Meat Polygynous culture is already here -- a perverse one.

[PeteR]

I would like to take a tangent tack on this topic of going back to Hubby #1 when #2 doesnt work out. Can we generally assume that those not calling themselves Yahweh followers had no such law and any relationship or marriage was legit? Secondly(and more to my real question), what is or could be the societal ramification of genetic strings i.e. woman with children from #1, then #2, then more from #1?
I like to understand the "why's" behind God rules. I will still obey our Father but it is nice to know the reasons.

Certainly, a major factor in Yah's instruction seems to be genetic clarity, I.e., no mixing seed or descendants of questionable parentage.

 

[NationBuilder1]

If sex= one flesh and one flesh= marriage, how does the woman not get stoned for becoming one flesh with two men in Deuteronomy 24?

Brother, @PeteR brought up a similar question.

Please keep in mind that the thesis of Deut 24:1-4 is not to give a woman permission to hook up with somebody else but to settle a question about whether a man should take a woman back after she has been defiled (because of adultery) by somebody else. To suggest otherwise is akin to suggesting that Kepha's vision (per Acts 10) was to help Kepha to see, not that he should preach to a gentile named Cornelius, but that he should have a pork BBQ for Cornelius, too. The thesis, the main point of the narrative should get priority. To read more into the story is, frankly, irresponsible.

Consider: how would due process of law happen practically if a woman left her husband, traveled to another country, and hooked up with a man there? Could the long arm of the Law reach into a foreign land and exact justice there? Perhaps, but perhaps not.

Consider also: if a woman is sent away from her husband (or leaves her husband) and hooks up with somebody else, if she has a certificate of divorce in her hand (to prove she can manage her own business affairs per Numbers 30:9), what is still required to bring her up on charges? Somebody would have to have sufficient concern to accuse her and somebody else, a second witness, would also have to have sufficient concern to bear such witness. Would such people exist? If the previous husband is happy with the arrangement, and the woman is happy hooking up with a new dude, and the new dude is happy with sloppy seconds, then who cares? Yah cares -- but apparently too few are overly concerned with His opinion on the matter, especially when it means upsetting and stoning people.

The abiding principle that overrides all other concern -- or should -- is regarding the sanctity of the institution of marriage as our Creator instituted it. The two become one flesh, and no man can undo this. Only death ends marriage.

Therefore, @PeteR, I am resolute on this. She, having left her husband even with a certificate of divorce, is defiled because she is guilty of adultery if she hooks up with another man. The adulterer and the adulteress are put to death upon due process of law. That's the way I read it.

As a result, Tim has utter disrespect for adulterers and adulteresses.

 

[Mark C]

Please keep in mind that the thesis of Deut 24:1-4 is not to give a woman permission to hook up with somebody else but to settle a question about whether a man should take a woman back after she has been defiled (because of adultery) by somebody else. (Emphasis added)

Still editing Yah to fit you own thesis, obviously.

He didn't say WHY. You assume, even mandate, for Him.

Yah said, Oh-so-clearly, she MAY BECOME "another man's." You contradict Him. And even declare what He allows a "hook up". Shame.

And, obviously, since He didn't specify a death penalty either for her, or her subsequent husband, you presume a whole HELL of a lot there, too. Like labeling something "adultery" which He did not.

This thread has demonstrated that, at least to some, facts don't matter. Worse still, and this is what should rankle those who care about Truth - NEITHER DOES His WORD.

Therefore, @PeteR, I am resolute on this.

I respond here, again, not in any misguided quixotic quest to convince you to love the Truth, or even accept the obvious. But instead to arm those who have been so harmed by such lies with it. This "doctrine of demons" and "forbidding to marry" is just plain Evil. Do as you like, and clearly intend. But spare others the lies.


PS> I respond with similar vehemence to those who try to kill the innocent and the gullible via lethal vaxx injections, too. Truth matters, and it really is a matter of life and death.

 

[steve]

To read more into the story is, frankly, irresponsible.

You really should have taken your excellent advice.