• 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.

Promised Evidence that the 12 Apostles were Plural

ravmoshe

ravmoshe

New Member
Real Person
From the latest edition book "Sex and the Believer" by Apostle Moshe Yoseph Koniuchowsky

Evidence of the Earliest Israelite Apostles having More Than One Wife

Below you will find 2 clear quotes/admissions from early “church fathers”; one from as early as 160 CE-AD, ADMITTING that JEWISH, or Messianic Israelite believers, commonly had more than one wife.

Calvin said Polygamy was "Exceedingly Prevalent among New Testament Believers”

Calvin believed polygamy was sinful. Nevertheless, he acknowledged its existence, not only in the Old Testament, but in the New Testament as well. In Calvin's commentary on 1Timothy 3:1-2, Calvin said polygamy-plural marriage was "exceedingly prevalent" among early New Testament believers. Evidently, this did not prevent them from becoming members of “the so called church.”

“The only true exposition, therefore, is that of Chrysostom, that in a bishop he expressly condemns polygamy, which at that time the Jews almost reckoned to be lawful. This corruption was borrowed by them partly from sinful imitation of the Fathers, (for they who read that Abraham, Jacob, David, and others of the same class, were married to more wives than one at the same time, thought that it was lawful for them also to do the same) and partly from neighboring nations; for the inhabitants of the East never observed that conscientiousness and fidelity in marriage which was proper. However that might be, polygamy-plural marriage was exceedingly prevalent among them and therefore with great propriety does Paul enjoin that a bishop should be free from this stain.”
(In other words, the Apostle Paul allegedly had the right to overrule Torah by disallowing leaders to have more than one wife. We know that simply cannot be; because if his words contradict YHWH’s Words, then Paul and the church are both found to be liars. As in most such cases however, it is the historic church’s wicked twisting and wrestling of Paul’s words, that turn them into antinomian diatribes.)

Justin Martyr Said “Many Jewish Christians Had Four or Five Wives”

Like Calvin, Justin Martyr (ce.160) was certainly no fan of polygamy-plural marriage. Nevertheless, he acknowledged its existence in the early New Testament church, perhaps mainly among New Testament Jewish Christians. He rebukes the Jews for allowing polygamy:

“Your imprudent and blind masters [i.e., Jewish teachers-rabbis] even until this time permit each man to have four or five wives. And if anyone sees a beautiful woman and desires to have her, they quote the doings of Jacob.” (Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 134).

Justin continues: “If, then, the teaching of the prophets and of Himself moves you, it is better for you to follow God than your imprudent and blind masters, who even till this time permit each man to have four or five wives; and if anyone see a beautiful woman and desire to have her, they quote the doings of Jacob [called] Israel, and of the other patriarchs, and maintain that it is not wrong to do such things; for they are miserably ignorant in this matter. For, as I before said, certain dispensations of weighty mysteries were accomplished in each act of this sort [as in church dispensationalism, where the pagan church system wickedly attempts to replace the Jewish people as Israel, via false doctrines, such as the weekly 7th day Shabbat and plural marriage allegedly being no longer legal in YHWH’s eyes, having been replaced by Sunday worship and serial mandated church-state monogamy]. For in the accomplished, in order that you may thereby know that your teachers never looked at the divine motive which prompted each act, but only at the groveling and corrupting passions. Attend therefore to what I say.”

Martin Luther recognized that the church CANNOT teach on human sexuality.
Only Torah can! He encouraged a brother to add a second wife!
Martin Luther said: "Sola Scriptura, I cannot forbid a person to marry several wives, for it does not contradict Scripture." Luther granted Landgrave Phillip of Hesse a second wife and refused to follow the Catholic ban on patriarchal marriage.

Ref. Letter to the Chancellor Gregor Bruck January 13 1524. De wette 2.459.
How many Protestants, Lutherans and other non-Catholic church folks know the history of their religion? Most are still following Catholic law and that includes most Messianics and Nazarene Israelites too. Either it's Sola Scriptura, or it’s back to church; hot or cold, but please no more lukewarm Torah fans.

So those who arrogantly, or ignorantly claim to have FULLY come out of the “church system,” yet cling to a belief in mandated state-church serial monogamy as the only valid marriage arrangement as practiced in the west, where there is no separation of church and state on this issue, sadly are still deceived; rather, both church and state are complicit, one with the other, AGAINST YHWH, HIS TORAH, HIS REVEALED WILL AND HIS PEOPLE YISRAEL (that’s us folks). They have called abusive and archaic, what YHWH calls His loving instructions and guardianship for Israelite women, who choose a biblically alternative lifestyle.

Now choose ye this day whom you will serve. As for me and my house, we will serve YHWH. Yahoshua/Joshua 24:15.
 
goodness, rav,

you is jes de postinist dude dis moanin

really good stuff, but i gotta get workin (unlike brother cecil :lol: )
 
sorry about the weird scripts as this is a ms word import..its worth working through however.
 
Nice writeup, it strikes me that you didn't actually have anything one way or the other about weather any of the 12 where themselves plural, but it is strong evidence that they had no problem with those that where.

In addition to Chrysostom, the writings of Tretullian record polygamous groups in the early church. In De Monogomia he vindictively attacks them with his massacred view of scripture, but thanks to his rants we have records of several Churches that allowed polygamy and had polygamy in their leadership. Its frightening how quickly these things spread after Christ left, it is truely a narrow road we walk.
 
Thank you!!! No sadly I have not been able to come up with evidence for any "one" of the 12, just that some of the 12 did have more than one. You mentioned

In addition to Chrysostom, the writings of Tretullian record polygamous groups in the early church. In De Monogomia he vindictively attacks them with his massacred view of scripture, but thanks to his rants we have records of several Churches that allowed polygamy and had polygamy in their leadership. Its frightening how quickly these things spread after Christ left, it is truely a narrow road we walk.

Can you please send me the quotes from Tretullian? Yes we must return to patriarchy, not just adding wives but the full faith of our father Jacob not father Tretullian or Chrysostom. ):
 
I would be very pleased too,

My primary source is The Ante-Nicene Christian Library, compiled in Edinburgh in 1867, Its available for free digitally as an attachment to the E-sword program.

Volume 4 part 6, Tretullian On Monogamy. The constant blasphemy in this 17 volume work is very difficult to endure, while I am glad to provide quotes that evidence polygamy in the church, forgive me that I must also put in quotes that show how depraved Tretullian himself was in his views and handling of scripture.

Chapter 1 line 1, "Heretics do away with marriages; Psychics accumulate them. The former marry not even once; the latter not only once. " Psychics referring to an early church group I cannot readily identify, a more modern translation would help here. That is, all the quote you need though, this writing was against this particular group and the present day teachings of the catholic church (It is a monastic work)

Chapter 2 deals with a defense of his work it is centered against the charge of Novelty. "And so they upbraid the discipline of monogamy with being a heresy; nor is there any other cause whence they find themselves compelled to deny the Paraclete more than the fact that they esteem Him to be the institutor of a novel discipline, and a discipline which they find most harsh: so that this is already the first ground on which we must join issue in a general handling (of the subject), whether there is room for maintaining that the Paraclete has taught any such thing as can either be charged with novelty, in opposition to catholic tradition, or with burdensomeness, in opposition to the “light burden” (Mat_11:30) of the Lord."

That is, the pro poly groups are saying that the monogomaniac group is creating a burdensome new ideal contrary to catholic tradition. I must put in one more lenghly quote, both because it is strong evidence and you will share my revulsion at the reasoning.

"Now concerning each point the Lord Himself has pronounced. For in saying, “I still have many things to say unto you, but ye are not yet able to bear them: when the Holy Spirit shall be come, He will lead you into all truth,”4 He sufficiently, of course, sets before us that He will bring such (teachings) as may be esteemed alike novel, as having never before been published, and finally burdensome, as if that were the reason why they were not published. “It follows,” you say, “that by this line of argument, anything you please which is novel and burdensome may be ascribed to the Paraclete, even if it have come from the adversary spirit.” No, of course. For the adversary spirit would be apparent from the diversity of his preaching, beginning by adulterating the rule of faith, and so (going on to) adulterating the order of discipline; because the corruption of that which holds the first grade, (that is, of faith, which is prior to discipline,) comes first. A man must of necessity hold heretical views of God first, and then of His institution. But the Paraclete, having many things to teach fully which the Lord deferred till He came, (according to the pre-definition,) will begin by bearing emphatic witness to Christ, (as being) such as we believe (Him to be), together with the whole order of God the Creator, and will glorify Him, (Joh_16:14) and will “bring to remembrance” concerning Him. And when He has thus been recognised (as the promised Comforter), on the ground of the cardinal rule, He will reveal those “many things” which appertain to disciplines; while the integrity of His preaching commands credit for these (revelations), albeit they be “novel,” inasmuch as they are now in course of revelation, albeit they be “burdensome,” inasmuch as not even now are they found bearable: (revelations), however, of none other Christ than (the One) who said that He had withal “other many things” which were to be fully taught by the Paraclete, no less burdensome to men of our own day than to them, by whom they were then “not yet able to be borne.”

Here he admits his pro monogamy sentiments are novel, new, never been heard of before in the church, and he admits that it is a burdensome rule. His counter argument is that the holy spirit (uncaptialized, as the true Spirit by no means instructed him in this) told him this rule and people before him where just too weak to follow it. The entire work itself is a 'new prophecy' and while it is apparent that there where Christians who objected to polygamy before this, no one had any mandate. I agree with his sentiment that a man must hold heretical views of God first, then of his institutions, and it is quite clear he holds a very heretical view of God.

In Chapter 3 he says abominable things, here are some quotes:
"“Good,” he says, “(it is) for a man not to have contact with a woman.” It follows that it is evil to have contact with her; for nothing is contrary to good except evil. " He clearly teaches all sex is evil,
"Finally, when he says, “Better it is to marry than to burn,” what sort of good must that be understood to be which is better than a penalty? which cannot seem “better” except when compared to a thing very bad?" He then goes on to say how marriage is very little better than going to hell.
The chapter then closes with a paragraph devoted to saying that if you understood Christ and the holy spirit you would understand he is only just barely tolerating marriage and excusing your infirmity for being married.

In chapter 4 he lays down, perhaps for the first time in history, the argument that God made only one wife for Adam, we also see "“And two shall be (made) into one flesh” - not three, nor more". I find it a wonderful relief that this argument stands beside those obvious heresies in the chapter before, if only people knew the reasoning they supported when they made these foolish arguments. "But where the first crime (is found) homicide, inaugurated in fratricide - no crime was so worthy of the second place as a double marriage." Is another interesting quote, best when followed immediately by " For it makes no difference whether a man have had two wives singly, or whether individuals (taken) at the same time have made two." He then talks about Lamech, says " What Scripture does not note, it denies." Wow, eh, and proceeds to say that polygamy was the reason for the Deluge, and plygs deserved what they got. I don't think you even need to guess that the closing paragraph of this chapter is devoted to exalting Noah as the great monogamist of the new human race (A topic we have discussed this very day)

He devotes the fifth chapter to pointing out the great polygamists of the Bible, and saying openly that he is ignoring them, he closes by saying he will follow the example of Moses, whom he mistakenly says was no digamist.

The next chapter he attacks the law and closes "At all events, priests we are called by Christ; debtors to monogamy, in accordance with the pristine Law of God, which prophesied at that time of us in its own priests."

Ah, I digress, it is not worth going further. It is interesting to see how many of their foolish arguments are present here, and more interesting that this work is a Montanist, anti Catholic work that sparked a huge controversy and is closely paired with celibacy of the priesthood.
 
Thank you brother Dwight. I agree that this is very useful ammo in the pro poly argument. Shalom!
 
Dear Brother Moshe,

I really appreciate this information. We need to work together to develop a systematic theology of marriage.

Blessings,

Doc
 
Dear Brother Moshe,

I really appreciate this information. We need to work together to develop a systematic theology of marriage.

Blessings,

Doc
 
Based on the title of the original message the writer has produced no evidence that the 12 apostles had more than one wife. Paul makes reference to Peter, other apostles and the brothers of Jesus being married (1 Corinthians 9:5), but there is no claim of polygamy for any of them. The historical references in Josephus and the Church Fathers about polygamy are of Jews in general. There is no logical basis for imputing those statements to the apostles. A principal reason polygamy existed among Jews of that time was the practice of yibbum or Levirate marriage. The mention of "four or five" wives was based on the rabbinic permission to have that many wives, but it was by no means a requirement. The average Jewish man would only acquire as many wives as he could support, probably not more than two.

QMCO5
 
Thanks QMC05 for your input. I have often wondered what the "norm" was for the Jewish culture at the time of Christ, and also before His time, specifically relating to what a man could afford. Rehoboam had quite the number of wives, and I assume that he did support them. Also, the large numbers of children attributed to some of the judges in Israel (40sons, 30 sons, etc.) seems to suggest that these men had more than just one or two wives. Were these all extreme cases, or was it just not reported that most men had more than one wife, or was it common for most men to be monogamous, and only the affluent had more than one or two? I noticed that you commented that "a" principal reason was the yibbum. Did you use "a" instead of "the" for a specific reason, and if so, do you have another principal reason? I have heard some different reasons why a man in that culture would want to have more than one wife and was hoping to get another input.
 
Paul not the apostle said:
Also, the large numbers of children attributed to some of the judges in Israel (40sons, 30 sons, etc.) seems to suggest that these men had more than just one or two wives. Were these all extreme cases, or was it just not reported that most men had more than one wife, or was it common for most men to be monogamous, and only the affluent had more than one or two?
Click to expand...
I would say at the time of the judges it was probably relatively common, as they had taken women as plunder quite a few times by then, if I recall correctly. Also, men had been killed off many times before and during that time, in battles and such. All those things leave women without husbands. Add to that the rate of female children to survive being higher than that of male children, as well as other factors, and you have a society that would most likely have quite a bit of polygyny.
 
...you have a society that would most likely have quite a bit of polygyny.
Click to expand...

Do the math from the Book of Numbers. :)


(Actually, J. Wesley Stivers does a great job in his book, Eros Made Sacred, to which I have frequently posted links on BF.

It turns out that the average Israelite 'head of house' at the time had FAR more male sons (and not even counting females) that could have been accounted for by one wife. Stivers even goes on to draw some very controversial, and compelling, conclusions about cultural vitality and polygyny as well. (In other words, the house of a man with more than one wife is a VERY effective economic and cultural driver to a vital God-fearing society.)
 
(In other words, the house of a man with more than one wife is a VERY effective economic and cultural driver to a vital God-fearing society.)

Mark, I had not considered that before, but that observation is awesome.

Blessings
 
Contrary to the report of Josephus and the Early Church Fathers, Rabbi J.H. Hertz, who wrote the forward to the Soncino Babylonian Talmud, claims that polygamy seems to have largely disappeared in Israel after the Babylonian Exile (http://www.come-and-hear.com/talmud/nashim_h.html). Out of 2800 rabbinic teachers mentioned in the Talmud, only one is stated to have had more than one wife. This is not really surprising given the fact that rabbinic scholars spent so much time studying and teaching written and oral Torah as to have little time for a wife. According to the Talmud, one of the most famous rabbis, Akiva, spent 12 years away from his wife studying Torah (Ketubot 62b; although Nedarim 50a says it was 24 years). That’s a bit extreme in my view.

I think it safe to say that polygamy on the scale known in the Israelite confederacy and monarchy had greatly diminished by the first century CE, but it was still a cultural reality. The only religious conviction among Jews that would prompt taking another wife was the kinsman duty of Deuteronomy 25:5, but primarily men who engaged in polygamy did so for domestic reasons. As one has pointed out the mortality rate of wars in those earlier centuries left many widows who would be taken in by the closest male relative. Men also gained concubines from women captured in war. However, by the first century CE this social condition no longer existed.

In addition, by that time marriages required a mohar (bride price), shiluhim (dowry) and matan (groom gifts). The marriage contract (ketubah) also stipulated that the groom had to give the virgin bride 200 zuzim (Hebrew silver coins) to be her property. (A widow received 100 zuzim.) This amount was the equivalent of financial support for a year. If he didn’t possess this amount (which was often the case for young and poor grooms), then the ketubah became a lien against his property for the amount in the event of his death or he divorced her. So, adding a wife and getting rid of a wife would be an expensive proposition. That’s probably why you find the divorce controversy between Jesus and the Pharisees. One rabbinic Sage, Hillel, had made it easy to divorce a wife in order to marry another without having to pay the 200 zuzim.
 
So, adding a wife and getting rid of a wife would be an expensive proposition. That’s probably why you find the divorce controversy between Jesus and the Pharisees. One rabbinic Sage, Hillel, had made it easy to divorce a wife in order to marry another without having to pay the 200 zuzim.
Click to expand...

That is some interesting detail. This particular controversy has been a topic of repeated discussion here and elsewhere; I have heard before, and found compelling, the midrash that Yeshua (in Matthew 5:32 and elsewhere) was teaching, among other things, of the then-common practice of men "putting away" a wife without a get or financial provision, in order to essentially "trade for a new model on the cheap".

I'd be interested in more source background if you have access to it.

Blessings,
Mark
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top