Torah or not Torah Regarding Polygyny?

By Chris Schaefer © 2008
Recently, polygamy has been in the spotlight with the illegal governmental raid
on the FLDS compound, and with the HBO series Big Love. Several Messianic
groups have come out with positions against the practice of polygamy. And so
this brings the following questions. What is the right position to take on this
issue? How should Natzarim Yisraelites view this topic? Perhaps this is heart of
the matter: Does any writer of scripture have any authority to override Torah?
More specifically, does Rav Shaul have any power to override Torah? Did Rav
Shaul even have any intention to override Torah? Let’s take a look at what
Scripture says. (Unless otherwise notified, all Scripture quotes are from
abridged 3rd Ed. RSTNE including notes; but all emphasis are mine).
Ivrim/Hebrews 7:12, 18
12 For the priesthood being transferred, there is made of
necessity an adjustment also in the Torah.


The Torah was not done away with, but adjusted, or
slightly altered, to accommodate a better, more
complete priesthood and sacrifice. Strong’s Greek
3346 metatithaymee means “moved from one place to
another, not eliminated.” So the priesthood was
shifted, not eliminated. Shifted from Aaron to Melech‐
Tzadik and from Leviticus to Genesis, still within the
Torah itself.
So here it sounds like everything in the Torah is still standing, including the
priesthood, shifted to its fullness.
18 For there is truly a setting‐aside of the former
command, because of its weakness and
unprofitableness.

Not a setting‐aside of the entire Torah, but only the
transfer of the priesthood from one tribe to another,
and of the forsaking of the old priestly order to
establish the new. This is not a replacement of Torah
by the Renewed Covenant, rather, one priesthood is
established instead of the other by transfer within the
nation of Yisrael itself.
It is unmistakable. The correct method is to assume that Rav Shaul is upholding
Torah rather than overriding Torah—a protocol that we should all agree on.
In the following passages, this general pattern will unfold: Rav Shaul does not
override any of Torah, but is in complete agreement with it—this can be clearly
seen with “controversial” issues such as Shabbat, kashrut, brit milah
(controversial as in when it’s the “church” vs. Natzarim Yisrael)
Romiyah/Romans 14:5‐112
5 One man esteems one day above another: another
esteems every day alike. Let every man be fully
persuaded in his own mind.
6 He that regards the day of eating, regards it to YHWH; and
he that regards not the day, to YHWH he does not regard it.
He that eats, eats to YHWH, for he gives thanks; and he that
eats not, before YHWH he eats not, and neither gives YHWH
thanks.
7 For no Yisraelite man lives for himself, and no Yisraelite
man dies for himself.
8 For whether we live, we live for YHWH; and whether we
die, we die for YHWH: whether we live, or whether we die,
we belong to and for YHWH.
9 For this purpose Moshiach both died, and rose, and was
revived, so that He might be the Master YHWH both of the
dead and the living.
10 But why do you judge your Yisraelite brother? Or,
why do you despise your Yisraelite brother over these
secondary issues? For we shall all stand before the judgment
seat of our Moshiach.
11 For it is written, As I live, says the Master YHWH, every
knee shall bow to Me, and every tongue shall confess to
the Master YHWH.
12 So then each one of us shall give an account of himself
to YHWH.

The word “eat” is used six times in these verses. The
issue obviously is food. Some eat meat, some don’t
and the same goes for vegetables. Some eat meat on
Thursday some eat meat only on Monday. Some fast
every morning, some fast only one morning a week.
We are not to make issues out of things that YHWH
says are gray areas, such as what days we fast, or eat
certain clean foods. In a case of a gray area, do not
criticize a new brother, or a weak brother, in the ways
of Yisrael. This applies only to gray areas that remain
unaddressed by detail in Scripture. Therefore verse 5
does not talk about Shabbat at all, or “pick your own
Shabbat,” or your own favorite day for your own
worship, simply because first the topic is eating
habits, and secondly because Shabbat is not a gray
area. The Spirit would never tell mankind to pick their
own day in direct violation of His word.
The whole thrust is that Rav Shaul couldn’t possibly be suggesting the undoing
of Shabbat, for that would be in violation of Torah. If the Torah states what
should be done for a given situation, there is no valid discrepancy.
Romiyah/Romans 14:23
23 And he that doubts and eats violates his own faith,
because he eats not with faith: for whatever is not of
faith is sin.
Meaning we better get our Yisraelite values from a full
trust in Torah and the faith of Messiah, and not man, or
man’s emotions, or dogmas.
Remember the above note emphasis for later.
Galutyah/Galatians 5:6
6 For in YAHUSHUA ha Moshiach neither brit milah is
anything, nor akrobustia; but faith which works by
love.
2 This holds true eternally. First, that circumcision is
an act of love to seal one’s faith, not to establish it,
and neither the Jews, the circumcised, nor the
akrobustia the “tossed‐away foreskinned ones” have
any ranking, or special standing over the other. Neither
house of Yisrael should see circumcision, or lack
thereof as a means of a spiritual rank over and above
the other, but as something that the individual in
YHWH’s decent order must do on his own.
Circumcision avails nothing in the sense that if
abused, it establishes one part of Yisrael as master
and the other as slaves. So it avails nothing in terms of
restoring equality in Yisra'el, yet it is a mandate to the
individual in his personal walk with YHWH. Messiah
came to free both houses, and establish equality, not a
new system of “works of law,” or ranking, based on an
immediate response to mandated corporate physical
circumcision, rather than personal physical
circumcision.
The above notes agree with the whole text, that the practice of circumcision in
Torah still stands. Notice that no fear whatsoever is expressed regarding those
who might disagree with the note. Good. That is the kind of courage needed
when standing up for the truth.
Galutyah/Galatians 6:12
12 Those who desire to make a nice show of your flesh,
they compel you to be circumcised; in order to avoid
suffering persecution for the execution stake of
Moshiach.

Preaching circumcision without Messiah, or as a
precondition for Messiah's acceptance of the
individual, is all about parading foreskins in a numbers
game, or show, even as modern‐day denominations fill
out commitment cards of those who profess a desire
for baptism, to make a nice show of big numbers.
Sadly, many among them have not had a regeneration
experience. Efrayim uses “decision cards, while Judah
uses “circumcision clubs.” Same wrong motive and
same wrong reasoning. Circumcision is required only
after true salvation and maturity.
The above notes make it clear that Rav Shaul is not negating Torah’s
instruction of circumcision, but rather showing where it is supposed to be in
YHWH’s order of things.

Qorintyah Aleph / 1st Corinthians 11:5
5 But every woman that makes prayers, or prophesies with
her head uncovered dishonors her head: for that is the
same as if she were shaven.


Qorintyah Aleph / 1st Corinthians 11:10
10 For this cause ought the woman to have a symbol of
authority on her head because of the unclean fallen demons.

This is a clear reference back to Genesis 6 where
women who were not under a spiritual authority, or
covering like the one provided for them by Noach, were
molested and had demons that cohabitated with them.
Due to the reality of unclean demons desiring to
physically violate and emotionally scar women
through vaginal entry, women are strongly urged to do
what is proper and not make this a contentious issue
like some who feel this is not important.
Torah is acknowledged as forever standing! So basically throughout all of
Scripture, it is made unmistakably clear that the Torah for the First Covenant is
the same Torah for the Renewed Covenant (with the one exception that the
Levitical priesthood has restored to the Melechtzadikian priesthood of
Yahushua.) I could show more examples from Scripture regarding Moedim,
niddah laws, kashrut laws, etc. But other writers have taken care of that in
depth, so there’s no need to re‐do the same thing that they’ve done. The
general (and correct idea) is: everything is in effect, except that it’s now under
the Melechtzadikian Priesthood of Moshiach.
Mattityahu/Matthew 22:40
40 On these two commandments hang all the Torah and the prophets.

Torah can’t be “done away with,” indeed, Yahushua
says the Torah and the prophets hang on these two big
ones. That is, these two big ones expand into the
details, which are contained in the Torah and the
prophets. They don’t replace the 613 laws, they are the
foundation of those laws.
Again, notice the emphasis. The 613 laws are not replaced, but are
undergirded by the 2 big summarizing ones.
Now, let’s take a look at some laws that Rav Shaul supposedly over‐rode.

Shemoth/Exodus 22:16‐17
16 “And if a man entices a virgin that is not engaged, and
lies with her, he shall surely pay a dowry for her to be his
wife.
17 If her abba utterly refuses to give her to him, he shall
pay money according to the dowry of virgins.”
Devarim/Deuteronomy 22:28‐29
28 If a man finds a damsel that is a virgin, who is not
engaged, and lays hold of her, and lies with her, and they
are found;
29 Then the man that lay with her shall give to the
damsel's abba fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his
wife; because he has humbled her, he may not put her
away all his days.
Qorintyah Aleph/ First Corintians 7:36
36 But if any man thinks that he behaves himself
improperly toward his maiden, if she is past the marriage
age, and his need requires marriage, let him do what he
desires, he sins not: let them marry.

Notice the resemblance of the three passages? Rav Shaul is pretty much
reiterating the content of two Torah passages, except with a pre‐emptive
strategy (to stop fornication before it even starts). So to either remedy
fornication or avoid fornication, the requirement is to marry (if the damsel’s
father is willing)—absolutely nothing at all is said about whether the man was
already married or unmarried!

What about requirements?

Devarim/Deuteronomy 25:5‐10
5 If brothers dwell together, and one of them dies, and has
no child, the wife of the dead shall not marry a ger: her
husband's brother shall go in to her, and take her to
himself as a wife, and perform the duty of a husband's
brother to her.
6 And it shall be, that the firstborn whom she bears shall
succeed in the name of his brother that is dead, that his
name be not put out of Yisrael.
7 And if the man does not like to take his brother's wife,
then let his brother's wife go up to the gate to the
elders of Yisrael, and say, My husband's brother refuses to raise
up to his brother a name in Yisrael, he will not perform
the duty of my husband's brother.
8 Then the elders of his city shall call him, and speak
to him: and if he persists, and says, I desire not to take
her;
9 Then shall his brother's wife come to him in the
presence of the elders, and loose his shoe from off his
foot, and spit in his face, and shall answer and say, So
shall it be done to that man that will not build up his
brother's house.
9
10 And his name shall be called in Yisrael, The house of
him that has his shoe loosed.
9 A warning to those who refuse to work with Messiah
to gather and restore all the brethren from both houses
of Yisrael and refuse to build their brother’s house.
Before jumping to the remez (hint) of the above passage, let’s look at the
pashat (plain teaching). The plain and direct message is a warning to male
Yisraelites who refuse to perform their potentially polygamist marriage duty
within the commonwealth of Yisra'el. Just maybe, might this be one of the 613
laws that still stand? Why would anyone skip over this?
Shemoth/Exodus 21:10‐11
10 If he takes himself another wife; her food, her
garment, and her marital rights, shall he not diminish.
11 And if he does not these three to her, then shall she go
out free without money.
It does not sound here like it is to her advantage to complain. Being a divorced
woman in that day and time, without money, was not a good situation to be in.
(See Malachi 2:14‐15 a couple of paragraphs down.)
Consider what is not spoken against here:
Devarim/Deuteronomy 21:15‐17
15 If a man has two wives, one beloved, and another
hated, and they have born him children, both the beloved
and the hated; and if the firstborn son be hers that was
hated:
16 Then it shall be, when he makes his sons to inherit that
which he has, that he may not give preference to the son
of the beloved wife before the son of the hated, who is
indeed the firstborn :
17 But he shall acknowledge the son of the hated as the
firstborn , by giving him a double portion of all that he has:
for he is the beginning of his strength; the right of the
firstborn is his.
Polygyny itself is not being spoken against in any way. In the above two
passages it is clear that Torah is legislating how things ought to be run in
polygynous households. As for “hated,” I personally think it means: in
comparison to the one that is loved [a lot]. But what is certain is that the firstborn
blessing is reserved for the firstborn and is not negated by polygyny. Yet
the polygyny is upheld through and through. Torah here is telling us the
righteous procedures and protocol for polygyny.
Some in Christiandom try to equate the following passage with polygyny:
Malachi 2:14‐15
14 Yet you say, Why? Because YHWH has been a witness
between you and the wife of your youth, against whom
you have dealt treacherously: yet she is your companion,
and the wife of your brit.
15 And did not He make them echad [compoundly unified]?
And the rest of the ruachim are His also.
And why echad? That he might seek a seed from Elohim.
Therefore take heed to your ruach, and let none deal treacherously
with the wife of his youth.

Rampant divorce in both houses of Yisrael was
another reason for our exile.
If polygyny were a widespread “problem” in Yisra'el, you’d think that YHWH
would have said something directly against it. “Wife of your covenant” gives
us a clue that it was the dissolution of the marriage covenant through divorce
for any and every reason that it was called treachery. Taking on an additional
believing wife is never considered a violation of any marriage covenant. The
notes also acknowledge the problem was rampant divorce, not polygyny. A
woman without a husband in biblical times was in a very treacherous position
indeed economically and socially. Polygyny never put a woman in a
treacherous social and economic position in Biblical times, if Torah was
followed.

So, what about leadership requirements?
***Bamidbar/Numbers 12:1‐8
And Miryam and Aharon spoke against Moshe
because of the Ethiopian woman whom he had married: for
he had married an Ethiopian woman.
2 And they said, Has YHWH indeed spoken only by Moshe?
Has He not spoken also by us? And YHWH heard it.
3 Now the man Moshe was very meek, above all the men
that were upon the face of the earth.
4 And YHWH spoke suddenly to Moshe, and to Aharon, and
to Miryam, “Come out you three to the Tabernacle of the
congregation.” And those three came out.
5 And YHWH came down in the pillar of the cloud, and
stood in the door of the Tabernacle, and called Aharon
and Miryam: and they both came out.
6 And He said, “Hear now My words: If there be a prophet
among you, I YHWH will make Myself known to him in a
vision, and will speak to him in a dream.
7 My servant Moshe is not so, who is faithful in all My house.
8 With him will I speak mouth to mouth, even plainly, and
not in dark speeches; and the form of YHWH shall he see:
why then were you not afraid to speak against My servant
Moshe?”

First note how YHWH defends His true leaders. If you
speak evil of any truly called (not perfect) leader, you
are literally doomed without repentance. Also note that
the reason Moses’s relationship with YHWH was above
that of the other Yisraelite leaders was due to the fact
that he saw YHWH’s form. Since the Father has no
form, we know of a certainty that he saw Yahshua the
Son of YHWH, who was and remains the manifest form
of YHWH.
First, remember that Moshe wrote the above passage in Bamidbar/Numbers.
Earlier in Shemoth/Exodus, he referred to his (first?) wife as “Tzipporah” who
was a unmistakably a Shemite (Beresheeth 10:6, 10:22,11:10‐26, 25:1‐2;
Yahshar 72:37, 73:31‐36,76:4‐6, 76:13‐23,77:27‐51). Now, he is clearly making
a distinction between Tzipporah and the Ethiopian woman (a Kushite by
definition). Also, he is making it painfully obvious that the gripe of Aharon and
Miriam was his recent additional marriage to the Ethiopian (Kushite) woman.
Aharon and Miriam were trying to use Moshe’s polygyny as a way to invalidate
Moshe’s leadership. Isn’t it clear? They were scorning Moshe’s leadership on
ground that he had married an additional non‐Shemite woman! See the
remez? Yahuweh is using Moshe’s polygyny to illustrate and validate the two
house truth! Obviously, YHWH did not view polygyny as a disqualification for
leaders! In fact, Moshe’s domestic arrangement was a living illustration of this
passage:
Shemoth/Exodus 12:49
49 One Torah shall be for him that is native, and for the
ger that sojourns among you.

This truth is what makes being Yisrael so special. All
believers receive the same blessings of doing the
same Torah.
So what grounds does Rav Shaul have to allegedly disqualify leaders on the
grounds of polygyny?
Maaseh Shlichim / Acts 7:37‐39
37 This is that Moshe, who said to the children of Yisrael,
A Prophet shall the Master YHWH your Elohim raise up to you
from your Yisraelite brothers, like me; to Him shall you listen.
38 This is he, that was in the eidta‐ekklesia‐congregation
of Yisrael in the wilderness with the Malach‐YHWH
who spoke to him on Har Senai, and with our fathers: who
received the living words3 to give to us:
39 To whom our fathers would not obey, but threw him
from them, and in their hearts turned back again into
Mitzrayim,
Apparently Stephen also believed that the Torah was
still in effect after Yahushua came, since he calls the
Torah’s teachings “ongoing,” or “living words.”
Noteworthy is the fact that in v. 37, the comparison is made between
Yahushua and Moshe! Moshe had a Shemite wife and a Kushite wife***.
Yahushua has Yahudah and Ephraim!
But yet…
Timtheous Aleph / First Timothy 3:12
12 Let the local elders be the husbands of one wife,
overseeing their children and their own houses well.
Does Rav Shaul have the authority and desire to override Torah and besmirch
the character of Moshe? Well, the “church” certainly thinks so regarding
Shabbat, the Moedim, head coverings, brit milah, etc. Is Rav Shaul a
“muhammed?” May it never be so! If one wanted to read the passage very
woodenly, one could also conclude that the requirement for leadership would
be polyandry since it says “husbands of one wife!” Read a little further to
clarify Rav Shaul’s intention:
Timtheous Aleph / First Timothy 5:9
9 Let not a widow be enrolled for community support
under sixty years old, having been the wife of just one
man,
See, Rav Shaul clearly means that a widow of 60 yrs or older must have been
married to at least one husband in her lifetime—otherwise a woman who
outlived 2 husbands would be denied care—which would certainly not be Rav
Shaul’s intent. It would be absolutely ridiculous to conclude Rav Shaul was
sanctioning polyandry. The reasons that would not make sense are: first, the
text was talking about a widow who had deceased husband(s), and secondly,
because polyandry was never allowed to be practiced in the common wealth
of Yisrael. Another ludicrous interpretation would be that if a 60 yr old widow
was a co‐widow (meaning that she and another woman were simultaneously
widows of the same dead husband) that she would not be eligible for
community support. On the contrary, whether or not she has a co‐wife, she
was still the wife of one husband when he was living, so was her co‐wife—
therefore they are both eligible for support!
Yochanan/John 4:17‐18
17 The woman answered and said, I have no husband.
YAHUSHUA said to her, “You have well said, I have no husband:
18 For you have had five husbands; and the one whom
you now have is not your husband: what you have said
is truth.”
The most likely case scenario is that Yahushua was referring to some other
man she was living with (or having an affair with or doing prostitution business
with) who was not her husband. From the context it is obvious that she was
living in some kind of sexual sin. As we later see from what she says in verse
29:
29 Come, see a Man, who told me all things that I ever did: is not this the
Moshiach?”
Another plausible situation that would warrant communal support is when a
woman could be widowed more than once through no guilt of her own.
Yochanan Moshe / Mark12:19‐22
19 Rabbi, Moshe Rabainu wrote to us, If a man’s brother
dies, and leaves his wife behind him, and leaves no
children, that his brother should take his wife, and raise
up seed for his brother.
20 Now there were seven brothers: and the first took a
wife, and dying left no seed.
21 And the second took her, and died, neither left her any
seed: and the third likewise.
22 And the seven all had her, and left no seed: last of all
the woman died also.
And Yahushua never says that the above scenario is implausible. Also
Yahushua does not negate the living brother’s Torah obligation to take the
widow as a wife whether or not he already has a wife! Remember, not one
yud or nekudah will pass away! Rav Shaul certainly had no authority, nor
intention to override the obligation that Yahushua upheld!

How was provision handled in the case of a widow who was in the ancestry
leading up to the surrogate birth of the Moshiach?
Bereshith/Genesis 38:6‐11,26
6 And Yahudah took a wife for Er his firstborn , whose
name was Tamar.
7 And Er, Yahudah's firstborn , was wicked in the sight of
YHWH; and YHWH killed him.
8 And Yahudah said to Onan, Go in to your brother's
wife, and marry her, and raise up seed for your brother.
9 And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it
came to pass, when he went in to his brother's wife, that
he spilled it on the ground, lest he should give seed to his
brother.
10 And the thing that he did displeased YHWH: So He killed
him also.
11 Then said Yahudah to Tamar his daughter in law,
“Remain a widow at your abba’s house, until Shelach my
son is grown”: for he said, “Lest suppose he die also, as his
brothers did.” And Tamar went and dwelt in her abba’s
house…
26 And Yahudah acknowledged them, and said, She has
been more righteous than I; because that I gave her not to
Shelach my son. And he knew her again no more.
Somebody then had to provide for her and her twins. Yahudah did—after all
he was the biological dad of the boys. Certainly she wasn’t thrown out into the
street just because she had been the wife of more than one husband.
So now go back to Timtheous Aleph 5:9. If it is read as woodenly as 1
Timtheous 3:12 usually is by some theologians, then it means that if a 60yr old
or older widow has lost more than one husband to death, then she should be
disqualified from care. That would seem contradict the rest of scripture, and
Yahuweh’s compassionate character. So if 5:9 really means that the widow
had to have actually been married at least once (as opposed to shacking up) in
order to qualify for care, then it would also make sense that Timtheous 3:12
means that the local elder has to have been married to at least one wife at
least once in his lifetime— but it certainly doesn’t disqualify him on the
grounds of polygamous marriage.

Let’s take a look at Teitus/ Titus 1:6 If anyone is blameless, the husband of one
wife, having believing children not accused of loose living, or of being unruly.
So now Rav Shaul contradicts himself and Torah? No. It is clear that just as
before, the text means that the local elder has to be the husband of a wife or
at least one wife and apparently not the husband solely of a concubine (like
was “St” Augstine!). It could also be read that at least one of the leader’s
wives (if he has more than one) must have believing children. Are we now
going to follow the lead of Miriam and Aharon by speaking against brother
leaders who have more than one wife and forbid them from leading? May it
never be so!
So, what does Rav Shaul speak against?
Timtheous Aleph / First Timothy 4:1‐3
1 Now the Ruach speaks expressly, that in the last
days some shall depart from the faith, giving
heed to seducing spirits, and teachings of demons;
2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience
branded with a hot iron;
3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from
foods, which YHWH has created to be received with thanksgiving
by those who believe and know the truth.
A teaching that is from demons and seducing ruachim is the forbidding of
marriage period (which includes both monogamy and polygyny). The only two
forms of marriage that the Torah legislates for and recognizes are both
heterosexual monogamy and heterosexual polygyny. (So let’s not waste any
time trying to falsely equate real Biblical marriage with so‐called “homosexual
marriages”) Those who forbid polygyny are in fact furthering the teachings of
demons and seducing spirits!

How does Yahushua portray Himself?
Mattityahu/Matthew 25:1‐10
1“Then shall the kingdom of Heaven be likened to
ten virgins who took their lamps, and went forth to
meet the Bridegroom and the bride.
2 And five of them were wise, and five were foolish.
3 They that were foolish took their lamps, and took no oil
with them:
4 But the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps.
5 While the Bridegroom tarried, they all slumbered and
slept.
6 And at midnight there was a cry made, See, the
Bridegroom comes; go out to meet him.
7 Then all those virgins arose, and trimmed their lamps.
8 And the foolish said to the wise, Give us from your oil;
for our lamps have gone out.
9 But the wise answered, saying, Not so; lest there not be
enough for you and us: instead go to them that sell, and
buy for yourselves.
10 And while they went to buy, the Bridegroom came; and
they that were ready went in with him to the marriage:
and the door was shut.”
Ten: representing ten returning tribes of Efrayim,
who hear and accept the latter‐day revelation of the
regathering.
Peshitta. Efrayim is called to meet Messiah and the
true Torah keeping bride, but not all Efrayim responds.
If one reads footnote 13 with the assumption that the ten tribes are only
guests or “bridesmaids”, who then does that leave to be the bride? Yehudah
and Benyamin only? And even they are two. (Because of that I would question
footnote 13’s representation of the 10 tribes, because then one would have to
conclude that only 5 comprise the bride(s) of Moshiach.) Any anti‐polygynist
read of Yahushua’s parable will contradict the two‐house teaching, not to
mention the whole thrust of the book of Maasah Shlichim / Acts!
Another question is: virgins—for what purpose? Some theologians try to say
that the 10 virgins are bridesmaids. Bridesmaids smack of western non‐
Hebraic tradition. Since when does an authentic Hebrew wedding in the time
of Yahushua have “bridesmaids?” Since when does a wedding guest have to
be a virgin?
It only makes sense if the virgins are the brides or a collective bride. The
guests at the wedding only have to be clothed in wedding garments; they don’t
have to be virgins, and they don’t have to have lamps ready. The virgins are
the ones waiting for their bride. We, the bride/brides, are waiting for
Yahushua. He obviously referred to Nazarim Yisrael in both singular and plural
because he wants us to be echad.
Here is the literal word order from the Aramaic Peshitta:
Then, let be likened the Kingdom of Heaven to ten virgins who took their
lamps and went out for the meeting of the bridegroom and the bride.
Five now of them wise were and five foolish and those foolish [virgins]
took their lamps, but not did take with them oil, those but wise [virgins]
took oil in vessels with their lamps. When delayed now the bridegroom,
they slumbered all of them and slept. And in the middle of the night
there was an outcry: “behold the bridegroom comes, go out for his
meeting!” Then arose all virgins those and prepared their lamps, were
saying and those foolish [virgins] to the wise “give us of your oil, for
behold have gone out our lamps.” Answered these wise [virgins] and
said, “Why, not there is enough for us and for you, rather go to those
who sell and buy for yourselves.” And while they went to buy, came the
bridegroom, and those who ready were, entered with him into the
banquet‐hall, and was locked the door.
Below is the Paul Younan translation from the Aramaic:
“Then let the Kingdom of Heaven be likened to those ten virgins who
took their lamps and went out for the meeting of the bride and the
bridegroom.”
So it is entirely plausible that it means that the 10 virgins went out
performing the custom of when the bridegroom meets the bride where each
one of them prospectively are the bride(s)!
Du Tillet Mattityahu and Munster Hebrew Mattityahu don’t even have “and
the bride” where as Aramaic has “and the bride.” Either way it does not
exlude the 10 virgins from being brides.
If Yahushua’s Abba compared Himself to a metaphorical polygynist in
Yermiyahu 3 and Yehezqel 23, why wouldn’t Yahushua do likewise?
For what it’s worth, the Greek translation of the Mattithyahu passage has
wedding celebrations in the accusative plural! So even the Greek speaking
translators knew to not mess with the polygynist illustration of Moshiach!

Consider this passage:
Yeshayahu/Isaiah 4:1‐2
1 “And in that day seven women shall take hold of one
man, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our
own apparel: only let us be called by your name, to take
away our reproach.
2 In that day shall the Branch of YHWH be beautiful and
full of tifereth, and the fruit of the land shall be excellent
and comely for those that are escaped of Yisrael.”
Age to come.
Yahushua.
The Messianic redemption always speaks of only the
surviving two‐house remnant, but never the whole
nation as Dual Covenant theology wrongly teaches.
OK, just for the sake of argument let’s pretend there is no pashat (plain
teaching), but that the passage exists as drash (allegory) only. Well, it still
sounds to me that there are still 7 allegorical “women” who are requesting
marriage to the Messiah. And in the following verse it seems to confirm that
they were indeed wed (although not necessarily with their requested terms of
providing their own bread and apparel). So the question that begs to be asked:
Is there also a pashat? Why shouldn’t Natzarim Yisraelite husbands at least
potentially be willing to follow the Messiah’s methods of loving each wife
whether he has only one or a more than one?
Natzarim Yisrael cannot embrace the substance of the symbol while rejecting
the symbol, can it?
Yochanan Bet / Second John v. 13
13 The children of your elect sister greet you.
Omein.
19 One elect sister writing to another. A continuation of the two twisted
sisters of Ezekiel 23, becoming straightened out in righteousness by the
truth of Messiah and His kingdom.
Alright, Let’s look at that passage:
Yechezqel/Ezekiel 23:1‐4
The word of YHWH came again to me, saying,
2 “ Ben‐adam, there were two women, the daughters of one
eema:
3 And they committed whoring in Mitzrayim; they
committed whoring in their youth: there were their
breasts pressed, and there their virgin nipples were
squeezed.
4 And their names were Ochala the elder, and Ochaliva
her sister: and they were Mine, and they bore sons and
daughters. These were their names; Shomron is Ochala,
and Yahrushalayim Ochaliva.”
Don’t Forget Yirmeyahu/Jerimiah 3 as well. Will Natzarim Yisrael still criticize
YHWH for His metaphorical polygyny? Let’s hope not.
One allegation that anti‐polygynists rail against polygynist apologists is that
polygyny solely caters to the base sexual (a.k.a. “fleshly”) desires of the man
(patriarch). Can we be honest? Monogamous couples enjoy sex just as much
as people in polygynous marriages. Is anyone accusing the monogamous
couples of being fleshly because they enjoy sex? Hopefully, not. Elohim
invented sex and marriage for both those who practice heterosexual
monogamy and those who practice heterosexual polygyny.
So what exactly are the works of the flesh?
Galutyah/Galatians 5:19 – 20
19 Now the works of the flesh are well known, among
which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness,
indecency
20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, quarrels, jealousies, rage,
strife, selfish ambition, stubbornness, heresies,
21 Envy, murder, drunkenness, wild indecent parties, and
all such things: about which I warn you again as I have
also done in times past, that those who practice such
things as the path of their llives shall not inherit the
kingdom of YHWH.
Notice what practice is missing from the above works‐of‐flesh list in
Galutyah/Galatians? That’s right, Polygyny. Why? Because, by definition,
polygyny is not fornication, nor is it adultery, but rather it is a kadosh marriage
practice that is acknowledged and legislated for in Torah! It is certainly not a
work of the flesh for Natzarim Yisrael. However, “jealousies” and “envy” are
listed as a works of the flesh. The only kind of jealousy that is sanctioned for
in Torah, is a husband’s jealousy for his wife as seen in Bamidbar/Numbers
5:11‐31**‐‐ but not the other way around! Check and see: ongoing
jealousy/envy of one wife over a co‐wife or potential co‐wife is never given a
stamp of approval for the commonwealth of Natzarim Yisrael! Yahuweh may
use it to further His perfect will, but why should that surprise us? This can be
clearly seen if one were to do a study on the word “vex” in Scripture.
Need more? OK.
Romiyah/Romans 11:11‐15
11 I say then, have they stumbled that they should fall
forever? Let it not be: but rather through their fall
salvation has gone out to the nations, for to provoke them
to jealousy.
12 Now if their temporal fall brought riches to this age,
and the diminishing of their believing numbers
brought riches to the nations; how much more the fullness
of their return from blindness?
13 For I speak to you nations, because I am the emissary
to the nations, I magnify my work by explaining this.
14 If by any means I may provoke to emulation those
who are of my flesh, and might save some of them.
15 For if their temporal setting aside be the reconciling of
this world, what shall the receiving of them back be,
but life from the dead?
9 Efrayim gets it while Judah is blinded. But in the end
times both houses start seeing clearly.
10 From Judah.
11 If Judah’s blindness brought life to Efrayim, how
much more will Judah's regeneration bring greater life
in the kingdom?
So it is clear that YHWH’s provoking of jealousy in the older sister (sister‐wife
as seen in Yechezqel/Ezekiel 23) is actually working out both Yahudah’s and
Ephrayim’s collective salvations! The parallel passage is Yirmeyahu/Jerimiah 3
illustrating YHWH being the husband to both sisters! So right there are 2
witnesses.
Yochanan/John 10:16‐
16 “And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold:
them also I must bring in, and they shall hear My voice;
and there shall be one fold, and one Shepherd.”
3 A plain reference to the other fold, or flock of Yisrael,
Efrayim‐Yisrael, that Yahshua says He must bring in by
command of the Father. Note that even before He died
and rose, He had two existing Yisraelite flocks, not one. Through
his mission as the Good Shepherd, both folds will become one.
Note: “other sheep not of this fold” certainly seems to be a reference to two
groups. Also, notice in the note that the “folds will become one” future tense.
As of now, they are not yet.
Maaseh Schlichim / Acts 13:42‐47
42 And when the Yahudim had gone out of the
synagogue, the non‐Yahudim begged that these words
might be proclaimed to them the next Shabbat.
43 Now when the congregation was dismissed, many of
the Yahudim and religious proselytes followed Shaul and
Bar‐Nava: who were speaking to them, and persuaded
them to continue in the favor of YHWH.
44 And the next Shabbat almost the entire city came
together to hear the word of YHWH.
45 But when the Yahudim saw the multitudes,
they were filled with envy, and spoke against those things,
which were spoken by Shaul, contradicting and blaspheming
him.
46 Then Shaul and Bar‐Nava grew bold, and said, It was
necessary that the word of YHWH should first have been
spoken to you: but seeing you put it away from you, and
judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, look,
we turn to the nations.
47 For this is what YHWH commanded us, saying, I have
set you to be a light of the nations that you should be for
salvation to the ends of the earth.
5 Efrayim in the nations.

See, if one “wife” is jealous of another‐‐ tough! It’s really for her own good in
the long run!! It is apparently YHWH’s method saving the most and saving
them most thoroughly.
Maaseh Schlichim / Acts 21:27‐30
27 And when the seven days were almost ended, the
Yahudim who were from Asia Minor, when they saw him
in the Beit HaMikdash, stirred up all the people, and laid
hands on him,
28 Crying out, Men of Yisrael, help: This is the man, that
teaches all men everywhere against the people of Yisra'el,
and the Torah, and this set apart place: and furthermore
he brought Greeks into the Beit HaMikdash, and has
polluted this set apart place.
29 For they had been seen before with him in the city
Trophimos the Ephesian, whom they supposed that Shaul
had brought into the Beit HaMikdash.
30 And all the city was moved, and the people ran
together: and they took Shaul, and dragged him out of the
Beit HaMikdash: and immediately shut the doors.
More of the older sister being jealous of the younger. Not a pleasant situation,
but necessary.
Eventually jealousy will come to an end. We need to trust YHWH’s
omniscience of the greater good:
Ephesiyah/Ephesians 5:32‐32
31 For this cause shall a man leave his abba and eema,
and shall be joined to his wife, and the two shall be echad flesh.
32 This is a great sod [mystery]: but I speak concerning the
Moshiach and the Yisraelite congregation.
5 There’s the pashat, or literal understanding. Two people
becoming one.
6 Mystery? Yes. The pashat/literal understanding is the
two persons becoming one. The secret behind the
literal is that in Yahushua the two individual houses
become one. That is the mystery behind the uniting of
man and woman. Yahshua and Yisrael become one in
the remez, or hint level of understanding. But in the
sod, or secret level as Yahshua marries Yisrael, both
houses remarry each other, thereby establishing
peace. That is also known as “the mystery” of the
kingdom.
Now, I certainly wouldn’t go so far as to say that the two “twisted sisters”
marry each other (on a pashat level that could be misused). But rather, it
would be more accurate to say that each sister being echad with her Husband,
will by default be echad with each other (similar to spokes being united to the
hub on a wheel). So the main point is that the jealousy will end when both are
echad with Yahushua.
Consider:
Mattityahu/Matthew 5:17‐20
17 “Think not that I am come to weaken, or destroy the
Torah, or the prophets: I have not come to weaken, or
destroy, but to completely reveal it in its intended fullness.
18 For truly I say to you, Until the current heavens and
earth pass away, not one yud, or one nekudah shall by
any means pass from the Torah, until all be fulfilled.
19 Whoever therefore shall break, or weaken one of the
least Torah commandments, and shall teach men so, he
shall be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven: but
whoever shall do and teach the commands, the same shall
be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven.”
“Reveal it in its intended fullness.” Selah!
Recently I’ve heard in a few sermons, the discussion of YHWH’s “permissive
will” versus His “perfect will”, with the assumption being that polygyny
supposedly falls within the “permissive will” and monogamy always falls within
the “perfect will.” Let’s consider YHWH’s perspective on the whole thing. Take
for instance the account of Ya’akov, Raquel, Leah, Bilhah and Zilpah.
Questions: was it in YHWH’s perfect will :
1. For Raquel or Leah to be married off to a pagan just like dear old dad?
2. For Raquel or Leah to subsequently become a pagan just like dear old
dad?
3. For Raquel to not give birth to Yoseph who would have become an
incredible type/foreshadowing of the Moshiach?
4. For Raquel to not give birth to Yoseph who would have been
instrumental in the refining of Yahudah?
5. For Raquel to not give birth to Yoseph, who YHWH would have used in
the rescuing of Yahudah and his brothers?
6. To not bless Leah with marriage to a righteous man?
7. To exclude Leah on the basis of her delicate (crosseyed? /Divergent
squint?) eyes?
8. For Leah to not give birth to Yahudah (surrogate bloodline of the
Moshiach)
9. To have Leah not give birth to Lewi? (and therefore no Moshe to deliver
Yisrael from Mitsrayim?)
10. To have less of Ya’akov’s seed to fill the earth?
11. To have Bilhah and Zilpah remain unmarried or sold to a pagan
husband(s)?
12. To throw away the possibility of the 4 wives symbolizing the four
directions/corners of the earth?
13. To ruin the Shemology prophecy of the Moshiach?
Who are we to tell YHWH what is and is not His perfect will?
See, without the acceptance and acknowledgment of polygyny as being
legitimate right alongside of monogamy, there is no Two‐House teaching. Look
how many Jewish Messianics reject the two house teaching right along with
rejecting polygyny.
So Let’s review Natzarim Yisrael’s stances: head coverings? Yes. Circumcision?
Yes. Kashrut? Yes. Niddah laws? Yes. Tzit‐Tzits? Yes. Shabbat? Yes.
Moedim? Yes. The Torah? Yes. The Torah’s halacha for accepting and
governing polygyny? “—gasp”. Why the sudden change of strategy? Huh?!?
Are we going to let women, women’s emotions and women’s dogmas override
the Torah?
Remember the note on Romiyah/Romans 14:23?
Meaning we better get our Yisra'elite values from a full
trust in Torah and the faith of Messiah, and not man, or
man’s emotions, or dogmas.
What sense does it make to say that Shabbat, Moedim, niddah laws, kashrut
laws, head covering regulations, and circumcision are all in effect, and then
turn around and say polygyny is outlawed. At best, that is gross inconsistency
and at worst it is downright disobedience of the whole counsel of YAH.
What is one of the consequences of rejecting YAH’s whole counsel?
Mattityahu/Matthew 10:25‐26
25 “It is enough for the talmid that he is as His Teacher,
and the slave as His Master. If they have called the Master
of Beit Yisrael Baal‐Zevuv, how much more shall they call
them of His household?
26 Fear them not therefore: for there is nothing covered,
that shall not be revealed; and hidden, that shall not be
made known.”
Is it in YHWH’s design for a man to be subordinate to his wife? Is Natzarim
Yisrael going to be more fearful of it’s own women rather than fearful of
Elohim? What’s the point of that? Either the Torah is for the renewed covenant
or it is not. If anyone in Natzarim Yisrael is going to speak against Torah by
speaking against those who practice the Torah’s instruction for and about
polygyny, then why not cash it all in and become just like the rest of
Christiandom? NO!!! Now is the time to stand up and stand firm! Teach the
whole Truth of Torah—all of it! As for the women of Natzarim Yisrael—their
allegiances will be revealed for what they truly are. That’s right, this is a test!
Will they rejoice like Devorah (Shophtim 5:30‐31*) or scorn like Miriam and
Aharon)? Are they for YHWH and His eternal order, or is each for her own
latent headship over her husband and the consequential demonic disorder?
Teach the whole Truth and hearts will be revealed for what they are.
Some closing thoughts:
From the Maaseh Schlichim passages, the reasons for taking a rival wife can be
seen—competition to goad the rebellious wife to repent and do the right
things. Instead of divorce, the merciful thing to do is take on a rival wife for
any or all of the following reasons. (While reading these, think of when Elohim
brings Ephramites and non‐Hebrew converts into the commonwealth of
Yisrael‐‐ much to the displeasure of the unbelieving Jews and even to the
raised brow of esoteric Messianic Jews)
1. If the first wife is idolatrous.
2. If the first wife is leading the children astray.
3. If the first wife is disobedient to her husband‐‐ insubordination, nonsubmissiveness.
4. If the first wife is not demonstrating true love to her husband.
5. If the first wife is not performing her conjugal duty.
6. If the first wife is deliberately refusing to reproduce‐‐ refusing to
accept the husbands seeds into her womb.
7. If the first wife refuses her husband’s Elohim‐given right to have an
additional wife.
Now contrast the above to the attitude of the believing Jews when Elohim
brings Ephramites and non‐Hebrew converts into the commonwealth of
Yisrael.
1. The obedient wife joyfully welcomes in her co‐wife.
2. The wives have fellowship with one another.
3. The wives love each other as themselves.
4. The wives work with one another in the running of the household for
the greater good.
5. The wives perform their conjugal duties to the by being fruitful and
multiplying.
6. They are echad.
7. Polygyny is a kodosh halacha for the husband’s and wives’ kodosh
desires.
Afterword:
So what is the practical application for us Natzarim Yisraelites in exile in USA,
Canada, UK, Australia, New Zealand and other European nations with similar
laws?
First, it should be considered that in the USA, Canada, UK, Australia, New
Zealand (and other Westernized countries), the divorce laws are venomously
anti‐Torah. Even in a monogamous marriage, the woman legally has the upper
hand in a divorce. How much more the case in a polygynous marriage
arrangement. If a woman is not wholeheartedly in agreement with entering
into a polygynous marriage, then in a divorce, she can potentially leave a very
wide trail of destruction and have the nation’s laws assist her in ruining the
family. And so because the laws are against us, The women and man in a
polygynous marriage should be in 100% agreement with the arrangement
before it ever starts—not easy to achieve considering how brainwashed our
culture is by anti‐polygyny doctrine. Even with 100% agreement within the
outset of a polygynous marriage, that is still no guaranty that none will
backslide and subsequently sabotage the family, (of course the same could be
said of monogamous marriages).
Secondly, there does not yet seem to be a significant oversupply of females per
males in Natzarim Yisrael—yet. Is there a current need? Possibly—on a global
scale there are Christian women who’s husbands are killed by Islamicists (but
who’s to stop the islamicist from forcing the widows to marry another
islamicist?), and given the current mess that the I.C.E (Immigration & Customs
Enforcement, formerly I.N.S) is in, those who follow the rules of immigration
get hassled worse than those who are illegal, so even that purpose is risky—
and even if I.C.E. wasn’t so backward, would the widows be willing to change
over to be Natzarim? Perhaps some.
Another question is: wouldn’t it be greedy for the old pros of marriage to grab
up all the women for themselves and leave the young men without viable
spouses? It probably is somewhat dependant on the demographics of local
believing populations, but the definition of “local” populations becomes
somewhat moot in light of the internet. So given that, it is a question that has
to be answered on an individual level, and should be soberly considered before
pursuing polygyny.
So currently the status is a catch‐22 stalemate: most women can get away
with whatever the heck they want to; and most believing men, who don’t want
to lose their children due to a divorce initiated by a rebellious wife, are scared
to death to introduce any Scripturally legitimate competition. The only thing
that will end the stalemate is standing up for Scriptural Truth.
Notes:
*Shophtim 5:30‐31
30 Are they not finding, are they not dividing the spoil?
To every man a woman, or two; to Sisra a spoil of dyed
garments, a spoil of dyed garments of needlework, of
dyed garments of needlework on both sides, made for the
necks of those that took the spoil?
31 So let all Your enemies perish, O YHWH: but let them that
love Him be as the sun when it goes forth in its might.
And the land had rest forty years.
** Bamidbar 5:11‐31 The only jealousy that Torah sanctions for people.
11 And YHWH spoke to Moshe, saying,
27
12 “Speak to the children of Yisrael, and say to them, If
any man's wife goes aside, and commits a trespass against him,
13 And a man lies with her carnally, and it is hidden from
the eyes of her husband, and is kept secret, and she is
defiled, and there was no witness against her, nor was she
caught;
14 And the ruach of jealousy comes upon him, and he
becomes jealous of his wife, and she is defiled: or if the
ruach of jealousy comes upon him, and he is jealous of
his wife, and she is not defiled:
15 Then shall the man bring his wife to the kohen, and he
shall bring the offering for her, the tenth part of an ephah
of barley meal; he shall pour no oil upon it, nor put
frankincense on it; for it is an offering of jealousy, an
offering of memorial, bringing iniquity to remembrance.
16 And the kohen shall bring her near, and set her before
YHWH:
17 And the kohen shall take kadosh water in an earthen
vessel; of the dust that is on the floor of the Tabernacle
the kohen shall take some, and put it into the water:
18 And the kohen shall set the woman before YHWH, and
uncover the woman's head,
and put the offering of
memorial in her hands, which is the jealousy offering:
and the kohen shall have in his hand the bitter water that
causes the curse:
19 And the kohen shall put her under an oath, and say to
the woman, If no man has lain with you, and if you have
not gone aside to uncleanness with another instead of
your husband, be free from this bitter water that causes
the curse:
20 But if you have gone aside to another instead of your
husband, and if you are defiled, and some man has lain
with you beside your husband:
21 Then the kohen shall charge the woman with an oath
of cursing, and the kohen shall say to the woman, YHWH
make you a curse and an oath among your people, when
YHWH makes your thigh to rot, and your belly to swell;
22 And this water that causes the curse shall go into
your bowels, to make your belly to swell, and your thigh
to rot: And the woman shall say, Omein, Omein.
23 And the kohen shall write these curses in a scroll, and
he shall blot them out with the bitter water:
24 And he shall cause the woman to drink the bitter
water that causes the curse: and the water that causes
the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter.
25 Then the kohen shall take the jealousy offering out of
the woman's hand, and shall wave the offering before
YHWH, and offer it upon the altar:
26 And the kohen shall take a handful of the offering, as a
memorial offering, and burn it upon the altar, and
afterward shall cause the woman to drink the water.
27 And when he has made her to drink the water, then it
shall come to pass, that, if she is defiled, and has done
trespass against her husband, that the water that causes
the curse shall enter into her, and becomes bitter, and her
belly shall swell, and her thigh shall rot: and the woman
shall be a curse among her people.
28 And if the woman is not defiled, but is clean; then she
shall be free, and shall conceive seed.
29 This is the Torah of jealousy, when a wife turns aside
to another instead of her husband, and is defiled;
30 Or, when the ruach of jealousy comes upon him, and
he is jealous over his wife, and shall set the woman before
YHWH, and the kohen shall execute to her all this Torah.
31 Then shall the man be free from iniquity, but the
woman shall bear her iniquity.”
***Moshe’s additional marriage to the Ethiopian woman is a rather
complicated narrative. Here are the references: Beresheeth 10:6, 10:22,11:10‐
26, 25:1‐2; Yahshar 72:37, 73:31‐36,76:4‐6, 76:13‐23,77:27‐51
Bamidbar/Numbers 12:1‐8.
When the Kushite Queen, Adoniah, was wed to Moshe as a reward for his
heroism, he never consummated the marriage, because she was a pagan
Kushite. Moshe’s hesitancy was confirmed when Adoniah later rebelled
against Moshe for his not following her and the Kushites’ idols. Ironically, the
Ethiopian/Kushite woman that Moshe was later being criticized for in
Bamidbar/Numbers 12, was most likely a different woman entirely, who
sojourned with the Yisra'elites, and followed YHWH; therfore she was an
Ethiopian‐Yisra'elite by conversion and then by marriage. How do we know
this? Moshe’s arranged marriage to the Kushite queen was long before his
marriage to Tzipporah the Shemite. Tzipporah was a Shemite because her
father was from Midyan who was a child through Avraham and Keturah (a
Kanaanite)—Avraham was from Shem. Aharon and Miriam would have no
geneological reason to criticize Moshe for his marriage to Tzipporah which
took place long before Bamidbar/Numbers 12. Their attempted coup against
Moshe seems to be in reaction to a recent event, a recent marriage, not
something that took place more than 12 years earlier. As for Moshe’s
unconsummated marriage to the Kushite queen, it would hardly even be called
a marriage since he never consummated it, and never pursued it in the first
place. Looking at the character of Moshe, he was most humble and did not
boast or build himself up—a man of YHWH with a shepherd’s heart. Since
there were non‐Hebrew peoples that left Mitzrayim/Egypt along with the
Yisraelites, the most likely case scenario suggests that there apparently was an
Ethiopian couple or family who converted to the faith of Avraham Yitzchak and
Yaakov. If during the journey, the Ethiopian’s woman’s husband passed away,
she would have been a widow. Moshe likely saw this need, rose to the
occasion, and set an example of a pragmatic, compassionate polygyny. Why
are her children never mentioned? She may have had only daughters, but the
other possibility is that Moshe was raising up seed for the deceased man, and
since the dead man was not noteworthy in the scheme of Scriptural
documentation, no mention of those possible children is made. She may have
also been barren. Why is her name not mentioned? Moshe, knowing the
stresses of the extra responsibility, did not want to sensationalize the taking on
of additional wives. Also since she remains anonymous, it reinforces the idea
that there is one Torah for the native Hebrew and for the ger [non‐Hebrew]
convert. She represents all ger converts in that sense.


Rabbi Simon Comments
I agree with Brother Chris and his assessment of what the Torah teaches about one
husband having more than one wife to raise righteous seed for Israel and the need to
do this not for personal gain but for righteousness sake. This is not a call for all of us to go and get a second and a third wife but this is for us to re‐examine what
happened after the fall in a post paradise. I came into this truth some six years ago
without the help of any teacher but it was not yet time for me to come out endorsing
this truth but now that time has come.
We do not need to shun Torah or cry fowl with YHWH but if we have hangs up as
clearly some of us have been brainwashed by the church system then just park your
hang‐ups and ask YHWH to reveal truth to you and I guarantee it will come. What
YHWH has been doing through Israel’s history is a monumental model to save
mankind from the tragedy of sin and especially sexual sin which can become a
bondage to many believers but having more than one wife is not a sexual sin as
taught but there is a way to regulate such a relationship within the strict Torah
guidelines. This document does not address all these things but is a glimpse of what
is expected in a believer but more material will be presented soon to clarify matters
further. You have heard lies scandal and baloney from churches, mosques and
Temples but now be ready to hear the truth.
Most of us are very happy to have our first wife of our youth as our only needed wife
and quite happy to raise righteous seed through her but there may be a need for
other brothers to get a second wife for the right reasons and since YHWH did not
condemn this behavior and in fact regulated it then neither do I as a teacher of the
Scriptures.
Chris has presented one angle of the Samaritan woman that is commonly accepted
view in the Churches but we do not endorse that angle and present a completely
different angle here.
http://www.abrahamic‐faith.com/Simon/Samaritan%20at%20the%20well.pdf