• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Husband of one wife...

S

Shadowjak's Dancer

Seasoned Member
Real Person
Male
Perhaps this has been discussed before regarding the overseers being husbands of one wife, but here goes:

Solomon...

So, whenever you take a new wife, you aren't to be charged with business or going out to war for one year. You are supposed to spend that year bringing happiness to your wife. It seems to be her right, as such. So, how can one be a leader, such as a king, when you have to take a year off from business as usual every time you take a new wife?

On the other hand, Solomon had hundreds of wives. Did they all get their allotted year? So, is it just not functional for people in certain positions to operate in this way?
 
The Jewish tradition for weddings was that the feast generally lasted a week. Times that by 1000 and it doesn't seem practical for Solomon. I'm pretty sure he's an exception. He probably married multiple women at the same time. I don't think we can take Solomon and hold him to a standard of what is normal or perhaps even acceptable in some cases. He is a rather extreme example.
 
In a rare instance, I find myself disagreeing with ZecAustin.

“When a man has taken a new wife, he shall not go out to war or be charged with any business; he shall be free at home one year, and bring happiness to his wife whom he has taken.

(NKJV)
 
He shall not be "charged with" any business. I think a lot hangs on the meaning of 'abar. I'm not a Hebrew speaker, as far as I can gather from concordances this seems to mean delegated by somebody else. In other words, as I read it, for the first year after taking a wife nobody else should be delegating them any task that would take them away from their wife (whether war or commercial enterprise). The king can't force them to go to war, and their master or father cannot require them to travel a long distance away from home for work (I would assume he could still be expected to do basic duties around the homestead etc if it didn't detract from his ability to bring happiness to his wife). However what they choose to do themselves may be another matter, leaving Solomon free because nobody was delegating him any tasks, he was the boss.

Sarah just pointed out to me that if this covers wives captured in war, and you have a very successful campaign where most of the men bring another woman home with them, then the entire army is out of action for the next year. That too is worth pondering. Clearly the entire army cannot be rendered completely unable to fight and leave the country defenceless - but these men are not to "go out" to war, ie be sent away on an offensive campaign. They're still available to fight at home in a defensive role, if needed. The issue must be separation from their wife rather than stopping all work.
 
jacobhaivri said:
In a rare instance, I find myself disagreeing with ZecAustin.

“When a man has taken a new wife, he shall not go out to war or be charged with any business; he shall be free at home one year, and bring happiness to his wife whom he has taken.

(NKJV)
Click to expand...

I recant. Condemn me not to the flames that are kindled for the heretic.
 
When I took my 2nd wife; we stopped many of our missions that required leaving the home overnight for one year.
It was how we interpreted this command for our lives since the mission field is often a spiritual war to be sure.
I also cut down my preaching engagements to focus more on our family for 1 year.
 
another thought... there was no war in Solomon's life time.
G-d made all of Israel's enemies pay tribute and fear Solomon after DAvid kicked so much tail
 
jacobhaivri said:
Perhaps this has been discussed before regarding the overseers being husbands of one wife, but here goes:

Solomon...

So, whenever you take a new wife, you aren't to be charged with business or going out to war for one year. You are supposed to spend that year bringing happiness to your wife. It seems to be her right, as such. So, how can one be a leader, such as a king, when you have to take a year off from business as usual every time you take a new wife?

On the other hand, Solomon had hundreds of wives. Did they all get their allotted year? So, is it just not functional for people in certain positions to operate in this way?
Click to expand...

Before I say anything, please do not think I am saying ignore or reinterpret any law. "If you believe not Moses, you couldn't possibly believe me." I personally think that we take certain things way to "literally" or perhaps legalistically than we should. I could spend the time making up scenarios where this strict adherence would not be possible but I do not think that is necessary. It means that if a man take a new wife, leave him alone! Just like a king is demanded to not multiply money, wives, horses, etc... to himself. A king is not limited to taking one wife or just one wife once a year (Jesus gave an example of multiple brides at the same marriage ceremony). He is limited to not taking advantage of being the king. And yes I get that that sounds very loose to our current standards of defining right and wrong, and/or loose standards on limits of power, but please entertain the idea that modern western democracy might not be "what God originally intended" or even the "best that we can expect or got."

Again, please do not interpret this as me saying that the Law is up for interpretation. "Not one jot or tittle shall pass from the law."
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top