COMMON LAW AND INFORMAL MARRIAGES IN LIGHT OF THE WORD

COMMON LAW AND INFORMAL MARRIAGES IN LIGHT OF THE WORD

COPYRIGHT � JANUARY 14, 1995 All rights reserved.
Copyright � 01/14/'95; 01/12/�96 (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 find Select All (under File) and change it to Geneva 10, Helvetica 12 or Palatino 12 . That will smooth out the paragraphs and lines, giving you a much more readable file.

By Lee Tyler P.O. Box 620763, SanDiego, CA 92162-0763
(ruth #1 lee #2) = [email protected] [email protected]

For more information/material, please request it from the above or
get the older/smaller file with your ftp tool from
FTP: gopher.etext.org
name: ftp
password: your email address
location: pub/Politics/Essays
title: divorce.remarriage.concubines.jesus

What makes a wedding &/or a marriage?
From many passages in the Bible (including Ezekiel 16:8, Exodus chapters 19 & 20, and Malachi 2:14,15) it appears clear to me that marriage of a couple is based on their covenant/solemn agreement to be husband and wife to each other in a relationship of marital/ sexual intimacy, - - whether or not they do it legally or officially. Adam and Eve had no formal or official wedding and exchanged no formal vows but they accepted each other as husband and wife and lived accordingly. There is no wedding formula in the Bible and there is no wedding ceremony prescribed in the Bible.

When you study how they married in the Old Testament you see that the
basis was either their covenant to be husband and wife to each other, or they accepted their parents� covenant for them to be married. The strongest statement I know of is the one in Matthew 1:18,19,20 where, based on their covenant/betrothal (v.18), the Holy Spirit callED Joseph her husband (v.19) and the angel called Mary his wife (v.20) before (Luke 1:26,34) their official wedding and cohabitation (v.24). God and His messengers call Mary and Joseph wife and husband before their wedding and solely on the basis of their covenants to be husband and wife to each other. This agrees with the great weight God gives our solemn word in such passages as DBY PSALM 15: Jehovah, who shall sojourn in thy tent? . . . 2 He that walketh uprightly, . . .who, if he have sworn to his own hurt, changeth it not; . . .
YLT ECCLES 5:4 � When thou vowest a vow to God, delay not to complete it, for there is no pleasure in fools; that which thou vowest--complete. 5 Better that thou do not vow, than that thou dost vow and dost not complete. 6 Suffer not thy mouth to cause thy flesh to sin, nor say before the messenger, that `it [is] an error,' why is God wroth because of thy voice, and hath destroyed the work of thy hands?

All of this is to say that if you and your mate have agreed seriously
to be faithful to each other in and for marital/sexual intimacy as husband and wife, then I believe that makes you husband and wife. Even if you haven�t used the magic words �husband, wife, marriage�, if you two have agreed to be faithful marital/sexual partners to each other, to me that�s the same thing as Ezekiel 16:14 where God shows that marriage is by covenant. In Malachi 2 God shows again that a woman becomes a wife by covenant, and to break that covenant is to deal treacherously with you mate. Sexual intimacy>m with anyone else besides your mate is fornication, sexual sin. If you are maritally committed to each other and then you yourself --- but not your mate----- genuinely received Jesus Christ as your Lord and Ruler to be obeyed and as Savior to deliver you from the penalty of your sins- - but your guy hasn't, then I believe you find yourself in the situation described in 1 Corinthians 7:12,13,14,15, the saved mate of an unsaved person.
[>.m see footnotes on breast pressing, petting,caressing and/or genital contact (Ezekiel 23:3,8,21; Prov. 5.)]

CIVIL LAW, PERSONAL LIBERTY AND A LOVING CONSCIENCE!

Surely Romans 13 and related passages apply. And certainly the principles of Romans 14 and l Cor 8 & 10 apply. The following is a brief summary of those principles:
1. Receive the weak in faith (their faith allows them very little personal liberty) but not to dispute doubtful things/points>61 . Doubtful things are things that the Bible is not explicitly clear about leaving a gray area for individuals to exercise their own judgment (e.g. eating meat vs. vegetarianism, length of dress, courtship and engagement, television, movies, computer use etc.)
2. Don't despise or condemn your brother/sister in Christ if (1) they feel free to do doubtful things or (2) they don't feel free to do doubtful things>62
3. Don't put a stumbling block, an occasion to take offense, put an obstacle in the way>82 , give someone an opportunity for sinning>63
4. Don't make your brethren uneasy>83 or hurt, injure or damage others' feelings>84.
5. Don't destroy your brethren's faith with your personal liberty>64
6. Let not the personal liberty your faith allows be evil spoken of>65
7. Do that which builds and helps the faith of your brethren>66 .
8. Don't put a temptation to sin in someone's way>.85 , or do that which leads another to sin>.86 .
9. Have your faith from the Word that allows you your personal liberty privately, discretely and personally before God and be happy in it>67
10. Don't do anything you have doubts about, doubts about whether or not it is God's will for you to do, be or have)>68
11. If your faith is strong allowing you a great deal of personal liberty, you should bear the weaknesses of those whose faith allows little personal liberty, not pleasing ourselves. Seek to please your brethren for their good, growth and development in the Lord and Word>69 .
[Footnote: [>61 (Rm.14:1) >62 . (Rm. 14:3,4) >.82 Please see Arndt & Gingrich's Lexicon. >83 Please see Thayer's Lexicon. >63 . (Rm. 14:13). >.84 Please see Arndt & Gingrich's Lexicon. >64 . (Rm 14:15). >65 (Rm. 14:16,17). >66 (Rm. 14:18,19). >.85 (Rm. 14:13)Please see Arndt & Gingrich's Lexicon. >.86 Please see Thayer's Lexicon. >67 (Rm.14:22). >68 . (Rm. 14:23). >69 . (Rm. 15:1-3)]

But how do these principles apply? Obviously polygyny or concubinage is a felony to officially marry (by man's laws) more than one woman in terms of the government's law, public records, inheritance laws and divorce laws in most Western or industrial nations. Obviously it is socially acceptable, legal and not a felony in most Asian nations, the Mid East, Africa and Indian tribes in the Americas. That is as clear as black and white. But there is a great big
gray area. Many Western states recognize informal marriage (concubinage) as common law marriages but as soon as they become official they come under the monogamy laws. But they can live for years in the morally acceptable informal and unofficial common law status without any illegality.

Under Administrative Law in California, County Welfare officials set up semi-official marriages with people who live together without being married where one or both parties could still be legally married to others. Administrative Welfare law recognizes them as a semi-married couple and will grant them AFDC aid and even help them get divorces so they can eventually marry IF THEY WISH. With the state's approval they live together as a family sometimes for years, but they have no IRS rights, or inheritance rights or marital tax status from the state as a married couple. It is legal and approved of by state law.

California's courts have also established palimony rights where they protect the covenant/contractual rights of people living in unofficial marriage or concubinage. While they have no official tax status or inheritance rights the courts have established that a marital relationship and the members of that relationship have protection under the law in terms of their covenants, contracts, vows, espousal or betrothal. The courts have awarded "palimony", property and child custody rights in and from these relationships. The new no-discrimination-against-one's-sexual-orientation laws protect those who practice informal contractual polygyny or concubinage.

Since God prescribes no "wedding ceremony", ritual, vows or rite>87 to make two people married, leaving it to the local churches to have their own redeemed local and indigenous marital customs>88 . The vows, covenants, betrothals and prenuptial contracts seem to be covered by God's standards in the following:
[Footnote: >87 See appendix #4 . >.88 See appendix #4 .]
MKJV EZEKIEL 16: 3 �And say, So says the Lord Jehovah to Jerusalem, . . . 8 And I passed by you and looked on you, and, behold, your time [was] the time of love. And I spread my skirt over you and covered your nakedness. And I swore to you and entered into a covenant with you, says the Lord Jehovah. And you became Mine.�
MKJV MALACHI 2:14 �Yet you say, Why? Because the LORD has been witness between you and the wife of your youth, against whom you have dealt treacherously; yet she [is] your companion and your covenant wife. 15 And did He not make [you] one? Yet the vestige of the Spirit [is in] him. And what [of] the one? He was seeking a godly seed. Then guard your spirit, and do not act treacherously with the wife of your youth. 16 The LORD, the God of Israel, says He hates sending away; and to cover [with] violence on his garment, says the LORD of hosts. Then guard your spirit, and do not act treacherously.� Here "act treacherously" means " break covenant" or "fail to honor your covenant/commitment".
MKJV ECCLES. 5:4 �� When you vow a vow to God, do not wait to pay it. For He has no pleasure in fools. Pay that which you have vowed. 5 [it is] better that you should not vow, than that you should vow and not pay. 6 Do not allow your mouth to cause your flesh to sin; do not say before the angel that it [was] an error. Why should God be angry at your voice and destroy the work of your hands? �
MKJV PSALM 15:1 � �A Psalm of David. LORD, who shall dwell in Your tabernacle? . . . 2 He who walks uprightly, and works righteousness, and speaks the truth in his heart; . . . [he] has sworn to his hurt, and does not change it; 5. . . He who does these [things] shall not be moved forever.�
MKJV ROMANS 1:28 �And even as they did not think fit to have God in [their] knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do the things not right, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness . . . 31 . . . covenant-breakers. . . 32 who, knowing the righteous order of God, that those practicing such things are worthy of death, not only do them, but have pleasure in those practicing [them].�

It is the treachery of breaking marital covenants that God condemns in these passages and that which he hates. "Yes, I swore an oath to you and entered into covenant with you, and you became Mine," says the Lord God>70 . We become a part of the bride of Christ in the same way. The Spirit considered Mary and Joseph as husband and wife on the basis of their espousal/betrothal/ covenants even before the wedding and the coming together>71.
[Footnote: >70 (Ezek. 16:8). >71 (Mat. 1:18-25 ;Deut. 22:23-27)]

So why can't two Christians exchange espousal/betrothal covenants and become each other's marital partners without a formal marriage which would be illegal? Of course they can since common law marriages are legally acceptable in most of America�s states and in most of the countries of the world. But should they? We are bound by our covenants and God makes it clear He has no pleasure in the fools who break them >72 . We enter into the gray zone of the liberty we have in Christ>73 that is limited by the cords of Agape love. Yes two Christians could exchange their vows/ covenants without a formal/legal wedding day but if they became involved in intimacy and that intimacy became an offense or stumbling block to another saint it would be sin and could destroy the work of Christ in another or embolden a weak one to be intimate contrary to his/her conscience>74 . So is such intimacy a sin between two Christians who have solemnly and formally covenanted before God that they are maritally one flesh as long as they both live? It is neither illegal nor sinful but it becomes sin if it stumbles, offends, grieves another in Christ> 75 .
[Footnote: >72 (Eccles. 5:5; Psalm 15). >73 (Rom 14). >74 (l Cor. 8 & 10). >75 (Rom. 14; 1 Cor. 8 & 10).]

But what about the command in Romans 14 that states that if you have a solid controversial conviction from the Word, have it to yourself before God? Happy is the one who does not condemn himself in what he approves>76 . But woe to him if he does it with doubts or offense to another in Christ. So it seems to be with post covenant but pre-wedding day intimacy. It seems to be the same case with polygyny / concubinage. Do you practice/believe in
polygyny /concubinage? Have it and do so privately and very discreetly before God. Happy is the one who does not condemn one's self in what he approves in the liberty of Christ. But she who practices/believes in polygyny /concubinage with doubts is condemned if she indulges because she does not practice it out of conviction from the Spirit and the Word. polygyny/concubinage is indeed pure, but it is evil to practice it if it stumble, offends,
grieves or weakens your brethren in Christ>77 .
[Footnote: >76 (Rom 14:22,23). >77 (Rom. 14; 1 Cor. 8 & 10)]

Foreign Christian polygynists visiting Western monogamous societies encounter a special challenge. Spiritual and Godly Christians would be able to handle it well and in the Lord, but the unsaved, the carnal, the Spiritual milk drinkers, the legalists, the ignorant, and those weak of conscience would all have varying problems with a Christian polygynist and his wives visiting their Western/Occidental church>78 . The visiting Christian polygynist should do all within his power to not let his liberty hinder the
effectiveness of his testimony and witness to these people, if they would be willing to receive it.
[Footnote: >78 (1 Cor. 8 & 10; Rom. 14 & 15)]

Hopefully mercy and compassion would move the Christian polygynist to not flaunt his polygyny in the face of such "Christians" even though they are so unlike Christ. Mercy would move the polygynist to not lay a heavier burden on the weak than they can bear, not wanting their liberty to cause their weak brethren to fall into sin. Compassion would move the polygynists to be sensitive to the weakness and doubts of the weak saints. Obviously the
polygynist would not be an official leader in the church and would not be visiting local churches as a leader/elder/deacon/ bishop/ overseer/etc.>79 . Ideally the local saints would be bearing the fruits of the Spirit and receive such foreign visitors with mercy and compassion. If they agreed and were able>80 for a short while to be separated, the polygynist could visit the Western church bringing one or none of his wives so as to reduce the controversy. The same would be true of a polygynist wife visiting the West without her husband, under the rule of 1 Cor. 7:4,5.
[Footnote: >79 (1 Tim. 3 and Ti. 1). >80 (1 Cor. 7:5)]
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.�

FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES, THERE IS LITTLE OR NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A COMMON LAW WIFE AND A CONCUBINE.

-- 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.41b and not the wedding ceremony41c that makes a woman a wife (Ezek. 16; Malachi 2; Eccles. 5:5-9;Matt. 1:18-20 (where we see Mary and Joseph called husband and wife based on their betrothal/espousal alone and before the actual wedding and cohabitation).

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 . . . . ..

". . . 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.

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 concubine�s 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: Concubine. 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)..........@33
FUNK & WAGNALLS NEW ENCYCLOPEDIA: CONCUBINAGE,....refers 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 even of the marriage of the parents....#34
HASTINGS DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE: The 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.<35. 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./36.
Both David and Abraham recognized all the rights and responsibilities of the concubines as if they were official wives. The bottom line is what does God say and how does He view concubines. When you line up 2 Samuel 12:11 with 2 Samuel 16:21,22; you see God calling and recognizing as "wives" David�s concubines. If that is the way God sees them, only a fool would treat them as less than a wife (Malachi 2).

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 �So 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.�
MKJV 2 Sam 16: 21 �And 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.�
MKJV2Sam.20:3 �And 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.�

In these passages you see God calling and recognizing as "wives" David�s 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.

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)]

What about the Levite�s? 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 � �And 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, . .�

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".

RELATED THOUGHTS AND ISSUES FROM THE PARENT FILE

Since the harlot is one flesh with every fornicator she has sexual union with and the husband is one flesh with his wife, the �one flesh� principle is not unique to marriage and cannot be an argument for monogamy or against polygyny . The �one flesh� principle is physical reality that describes only the result of sexual union, whether it involve a harlot, a fornicator, a married couple or a polygamous marriage. David, Israel and Abraham were �one flesh� with each of their wives, just as the adulteress of Prov. 6 & 7 was one flesh with each of her adulterers. Under the Law by Moses, being �one flesh� could have been the basis for marriage>11 but not so for us after the Sinai Law of Moses was declared voided in Eph. 2 and Col. 2, especially in the case of 1 Cor. 7:9; 1 Tm. 5:11-14. If we do not control ourselves today, we are commanded to marry>12 , but who to marry is not specified, only that your mate be saved>13 and godly>14.
[Footnotes: >11 (Deut. 22:22-30; Ex. 22:16,17). >12 1 Cor. 7:9,36; 1 Tim 5:14; Appendix Six of this document. >13. 2 Corinthians 6. .>14 1 Corinthians 5:9-11; 2 Thess. 3:6-14]

The woman's repentance option explains the �double standard� and apparent inequity of 1 Corinthians 7:10,11 where it appears that the woman who has left her husband has the repentance option of remaining single but the man must never leave his wife. If a wife left her husband according to 1 Cor. 7:11, he would immediately be put in the hazardous position of 1 Corinth 7:1-5, being tempted to sin because his wife will not give him the marital sexual outlet since she is gone. It seemed to me to be quite unfair that she could leave him and live unmarried, and he, knowing he is still bound to her for life, has to struggle with the burning temptations predicted in 1 Corinth. 7:1-5, 9 with no legitimate sexual outlet.

Then I realized that 1 Corinth. 7:1-5 predicted his need of marital intimacy, how Satan would use the wife's absence to tempt him, how marital intimacy is the prescription to avoid Satan's temptations, and then the command in verse 9 plainly commands the one to marry who is failing to have successful self-control>100 . Then I realized that the polygyny option balanced the equation. The wife could leave her husband and remain single and the husband who was still bound to such a departed wife seems to have had a Biblical option of polygyny / concubinage, (depending on the laws of his land) if he found himself tempted and burning as in 1 Cor. 7:5, 9,12. She could leave and he could remarry becoming a polygamist and the inequity was gone. She could separate and remain single, and he could remarry as long as he recognized that he was still bound to his separated wife.
[Footnote: >100 See Appendix Six.]

So the divorce is only a legal recognition of the wife's departure and
unwillingness to be reconciled, while he still publicly recognizes the binding nature of their relationship. Then he remarries another Christian because his burning and his 1 Cor. 7:5 predicted failures to control himself bring him under the command to marry in l Cor. 7:9,36 (NIV & Amplified "they should marry"),
1 Cor. 7:36 (NIV "They should get married);
1 Tim 5:14 (NIV "So I counsel younger widows to marry.."
Amplified "So I would have younger [widows] marry..") and
1 Thess 4:3-8 (NIV "that each of you should learn to control his own body in a way that is holy and honorable . . ..") >101
[Footnote>101 Please see Appendix Six; NIV , NEW INTERNA-TIONAL VERSION. ]

Seeing her brother-husband in need, she shuts up her feelings of
compassion>88 . But in the meantime she has killed his affections for her
by her words and deeds and his affection goes unanchored now. She refuses to welcome his affectionate and intimate touch in disobedience to the Word>89 . As predicted, Theo is being sexually tempted by Satan and Theo finds himself burning and sometimes failing >90 to control himself when exposed to things like pornography. Tempted, burning and sometimes failing to control himself, Theo finds himself under the command to marry (be having his own wife)>n89. Safronia refuses to help him meet his needs, and he can't divorce her because she claims to be saved >91 . Since she cares not for affection with him, he might exercise his liberty to have a concubine in the manner of Romans 14. If his faith allows him to have a concubine but having a concubine would grieve, offend and/or stumble someone, perhaps even his Arctic wife, then wouldn't he have to exercise his faith's personal liberty by having his concubine privately and discretely between himself, her and God so as not to let his liberty offend the Body of Christ.
[Footnote: >88 (1 John 3:14-18). >89 (1 Cor. 7:2,3,4,5). >90 (1 Cor. 7:9, see Appendix 6). >.n89 See Appendix Six. >91 (1 Cor.7:10,11,39; Mark 10:1-12).]

He could be moved by her plight and pray for an unencumbered husband for her. But if God doesn�t provide another and the sister is burning, having great trouble with and almost succumbing to temptations, his continued prayer alone would be empty piety like in the following:
MKJV JAMES 2: 14 � �My brothers, what profit [is it] if a man says he has
faith and does not have works? Can faith save him?15 If a brother or sister is
naked and destitute of daily food, 16 and if one of you says to them, Go in
peace, be warmed and filled, but you do not give them those things which are
needful to the body, what good [is it]? 17 Even so, if it does not have works,
faith is dead, being by itself.�

He would seem to be compelled to intervene, offering himself in marriage to her as he desires anyway, to enable her to obey God�s solution for her problem>101 . This could even be the case if his chastely separated and divorced "Christian"� wife was carnal and too selfish/rebellious to be moved by her plight and 1 John 3:17 to approve of her divorced Christian man�s plan to marry her. You don�t let the saint who seeks God�s solution be destroyed because of a carnal saint who resists or refuses compassion and God�s solutions.
[Footnote: >101 (1 Cor. 7:1,2,3,9; see Appendix Six).]

Why would a Western/Occidental woman ever consider polygyny
/concubinage? It is clearly a sin to marry an unsaved person> 104 . She
knows she must not marry an unsaved man>105 or a snared-in-sin "saint">106. If a Christian woman in a Western church finds the usual shortage of godly brothers, yet earnestly desires marriage or is commanded to marry>91 she may consider marrying a Christian brother (1) whose �Christian� wife has divorced him exercising her option>107 to be separate and chaste, or (2) who sinfully divorced his �Christian� wife who now will not forgive him or be reconciled to him, exercising her option to be separate and chaste.
[Footnote: >104 (2 Cor. 6 & 7 etc.). >105 (2 Cor. 6:14-7:2). >106 See Appendix five. >91 See Appendix Six. >107 1 Cor 7:10.]

If this Western Christian sister is burning with passion and not successfully
controlling her passions and/or imagination consistently, she must marry>92. If she finds herself in repeated defeat morally and spiritually and the only Christian brother who is available or interested is the one who is legally divorced from a Christian wife who wants chaste separation without
reconciliation, the choice to marry in Biblical polygyny would be more
acceptable than continued burning and moral defeats. It is clearly a sin to
marry an unsaved>#5 or backslidden Christian>108 . It is not a sin to
exercise personal liberty in Christ in covenanted polygyny .Yes, the polygyny
of being married to a divorced Christian man who is bound for life to his
former wife who left/ divorced him and refuses to be reconciled to him,
exercising her option of chaste separation.
[Footnote: >92See Appendix Six. >#5 See Appendix #5. >108 (l Cor. 5:11; 2 Thess 3:6,14).]

XXIII. BIBLIOGRAPHY

>1. A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of The Christian
Church, Vol. IV; edited by Philip Schaff (D.d., LL.D.); W.B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., Grand Rapids Mich; 1956
>2. A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of The Christian
Church, Vol. V; edited by Philip Schaff (D.d., LL.D.); ; W.B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., Grand Rapids Mich; 1956; p. 267
>3. A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of The Christian
Church, Vol. VIII; edited by Philip Schaff (D.d., LL.D.) and Henry Wace (D.D.) ; W.B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids Mich; 1956
>4. A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of The Christian
Church, Vol. XIV; edited by Philip Schaff (D.D., LL.D.) and Henry Wace (D.D.) ; W.B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids Mich; 1956
>5. Amplified Bible, The; 1965, Zondervan Publishing House
>6. ANALYTICAL GREEK LEXICON, THE: Harper & Brothers, New York
>7. Arndt & Gingrich: A GREEK-ENGLISH LEXICON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT and Other Early Christian Literature ; By W.F.Arndt & F. W. Gingrich; The Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago, Ill.; Cambridge at the Univ. Press.; 1957
>8. ASV: The Holy Bible, American Standard Version 1901 & 1929; Thomas
Nelson & Sons, New York
>9. Gold Cord, by Amy Carmichael, Christian Literature Crusade, Fort Worthington, Penna.; London's Society for the Promotion of Christian Knowledge, Holy Trinity Church, Marylebone Rd., N.W. (N.Y. The Macmillan Company).
>10. CUSTOMS AND CULTURES, Anthropology for Christian Missions, by Eugene A. Nida1954, Harper & Brothers, New York
>11. Darby's 1890 translation: Most of the scriptures quoted in this work, if
not otherwise indicated, are from the a modernized version of J. N. Darby's
translation, the OnLine Bible computer program of "Online Bible f ", Ken
Hammil 1-908-741-4298; [E-Mail: [email protected]].
>12. DIVORCE, John Murray, Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co. \
>13. G. Duty's book on divorce and remarriage , Downers Grove, Ill.
>14. HASTING'S DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE; 1989, Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., Peabody, Mass;, Editor James Hastings, DD.,
>15. I LOVED A GIRL; Walter Trobisch, Inter-Varsity Press, Downers Grove, Ill.
>16. INTERNATIONAL BIBLE COMMENTARY, THE; Editor, F.F.Bruce; 1979; Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids Michigan.
>17. Jay Adam's� book on divorce and remarriage
>18. JEWISH: The Holy Scriptures according to the Masoretic Text, 1955, The Jewish Publication Society.
>19. KINSHIP & MARRIAGE, Robin Fox, 1967, Penguin Books, Inc., USA & England
>20. LAMSA: The Holy Bible from Ancient Eastern Manuscripts, 1940, Holman Co., by G. Lamsa.
>21. MARRIAGE EAST AND WEST; David & Vera Mace, 1960, Dolphin Books, Double Day & Co., Inc. Garden City, NY
>22.MARRYING AGAIN; David Hocking, 1977, Fleming H. Revell Co.
>23. MKJV: MODERN KING JAMES VERSION, 1993, by Jay P. Green Sr., in Online Bible 2.5.1; the OnLine Bible computer program of "Online Bible f ", Ken Hammil 1- 908-741-4298; [E-Mail: [email protected]].
>24. MY WIFE MADE ME A POLYGAMIST; Walter Trobisch, 1971, Inter-Varsity Press,
>25. NASB: Holy Bible New American Standard; Broadman & Holman Publishers, Nashville Tenn.; The Lockman Foundation, 1977
>26. NEB: NEW ENGLISH BIBLE, 1970; Oxford/Cambridge University Press
>27. NEW BIBLE DICTIONARY, THE; Editor J.D.Douglas Ph.D; 1962; W. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, Mich.
>28. NEW TESTAMENT GREEK FOR BEGINNERS, By, J. Gresham Machen, D.D, Litt. D.,1959
>29. NIV: "Scripture taken from the HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION. Copyright @ 1973, 1978, 1984 International Bible Society." Used as required by Zondervan Bible Publishers.
>30. NKJV: New King James Version, 1984, Thomas Nelson, Inc.
>31. OnLine Bible computer program of "Online Bible f ", Ken Hammil 1-908-741-4298; [E-Mail: [email protected]].
>32. PLEASE HELP ME! PLEASE LOVE ME!; Walter Trobisch, Inter-Varsity Press,
>33. St. Augustin: On The Trinity; translated by Arthur West Haddan, B.D.; W.B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids Mich; 1956
>34. Strong�s Lexicon, Open Bible "Online Bible f", Ken Hammil 1-908-741-
4298. Also Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Mich.
>35. Thayer: Greek English Lexicon of the New Testament; Joseph Henry Thayer, D.D.; American Book Co., New York, 1889
>36. The Septuagint of the Old Testament and Apocrypha With an English
Translation; Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, Michigan; 1972;
Samuel Bagster & Sons, Ltd. London
>37. WOMEN'S LIVES IN MEDIEVAL EUROPE - A SOURCEBOOK; Edited by Emile Amt; Routledge, Chapman, Hall; NY, NY; 1993
>38. Wuest's THE NEW TESTAMENT, An Expanded Translation, Kenneth S. Wuest, 1961
>39. YLT; Young's Literal Translation, 1898: OnLine Bible computer program of "Online Bible f ", Ken Hammil 1-908-741-4298; [E-Mail: [email protected]].

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/�96 (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 Geneva or 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 >�s and some >�s where r�s should be. Didn�t get to proof that far yet. Please be patient.

By L. Tyler P.O. Box 620763, SanDiego, CA 92162-0763
[email protected] [email protected]

TABLE OF CONTENTS (These page numbers are correct with Palatino 14 ,left and right margins of 1.25"each, and top and bottom margins at 1" each.)
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! ISN�T 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

41b See appendix #4
41c See appendix #4
@33 1962, IVCF, Editor J.D.Douglas; W. B. Eerdmans Publishing
#34 1986, Funk & Wagnalls
<35. HASTINGS DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE; 1989, Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., Peabody, Mass;, Editor James Hastings, DD, p.259
/36. 1989, HASTINGS DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE; Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., Peabody, Mass;, Editor James Hastings, DD; p.585