Topanga wrote:Can you please state some of the other examples you refer to.
Sure. As I said though, there are no direct prohibitions--just a general mindset:
1. All of the Song of Songs. There's a lot of debate about this book, with some seeing it as a unified love story about two women and some seeing it as a collection of love poems about different women and still others arguing that it is a collection of poems about the same woman. See, for instance,
Tom Constable's commentary on the book, pages 1 and 4.
2. Prov 5:18-19: "May your fountain be blessed, and may you rejoice in the wife of your youth. A loving doe, a graceful deer—may her breasts satisfy you always, may you ever be intoxicated with her love." Obviously not a prohibition against polygamy, but definitely an exhortation to love your first wife. Solomon (of all people) is clearly saying the ideal is to be satisfied with your first wife and not to look for love elsewhere.
3. Gen 16: While Abraham doesn't marry Hagar, he does take her essentially as a concubine. There should be no question that his particular action there was regarded as a lack of faith in God's ability to fulfill His promises through his first wife, and there obviously were frustrating consequences that came with his decision.
4. Obviously, Solomon is a great example of a serious problem with many wives. Granted, his case may be extreme, but all the same, extreme error leads to extreme consequences (the loss of the Kingdom).
5. Judges 8:30‑31: "And Gideon had seventy sons which he fathered: for he had many wives. And his concubine that lived in Shechem also bare him a son, whom he called Abimelech." Now, the Gideon story doesn't turn out well, so we have another example of difficulties resulting from the practice. But still, this verse is especially interesting to me, because a little noted fact is that Judges is so structured that each judge is progressively worse than the previous. As such, the decline of the quality of judges mirrors the decline of the faithfulness of Israel. That has ramifications for how we understand the book. Gideon's request, for instance, for the sign is not seen as a good thing but rather an example of a degree of fear and faithlessness later exemplified more strongly in men like Jephthah and Samson. In light of this, it is especially interesting that there is a decline in the family structure of the judges, from Caleb all the way to Samson. Gideon's polygamy, then, is presented in Judges as an example of national decline--it is not a good thing, but rather something ideally avoided. For more on this perspective (with reference to Jephthah's vow, but detailing this article, see a paper I wrote on the subject
here).
6. Amos 3:2: "You only have I known of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities." I take it that you know that God and Israel are often portrayed in husband/wife terms. This verse is the same. "To know" has sexual connotations. If God only has one wife, why should men have many?
This might be a good page for you to check out. It has some other examples as well:
http://www.inplainsite.org/html/polygam ... ml#Poly-10. This seems to be a good blog post on it, too:
http://matthiasmedia.com/briefing/2012/ ... rdid-tale/
What really baffles me about David is several things. First , his Psalms always state that he meditates on the law day and night , so if it was forbidden , how'd he mis it?
He's constantly described as a man after [G] own heart, so again , he missed it???
Easy. He still had a sin nature. People tend not to see what they don't want to, and what they want to, they tend to. In fact, imagine that he had not been polygamous. Do you think his sons would have been, or at least as much as he was? I mean, where do you think Solomon got the idea it was okay in the first place? So David's polygamy, while not causing, actually set the stage for the division of Israel after Solomon died.
In Nathan's prophecy there was a pretty specific statement ...
"I gave you your master's wives into your arm"
Seems to condom it to me
Saul is never pictured as a particularly good man. Just the opposite, in fact. And, in fact, David inherited ALL of Saul's kingly benefits. But that would include the many horses and much gold, etc., all of which violates Deut 17. So what gives? Is God breaking His own command? Simply, no. When God took the kingdom from Saul, He gave everything Saul had to David. That would include the women, and Nathan raises the point here because it is directly related to his sin with Bathsheba.
In short, God isn't condoning David's polygamy. He's noting that, even in David's polygamous context, his sin with Bathsheba is still terrible, and, in fact, his polygamous context made that sin ALL THE WORSE.
Nathan confronted David on other sin, why not say hey! Your sinning Dude! Stop taking on new wives once a month.! Read Deut 17:17 while your meditating on His word day and night.
I understand what you are saying about the difference between the bible recording a historical event but not necessarily condoning it, but Nathan's confrontation falls short of condemning it , if it was sin, in my Humble , much to learn, opinion.
Do you expect the Bible to confront every sin individually? That's not how stories work. The reader is expected to be smart enough to see where certain things are just wrong. One of the pages I linked above (I think the second one) has a thing or two to say about that.
And as far as the trouble David got himself into, that seemed to be a result of the Adultery and Murder , when he's on the run for his life from his son
Sure, David had some family problems, but 1 wife can do the same,
Job had 1 wife, look at the mess she almost got him in with her advise " Job , why don't you curse ... and die"
David had some "Quality" problems.
And it's not always clear to me when an act in the bible was condoned or not. While David was on the run from Saul, he performed some raids on people, and groups of people and he and his men killed them, that's always been unclear to me.
But thus issue of multiple wives ties into a bigger issue for me. Inerrancy , infallibility , and cultural relevance .
And were David not polygamous, the adultery would have never come up. And why did David have to run from Absalom? Look back at the story. Absalom had murdered his brother Amnon for raping his half-sister Tamar. No polygamy, no half-siblings. No half-siblings, a more united family. A more united family, no running from Absalom.
Again, is polygamy the direct cause? No, and I've never said that polygamy is presented as directly causing sin. I've said that it isn't hard to read the OT and find out that the OT presents polygamy in a negative light. As far as how to tell what's condoned and what's just reported, the problem is that you are reading it all wrong. That's not even a question you should be asking. David, Job, even good men like Joseph and Daniel are not presented as good people whose lives we are to emulate. That turns the Bible into little more than a moral guidebook. In all of those stories, the hero always is only God. The goal is to understand HIS actions. And what you find is that He is constantly saving sinful men, and that in spite of themselves.
That's not to say that we should never look at the behavior of Bible characters. We should. But we must understand that their actions are secondary and are important, really, to the extent that they say something about their relationship with God. (Again, I refer you to the Jephthah paper linked above for a practical example of this.)