid it." [Footnote: >.14 A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of The Christian Church, Vol. iv; p. 289] I hope that dear brother Augustine is having a wonderful time in Heaven. I also hope that Jesus has shared with Him meaning of Prov. 5:18, 19----- a husband's sensual gratification by and with his wife's breasts, being enraptured and intoxicated with and by her lovemaking; the sensual gratification of the marital joys of the Song of Solomon; the joyful marital living of Eccles. 9:7,8,9; and the sensual gratification of the blissful exchange of intimate marital affection required in 1 Cor. 7:2,3,4,5. I don't understand how he could have missed these obvious God given instructions to blissfully and wholeheartedly love our mates in marriage. In spite of this Biblical record of God's blessings on Jacob, I understand a brother to write that Jacob experienced only troublesome times with Rachel and Leah, and that they were angry, envious, and hateful rivals.>15. Only troublesome times? What about all of God's miraculous provision and prospering their family experienced directly from God's intervention? What about their cooperation, their love, trust and loyalty for Jacob when he was in conflict with their father and then with Esau? Maybe their polygyny lacked the sweet bliss and loving harmony of Solomon's early polygyny >66 , but there is no passage that Rachel and Leah only had troublesome times. [Footnotes:>15. Trobisch, MY WIFE MADE ME. . ; p. 20; >66 (Song of Songs 6:4-9)] I wish I had some of that trouble in my life! What about the rivalry? God saw the destructive potential of such sibling rigalry and made the law that a polygynist should not marry the sister of his wife >67 . He did not condemn the man for being a polygynist, He just indicated that the man as polygynist should not marry his wife's sister while she lived. What about the hatred, envy and anger? Well folks, I don't mean to be redundant, but we see those sins in monogamy, between sisters, between brothers (Cain & Abel) and between children and parents (Absalom and David) then and today. If you aren't aware of that, then I have to ask you if you were raised by Robinson Crusoe on some island. [Footnote: >67 (Lev. 18:18)] JacobÕs son Ashur had two wives >68 , and his son, Manasseh, had a concubine>69. BenjaminÕs Shaharaim was also a polygamist>70. So what is the score? God miraculously gives one wife to Adam and another one to Isaac. God allows Lamech, Abraham, Nahor, Esau and Jacob to marry polygamously and blesses the ones who walk with Him in submission, polygyny or no polygyny. [Footnotes:>68 (1Chron. 4:5); >69 (1 Chron 7:14); >70 (1 Chron.8:8)] The next occurrence is controversial but interesting. Before the Law and in accordance with the principles of Genesis, Moses marries Zipporah a Midianite. She seems to do a Michal>71 and apparently suffers the same fate because next we see Moses marry, after the giving of the law, an Ethiopian Cushite>72 in polygyny . Under God's Law Moses gave instructions about polygyny>73 affording it the full legal status of monogamy with no stigma or denunciation. [Footnotes:>71 (l Sam 6) in Ex. 4:23-26; >72 (Num 12:1-10); >73 in Ex. 21:10,11] The maidservant status of Hagar and Jacob's wives is clothed in marital status>74 . It is a profound statement that in all of the explicit moral injunctions of Lev. 18, 19, &20; Deut 12 & 27 there is not one denunciation of polygyny or concubinage. Concubinage apparently, because it involved maidservants, seems to have a lower status as reflected in Ex. 21:7-9 with Lev. 19:20 in contrast to Deut. 22:23-26. [Footnote: >74 in Ex. 21:7-9] MKJV EXODUS 21: 7 ÒAnd if a man sells his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do. 8 If she does not please her master, who has betrothed her to himself, then he shall let her be redeemed. He shall have no power to sell her to a strange nation, since he has dealt deceitfully with her. 9 And if he has betrothed her to his son, he shall deal with her as with daughters. 10 If he takes himself another [wife], her food, her clothing, and her duty of marriage shall not be lessened. 11 And if he does not do these three to her, then she shall go out free without money.Ó MKJV LEVITICUS 19:20 ÒAnd whoever lies with a woman with semen, and she is a slave-girl, betrothed to a husband and not at all redeemed, nor freedom given her, there shall be an inquest. They shall not be put to death, because she was not free.Ó MKJV DEUT. 22: 23 ÒIf a girl [who is] a virgin is engaged to a husband, and a man finds her in the city and lies with her, 24 then you shall bring them both out to the gate of that city, and you shall stone them with stones that they die; the girl because she did not cry out in the city, and the man because he has humbled his neighbor's wife. So you shall put away evil from among you. 25 But if a man finds an engaged girl in the field, and the man forces her and lies with her, then only the man that lay with her shall die. 26 But you shall do nothing to the girl. No sin [worthy] of death [is] in the girl; for as when a man rises against his neighbor and slays him, even so is this matter. 27 For he found her in the field, the engaged girl cried out, but [there was] none to save her.Ó Perhaps Deut. was subsequent and current replacing Lev. 19:20. What about Ex. 21:7-9? It was expected that the female slave would become her master's wife or concubine, or become the wife or concubine of her master's son, and the law protected her rights if he was unwilling to do so.>16. Her owner could not sell her to foreigners because he had "trifled" with her (see LXX), "seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her.">17. [Footnotes:>16. Please see the discussion in THE INTERNATIONAL BIBLE COMMENTARY; p.126ff & p.172ff.; >17. Ex. 21:8; The Holy Scriptures according to the Masoretic Text]. God's Law forbade a king from "multiplying" wives>.75 to himself without making such a command to we nonkings. It appears from later scripture about Godly and God blessed kings of Israel that God makes a distinction between MULTIPLYING wives & horses to yourself and adding wives & horses to yourself. None of us object to King David having more than one horse but many object to King David having more than one wife, yet it is the same command "he shall not multilply hoses . . . wives to himself." By 2 Samuel 5-12 God had ÒgivenÓ him seven wives plus a number of concubines. We see His implied blessing on DavidÕs polygyny . This implied blessing of his polygyny would have to mean that David, with concubines and seven wives, had not yet violated the prohibition against a king multiplying wives and horses to himself. [Footnotes:>75 De 17:15 ÒYou shall only set him king over you whom Jehovah your God will choose: from among your brethren shall you set a king over you; . . . 16 Only he shall not multiply horses to himself, . . . 17 Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away; neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold.Ó NO PROHIBITION FROM HAVING SOME HORSES , SOME WIVES and some gold] In Deut. 21:15-17 God intervenes and acknowledges and vindicates the second wife in a polygamous marriage where the sin of partiality >76 was being practiced. If polygyny were sin why didn't God condemn it in this passage instead of covering it with the dignity and holiness of His Law? The wife is vindicated, not condemned. [Footnote: >76 (James 2:1-7)] Deut. 21:15 ¦ ÒIf a man have two wives, one beloved, and one hated, and they have borne him children, [both] the beloved and the hated, and [if] the first- born son be hers that was hated; 16 then it shall be, in the day that he makes his sons to inherit [that] which he has, [that] he may not make the son of the beloved first-born before the son of the hated, who is the first-born; 17 but he shall acknowledge as first- born the son of the hated, by giving him a double portion of all that he has; for he is the firstfruits of his strength: the right of the firstborn is his.Ó Gideon had MANY WIVES, was blessed and used of God without any condemnation/denunciation from God about his polygyny>77 . A dear brother apparently states, of Gideon's (Jerubbaal's ) son Abimelech, that polygamy actually lead to murder in Judg. 9:5 >18. Excuse me! With logic like that I guess you would have to say that the monogamy of Adam and Eve led Cain to murder Abel. I think not. Jesus makes it clear that murder comes from the murderer's heart >78 or from the inner working of the evil ones>79 , but not from monogamy or polygamy. The problem is sin and the flesh, not polygamy. [Footnotes:>77 (Judges 8:29-32); >18. Trobisch; MY WIFE MADE ME>.>.>.p. 20; >78 (Matt. 15:18,19); >79 (Eph. 2:1,2; 6:12)] What about the LeviteÕs? These keepers of the tabernacle, did they have special rules that kept them from polygyny? Not according to the following, because when his concubine was mercilessly murdered by rape, the nation of Israel rose to vindicate him and avenge her murder. Judges 19:1 ¦ ÒAnd it came to pass in those days, when [there was] no king in Israel, that there was a certain Levite, . . . who took to him a concubine out of Bethlehem-Judah. 2 And his concubine played the whore against him, and went away from him to her father's house to Bethlehem-Judah, and was there four whole months. 3 And HER HUSBAND rose up and went after her, to speak friendly to her, [and] to bring her again; . . . And she brought him into her father's house; and when the father of the damsel saw him he rejoiced to meet him. 4 And his FATHER-IN-LAW, the damsel's father, retained him, and he abode with him three days; . . .5 . . . And the damsel's father said to his SON-IN-LAW, . .Ó SO A CONCUBINE IS NOT A HARLOT. Just like any other wife, she can become a harlot while married (Ezek. 16 and Hosea). HARLOTRY IS AN EVIL THAT EITHER A WIFE OR A CONCUBINE CAN PRACTICE WHILE MARRIED. Not only is a concubine not a harlot, the Holy Spirit by the writer of the book of Judges declared the Levite to be the concubine's "husband", declared the father of the concubine to be the Levite's "father-in-law", and declared the Levite to be the "son-in-law" of the concubine's father. This is a very strong legitimization of the husband- concubine marital status. It is the same legitimization of the relationship that the Holy Spirit used in Matthew 1, calling the espoused Mary "wife" and the espoused Joseph "husband". If God so recognizes them and describes them, then who are we to do any less. By the Holy Spirit here in Judges 19 we see that a concubine had a "husband" who was the "son-in- law" of her father, his "father-in-law". A wife has a "husband" who is the "son-in-law" of her father, her husband's "father-in-law". Hannah, the wife of polygamous Elkanah, received the same intervention and blessing from God that Sarah, Rachel and Leah received in their polygyny>80 . Her problem with her co-wife and her own infertility is quite similar to Abraham and Sarah's experience. The co-wife had a sin problem, and it was her problem, not a polygyny problem. You find the same sinful behavior today between sisters, brothers, wives in social groups, wives socializing in church or work settings. Sin and the flesh are the problems, not polygyny. [Footnote: >80 (l Sam. 1:1-19)] The situation made famous by Ruth>81 involves the potential for polygyny since the brother-in-law is not exempted if he is already married. It is amazing, given the specificity of the Law spread out over four books, that God specifically condemns adultery, fornication, homosexuality, sodomy, bestiality but nowhere condemns polygyny or concubinage. King Saul had a concubine>82. [Footnotes:>81 , Deut. 25:5-10 (See l Tim 5:1-16); >82 2Sam 3:7] . David is a fascinating case. He marries Michal in l Sam. 18. Then, as the anointed future king of Israel, David took to himself three additional wives in l Sam 25, and one is recognized by the Spirit for her grace and wisdom. He does this at a time of God's miraculous intervention and blessing in his life. God neither denounces or condemns him or his polygyny. In the case of three or four wives you are still dealing with addition, rather than the multiplying of Deut. MKJV DEUT. 17:16 ÒBut he shall not multiply horses to himself. . . . 17 Nor shall he multiply wives to himself, so that his heart does not turn away. Nor shall he greatly multiply silver and gold to himself.Ó It is interesting that horses, silver and gold - AS WELL AS WIVES - were not to be multiplied. I can't believe this was meant to limit the king to ONE HORSE, or ONE SILVER OR GOLD BAR, even so I can't believe it limits a king to one wife. In fact in 2 Sam 6, it is Michal who is condemned and punished instead of her polygamous husband David. By the time he becomes King in Judah he has 6 wives>83 and is being blessed and prospered by God. At the time of the wonderful Covenant with David in 2 Sam. 7, God specifically blesses and covenants with polygamist David and his concubines and his seven wives, as part of his house, receive a blessing. God even said "I gave you . . . your master's wives" >84 ". And Nathan said to David, you are the man! Thus says Jehovah the God of Israel: I anointed you king over Israel, and I delivered you out of the hand of Saul; 8 and I GAVE YOU YOUR MASTER'S HOUSE, AND YOUR MASTER'S WIVES INTO YOUR BOSOM, and gave you the house of Israel and of Judah; and if [that] had been too little, I would moreover have given unto you such and such things." [Footnotes:>83 (2 Sam. 3); >84a 2Sa 12:7] At this time God had ÒgivenÓ him seven wives plus a number of concubines (1 Chronicles 3). God here condemns DavidÕs adultery and murder, but implies His blessing on DavidÕs polygyny . This implied blessing of his polygyny would have to mean that David, with concubines and seven wives, had not yet violated the prohibition against a king multiplying wives to himself. >84b to David in his polygyny. Apparently even concubines plus seven wives is not "multiplying" wives to oneself. He had about 14 wives and concubines at the end of his life>85. David the polygamist was declared to be loyal to God>86. God declares that David, the polygamist, fully followed God>87. [Footnotes:>84b 2Sa 12:7; >85 (1 Chron 3); >86 ( l King 11:4); >87 (l King 11:6)] In contrast to God's evaluation of David, we have a beloved brother's evaluation that David was adulterous, unjust, favored some over others, and his sons became killers because he didn't have the authority deal decisively with his heritage>19. Unless I'm mistaken, I believe that monogamous Adam and Eve had a similar problem with Cain and Abel, and monogamous Isaac and Rebekah certainly had their share of "favoritism and injustice. . . intrigues" in their parenting of Jacob and Esau and Jacob's obtaining the blessing instead of Esau. Again and again we see that sin and the flesh are the problems, not polygyny. [Footnote: >19. Trobisch; MY WIFE MADE ME. . . p.20.] God conferred the status of wives on David's concubines in 2 Sam. 12:11 as we see how the prophecy was played out in 2 Sam. 16:21, 22; and 20:3. Again the distinction between concubines and wives seems to be an issue on man's end, not on God's end where it seems to be the solemn vow/covenant>20 and not the wedding ceremony>21 that makes a woman a wife even if society calls her a concubine>88 . [Footnotes:>.20 See appendix #4.; >.21 See appendix #4; >88 (Ezek. 16; Malachi 2; Eccles. 5:5-9;and Matt. 1:18-20 where we see the Holy Spirit call Mary and Joseph husband and wife based on their betrothal/ espousal alone and before the actual wedding and cohabitation)] Solomon's polygyny was sinful first because He disobeyed GodÕs command against a king multiplying wives to himself>89; and secondly because he married unbelievers with whom God had specifically forbidden marriage>90. Too many wives and forbidden wives both had the same predicted result, that they turned his heart away from God. Solomon was declared to be disloyal to God in his polygyny>91 while David the polygamist was declared to be loyal to God>92 . God even declares that polygynist David fully followed God>93 . [Footnote: >89 (Deut. 17:15-17); >90 (Nehemiah 13:23) ; >91 (1 Kings 11:1,2,6, 11); >92 ( l King 11:4); >93 (l King 11:6)] Evil king Rehoboam imitated Solomon and almost had 18 wives and 60 concubines in 2 Chron. 11 & 12. Then Godly king Abijah, blessed and prospered of God, also had fourteen wives>94 . The Godly High Priest Jehoida gave two wives to godly king Joash in 2 Chron 24. Godly queen Esther was a wife blessed by God in her polygyny . God Himself describes Himself as a polygamist in Ezekiel 23. Jesus reaffirmed the Old Testament teachings on polygamy and concubinage in Matt. 23:2,3. [Footnote: >94 (2 Chron. 13)] MKJV MATT. 23:2 Ò. . . The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. 3 Therefore whatever they tell you to observe, observe and do. But do not do according to their works; for they say, and do not do.Ó What a record! Two authors of the Old Testament, David and Solomon, possibly three if you count Moses, were uncondemned and God-honored polygynists in their polygyny. Four godly patriarchs with whom God entered into special and unique covenants (Abraham, Jacob, David, Solomon; five if you count Moses) were polygynists at the time God covenanted with them. In every era of the Old Testament (Pre Law, Sinai Law, Judges, Kingdom prophets, Dispersion prophets) you find GodÕs people and leaders practicing polygyny and practicing it according to GodÕs will or commands. Yet many Christian leaders agree with the brother that apparently maintains that the Bible offers little defense for polygamy in comparison to monogamy, that because of its shortcomings polygyny cannot be tolerated as a form of marriage willed by God.>22. Perhaps that's why God chose the polygamous marriage of Solomon and his Shulamite in The Song of Solomon to be the model for marriage in Israel and the marriage model for His relationship to Israel>95 . [Footnotes:>22. Trobisch; MY WIFE MADE ME>.>..P.21; >95 (Ezekiel 23)] Were these Old Testament saints less Godly than we? I think not. But what of those who say that having more than one wife in those days was a falling short of the will of God and reflected a weakness in the character of those who participated in polygyny? St. Augustine has a good word, as follows: "But those who have not the virtues of temperance must not be allowed to judge of the conduct of holy men, any more than those in fever of the sweetness and wholesomeness of food. . . If our critics, then, wish to attain not a spurious and affected, but a genuine and sound moral health, let them find a cure in believing the Scripture record, that the honorable name of saint is given not without reason to men who had several wives; and that the reason is this, that the mind can exercise such control over the flesh as not to allow the appetite implanted in our nature by Providence to go beyond the limits of deliberate intention. . . . the holy patriarchs in their conjugal intercourse were actuated not by the love of pleasure, but by the intelligent desire for the continuance of their family. . . .nor did the number of their wives make the patriarchs licentious. But why defend the husbands, to whose character the divine word bears the highest testimony. . . ." [Footnote: >.23 A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of The Christian Church, Vol. iv; p.290] Never by God or His prophets is polygyny denounced, condemned or grouped with sins or carnal expressions of the flesh. God Himself portrays Himself as a monogynist in Ezekiel 16 and then as polygynist in Ezekiel 23. It appears He has no problem with the marriage styles he initiated, legislated and in which He blessed His people. So who are we to condemn as sin that which God never condemns as sin? Why would we want to do such a thing? Yes it is against the law in some countries and we know that God wants us to obey the laws of the land as long as it does not violate His Law. So we should not practice polygyny in those lands in obedience to Romans 13 etc. So why not simply say that instead of teaching as doctrine the tradition of religious men, i.e. that polygyny is sinful? POLYGAMY, JESUS, PAUL AND NEW TESTAMENT TIMES Some might say all or most of those Old Testament passages on marriage and morality were for the nation Israel under the Law of Moses and not for Jesus' church under the Law of LOVE in Christ. Bible history indicates quite clearly that Jesus came not to destroy the Law but to fulfill it>96 . Jesus showed that He was observing all the Law of Moses as an adult when He said that whoever does the commandments and teaches others to do the Law of Moses "shall be called great in the kingdom of Heaven">~ . Over and over again in the Gospels you see Jesus obeying the Law of Moses and telling His followers to obey it>97 . Matt. 23:3, 4, and 23 are the strongest statements of this expectation that His followers were to be obeying the marriage and morality laws of Moses when He was still visibly with them, and Jesus made it soon before His death. [Footnotes:>96 (Matt. 5:17,18); >~ (Matt. 5:19); >97 (Matt. 8:4; 12:11,12; 13:54; 15:3-6, 22-26; 17:24, 27; 19:17-19; 21:12,13; 22:34-40; 23:3,4,23; 26:18,19; 26:63,64; etc.)] Mat. 5:17 ¦ ÒThink not that I am come to make void the law or the prophets; I am not come to make void, but to fulfil. 18 For verily I say unto you, Until the heaven and the earth pass away, one iota or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all come to pass. 19 Whosoever then shall do away with one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of the heavens; but whosoever shall practise and teach [them], *he* shall be called great in the kingdom of the heavens.Ó Matt. 23:1 ¦ ÒThen Jesus spoke to the crowds and to his disciples, 2 saying, The scribes and the Pharisees have set themselves down in Moses' seat: 3 all things therefore, whatever they may tell you, do and keep. But do not after their works, for they say and do not, . . .Ó Consider Hebrews 8, especially the Greek of verse 13: ÒIn that he says, ÔA new [covenant]Õ, he has made the first [covenant] old. Now that which is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.Ó Consider The Greek of 2 Cor. 3:7,11: Ò. . . the ministration of death, written [and] engraved in stones, was glorious . . . How shall not the ministration of the Spirit be more glorious? . . . For if what is passing away [was] glorious, much more that which is reamaining [is] glorious>..Ó These passages show there was a period of transition (Òis becoming obsolete..growing old..is ready to vanish..is passing awayÓ) from the Sinai Law of Moses to the Calvary Law of LOVE in Christ. The book of Acts is full of the apostles keeping the Sinai Law of Moses after Pentecost. You see them worshipping in the Temple regularly>98 , Peter refuses to socialize with Gentiles according to the Sinai Law>99 , Peter refuses to eat the animals classified as unclean in the Sinai Law>1 , Paul circumcises Timothy, Paul keeps the Law's feasts>2 , Paul recognizes the authority of the Chief Priest, the believing Gentiles are released from the Sinai Law of Moses while the believing Jews are not released >3 . [Footnotes:>98 (Acts 4, 12, 15, 21); >99 (Acts 10, 11, Gal. 1 & 2); >1 (Acts 10 & 11); >2 (Acts 21); >3 (Galatians, Acts 15 and see Acts 10; 11:8, 23; 15:5; 16:3; 18:18, 21;21:18-25; 24:18)] So even after Acts' Pentecost and Acts 15 the apostles and believing Jews in Acts 21 still believe that they are to obey the Law of Moses including the laws about marriage (including polygyny ) and morality. The only thing they wrote about polygyny was that the elders/bishops/deacons should have only one wife at a time. Consider the following: Acts 21:18 ÒAnd on the morrow Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders came there. 19 And having saluted them, he related one by one the things which God had wrought among the nations by his ministry. 20 And they having heard [it] glorified God, and said to him, You see, brother, how many myriads there are of the Jews who have believed, and all are zealous of the law. 21 And they have been informed concerning you , that you teach all the Jews among the nations apostasy from Moses, saying that they should not circumcise their children, nor walk in the customs. . . . 23 This do therefore that we say to you: We have four men who have a vow on them; 24 take these and be purified with them, and pay their expenses, that they may have their heads shaved; and all will know that [of those things] of which they have been informed about you nothing is [true]; but that you yourself also walk orderly, keeping the law. 25 But concerning [those of] the nations who have believed, we have written, deciding that they should [observe no such thing, only to] keep themselves both from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication. 26 Then Paul, taking the men, on the next day, having been purified, entered with them into the temple, signifying the time the days of the purification would be fulfilled, until the offering was offered for every one of them.Ó So we see Paul, the Apostle of Grace to we non-Jews, purify himself with four other Christian Jews under a vow, pay the expenses of their being under the vow including the shaving of their heads, and have an offering offered for them all so that he could show the believing Jews that he walked orderly, keeping the Sinai Law and its customs and telling the believing Jews to circumcize their children and walk in Moses' customs. These customs of Moses included the laws given to Moses regulating and recognizing polygyny. So the apostles and believing Jews were still keeping the Law, not for salvation, but to obey Jesus in Mat. 23:1-3, and still they do not condemn or reject the polygyny being practiced all around them by both Jews and Romans (See the quotes below). In fact, it is not until after Acts 22 that the Spirit has Paul write the following: MKJV EPHES. 2: 14 ¦ ÒFor He is our peace, He making us both one, and [He] has broken down the middle wall of partition [between us], 15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity (the Law of commandments [contained] in ordinances) so that in Himself He might make the two into one new man, making peace [between them]; 16 and so that He might reconcile both to God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity in Himself.Ó MKJV COLOS. 2:13 ¦ ÒAnd you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses, 14 blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and has taken it out of the way, nailing it to the cross. 15 Having stripped rulers and authorities, He made a show of them publicly, triumphing [over] them in it. 16 ¦ Therefore let no one judge you in food or in drink, or in respect of a holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbaths.Ó MKJV 2 PETER 3:15 ÒAnd think of the long-suffering of our Lord [as] salvation (as our beloved brother Paul also has written to you according to the wisdom given to him 16 as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable pervert, as also [they do] the rest of the Scriptures, to [their] own destruction).Ó Ephesians 2:14-18 and Colossians 2:11-17, confirmed by 2 Peter 3:15, show us that Jesus reveals and instructs us to accept the end of the Law of Moses, finally releasing believing Jews from having to obey the Law of Moses (as the Gentiles were in Acts 15) and then not many years later causes the Jerusalem Temple to be destroyed so that it would be impossible to keep on obeying the Law of Moses with its sacrifices and temple worship. This means that the marriage and morality teachings of 1 Thess. 4 ; Romans 7; 1 Corinthians 5, 6 and 7 were written before the time of Acts 21:16 while Paul and the believing Jews, including the apostles, were still obeying and teaching the marriage and morality laws of the Law of Moses, discussed at length above including polygyny . The change of significance was not that polygyny was condemned or forbidden but that monogamy was made a prerequisite for holding an official position of leadership in the local church. The polygyny of the Jewish, Greek and Roman world was not attacked, but the leadership of the local churches was transformed by the monogamy restriction, probably to prevent polygamous leaders from getting involved in church service that would result in the neglect of time with their own children and/or wives. What was the actual status of polygamy in New Testament time, the First Century AD? Christian elders agree that during Jesus' physical and visible walk on earth, the Jews practiced polygamy>24.Ó [Footnote: >24. Trobisch; MY WIFE MADE ME..P. 23. ; "Polygamy was not definitely forbidden among the Jews till the time of R. Gershom (c. A.d. 1000), and then at first only for France and Germany. In Spain, Italy,m and the East it persisted for some time longer, as it does still among the Jews in Mohammedan counties". HASTINGS DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE, p.584. ; A Select Library of the Nicene and Post- Nicene Fathers of The Christian Church, Vol. V, p. 267.; A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of The Christian Church, Vol. iv, p.290.; A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of The Christian Church, Vol. VIII, p. 258. ; St. Augustin: On The Trinity, p. 402.; HASTINGS DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE, p.259, 583ff.] Let's look at the following evidence: DOUGLASÕ NEW BIBLE DICTIONARY : MARRIAGE: ."Monogamy is implicit in the story of Adam and Eve, since God created only one wife for Adam. Yet polygyny is adopted from the time of Lamech (Gn. 4:19), and is not forbidden in Scripture . . ..It is difficult toknow how far polygamy was practised, but on economic grounds it is probable that it was found more among the well-to-do than among the ordinary people. Polygamy continues to the present day among Jews in Moslem, Hindu, Buddhist, Asian, Oriental, and African countries." >25 [>25 IVCF, Editor J.D.Douglas; 1962,W. B. Eerdmans Publishing, p.787] Eerdmans' Douglas' New Bible Dictionary: ÒConcubine. A secondary wife acquired by purchase or as a war captive, and allowed in polygamous society such as existed in the Middle east in biblical times....Where marriages produced no heir, wives presented a slave concubine too their husbands in order to raise an heir (Gen. 16). Handmaidens, given as a marriage gift, were often concubines (Gen. 29:24,29). Concubines were protected under Mosaic law (Exod. 21:7-11; Dt. 21:10-14), though they were distinguished from wives (Jdg. 8:31) and were more easily divorced (Gen.21:10-14)Ó [Footnote: >26 IVCF, Editor J.D.Douglas; 1962,W. B. Eerdmans Publishing.] FUNK & WAGNALLS NEW ENCYCLOPEDIA: CONCUBINAGE, ÒRefers to the cohabitation of a man and a woman without sanction of legal marriage. Specifically, concubinage is a form of polygyny in which the primary matrimonial relationship is supplemented by one or more secondary sexual relationships. Concubinage was a legally sanctioned and socially acceptable practice in ancient cultures, including that of the Hebrews; concubines, however, were denied the protection to which a legal wife was entitled. In Roman law, marriage was precisely defined as monogamous; concubinage was tolerated, but the concubine's status was inferior to that of a legal wife. Her children had certain rights, including support by the father and legitimacy in the event of the marriage of the parentsÓ. [Footnote: >27 1986, Funk & Wagnalls NEW ENCYCLOPEDIA.] In HASTING'S DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE we read "Being .. apparently legalized, and having the advantage of precedent, it was long before polygamy was formally forbidden in Hebrew society, though practically it fell into disuse; the feeling of the Rabbis was strongly against it. Herod had nine wives at once. . . Its possibility is implied by the technical continuance of the Levirate law," [Deut. 25:5-10] "and is proved by the early interpretation of 1 Ti 3, whether correct or not. Justin reproaches the Jews of his day" [A.D.] " with having 'four or even five wives,' and marrying 'as they wish, or as many as they wish.' The evidence of the Talmud shows that in this case at least the reproach had some foundation. Polygamy was not definitely forbidden among the Jews till the time of R. Gershom (c. A.D. 1000), and then at first only for France and Germany. In Spain, Italy, and the East it persisted for some time longer, as it does still among the Jews in Mohammedan countries." [Footnote: >28. HASTINGS DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE; p.583ff.] Eugene Nida's (American Bible Society) book Customs and Cultures>.29 . . documents the current practice of polygyny by Christians in non Western countries, and how it is still practiced in China, SE Asia, India, Africa and parts of South America. Eugene Nida points out that when polygamists become Christians they are told of their limitations in church offices and are asked not to take any additional wives because it stumbles western Christians (Rom 14, l Cor. 8 and 10). They are not usually asked to abandon their other wives to a premature widowhood because of l Cor>. 7:1-15. [Footnote: >.29 1954, Harper & Brothers, New York] Tacitus, who died in 117 A.D., was a Roman historian who provided us with one of the earliest detailed descriptions of the Germans and their Germanic tribes, which later migrated into western Europe and included the English and the French. >30 These Germans of his time were unique. They strictly observed the marital tie and were generally content with one wife for each husband, in marked contrast to most of the "barbarians" of the time who often practiced polygyny. The few exceptions to this Germanic monogyny was when they were sought for a polygynous marriage because of their high birth>31 [Footnotes:>30 Source: Tr. Maurice Hutton, in Tacitus: Dialogus, Agricola, Germania, Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1914). WOMEN'S LIVES IN MEDIEVAL EUROPE - A SOURCEBOOK; p. 36.;>31 WOMEN'S LIVES IN MEDIEVAL EUROPE - A SOURCEBOOK; p. 37.] The New York Times News Service reported in Jan. '96 that there were 200,000 individuals involved in polygamous marriages in Paris France alone. These polygamous individuals were reported to be mostly immigrants from SE Asia, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Africa. This is significant since England and Germany also have similar immigrant populations with similar marriages. This is an awesome mission field right in middle of Western Europe, involving our NATO allies. Are we going to exclude them from the Gospel message because of their polygamy? Are we going to tell the husbands to disobey the Jesus who condemns the breaking of marital covenants (Mal.2; Rom. 1) by abandonning/divorcing all their wives but one. Are we going to disobey the Jesus who tells new converts to stay in the calling in which they were called (1 Cor.7:25-35) and tell the husbands not to abide in the polygamous calling in which they were called, but to dump and abandon their "extra" wives, condemning them to widowhood, poverty and prostitution? It is incredible to think that Jesus and the apostles would say nothing about such a widespread contemporary practice as polygyny if it were indeed sinful, less than God's best, carnal and reprobate to good works. God never said such a thing in Old Testament times and He obviously never said such a thing in New Testament times. When you consider how specific God was in Lev. chaps. 18-22; Deut. chaps. 22-24; Romans 1; 1 Cor. 6; 2 Cor. 6; Gal. 5 and etc., I can not believe that God would "forget" to include polygyny if it is as bad as most Christian leaders say it is. Let's take a look at what most Christian leaders say about polygyny and concubines in the next section. V. WHAT DO MOST CHRISTIAN LEADERS SAY ABOUT CONCUBINES & POLYGYNY TODAY? FIRST, they say that one of God's purposes in creation was that the marital standard for man be monogamy>32 even though there is not one scripture, quoted or paraphrased, that says that. Yet I understand a Christian elder and most of the "leaders" to persist, apparently maintaining that there is no doubt that God's indisputable will, as seen in the Old Testament, is monogamy.>33. [Footnotes:>.32 Please see THE INSTITUTES OF BIBLICAL LAW, page 362, by R. Rushdonney.; >33. Trobisch, MY WIFE MADE ME. . . P.21] There is no question that the best form of marriage for most is monogamy, since that is the gift>@ He has given most of His children on earth and worldwide. But the point of 1 Cor. 7:7-27 ----- [Footnote: >@ (1 Cor. 7:7-27)] MKJV 1 CORINTH. 7: 7 ÒFor I would that all men were even as I myself am. But each has his proper gift from God, one according to this manner and another according to that. 8 I say therefore to the unmarried and the widows, It is good for them if they remain even as I. 9 But if they do not have self-control, let them marry; for it is better to marry than to burn. 17 ¦ But as God has distributed to each one, as the Lord has called each one, so let him walk. And so I ordain in all churches.18 [Was] any called having been circumcised? Do not be uncircumcised. Was anyone called in uncircumcision? Do not be circumcised. . . . 20 Let each one remain in the calling in which he was called. 21 Were you called as a slave? It does not matter to you, but if you are able to become free, use [it] rather. . . . 24 Each in whatever way he was called, brothers, in this remain with God.Ó Whether or not it is the best form of marriage for each individual depends on the gift and the leading (Rom. 8:1-14) each