I perceive somewhere along the way that my responses are viewed as being angrily attacking (definition of a rant as stated in the conclusion of the last post). I can say in all honesty before God that I have not once written an angry word on this subject or towards you. I am indeed single-mindedly focused in expounding God’s Word, which is my responsibility as a disciple of Jesus. (2 Timothy 4:2) But, I cannot help if that is being taken incorrectly as a personal attack, that is certainly NOT my intent.
As I have already stated, I strive to be succinct. I have remained on the context of Matt 19 for a reason: it addresses the core of truth on this subject. I don’t normally deal with all of the extra ideas along the way so as to avoid distraction from the core thought. However, there are some appeals to Old Testament events that warrant examination. But first, I will address again the core context of Matt 19.
1) Matt 19 provides a foundational definition of marriage as between one man and one woman
A simple linguistic proof that what Jesus states in Matt 19:4-6 is a foundational principle defining and governing marriage is found in one simple word: therefore
Matt 19:4-6 wrote:4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh
6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
The word "therefore" is a connective adverb establishing a conclusion from a fact stated before it. "Therefore" establishes consequence of the first statement to the second statement. Jesus' observation of "What God hath joined together, let not man put asunder" is a consequence of the previous statement in v4-5. Consequence can only occur if the statement before it is a basic principle to draw consequence and conclusion from. That is following simple language construction. It is a foundational concept by virtue of the period in time identified: "made them at the beginning". You cannot get any earlier in establishment than the beginning creation. Thus, the statement made by Jesus' in v4-5 is indeed a foundational definition of marriage. You stated earlier: “Granted Jesus refers to the first marriage which coincidently is a monogamy”. Quite frankly, no, it is not coincidental, it is simply the way it was in the beginning returning us again to the foundational truth and thought expressed by Jesus in Matt 19.
Let us examine again the enumeration of 2 becoming 1 flesh. First, I ask myself, what does it mean to become "one flesh"? That is why I pointed to the language used first as "leaving and cleaving". The "cleaving" is a parallel of the "one flesh". The "gluing together" defines the closeness, unity, single mindedness, and purpose with respect to the bond of marriage and the new relationship created, the "one flesh". Now, if a man marries a woman and they are now one flesh, and that man decides to marry another woman, how is that a "oneness", or a single mindedness towards the marriage as represented in the basic figure of "one flesh"? The action of a man deciding to marry another woman would be analogous to a "one flesh" acting with half a brain, or half his will, or half his purpose, in which case the "one flesh" would not be acting as "one flesh" but as half flesh. “One flesh” that is “cleaved” together being one man and one woman is the only view that is consistent with the figure being drawn by Jesus and any other would be a distortion of that figure.
The reassertion of the definition of marriage in Matt 19:4-5 provides a basis to then draw consequence and conclusion to things relating to marriage. Just as you reasoned earlier:
Hugh McBryde wrote:This is not like saying God never says "Don't smoke Pot". Pot smoking, to our knowledge, was not practiced in Israel, however being drunk was spoken against.
You reasoned well from the definition of drunkenness and sobriety and established that “pot smoking” is a consistent consequence (conclusion) of those definitions. You have established that while scripture speaks specifically of wine causing drunkenness, it is not the ONLY substance that can cause drunkenness. Why then is it so difficult to acknowledge that Jesus’ followed the same logical process in establishing marriage principles and it’s definition from the beginning in Matt 19?
2) Jesus is the greater authority over Moses and the prophets.
You have stated several times with phrases such as
Hugh McBryde wrote:He never speaks against it, he doesn't so much as clear his throat on the subject.
along with appeals to other men such as Jehoida and Nathan and what they did relating to multiple wives. I perceive this type of reasoning is given as a defense that Old Testament times past govern our present and that they are unchangeable by any one after.
In the same context of Matt 19 the conversation with Jesus continues:
Matt 19:7-9 wrote:7 They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away
8 He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.
9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.
We can only understand the mind of God based on what is revealed for us in His word. Jesus in v8, exposes the mind of God for us to see why Moses allowed certain things to continue as stated: “Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you.” How many other things do you think were “suffered”, or endured, with the Old Testament characters and the people of Israel but were not written about? I will address this question by way of asking another question:
Who is greater: Jesus or Moses? Jesus or Jehoida? Jesus or Nathan?
First, of the three names given, Jehoida and Nathan are two you identified earlier and no other particular reason. Let’s first ask, who of these three is greater: Moses, Jehoida, or Nathan? Moses is the one that is repeatedly identified throughout the New Testament as the giver of the law and the basis of their action and faith. The Jews referred to the Old Law as the Law of Moses.
Who then is greater: Jesus or Moses? In this, the New Testament writers are clear:
John 1:17-18 wrote:17 For the Law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.
18 No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, that One declares Him.
Heb 3:1-3 wrote:1 For this reason, holy brothers, called to be partakers of a heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our confession, Christ Jesus,
2 "being faithful" to Him who appointed Him, as also "Moses" was "in all his house."
3 For He was counted worthy of more glory than Moses, by so much as the one having built the house has more honor than the house.
and we cannot deny the very words of God the Father as uttered during the transfiguration event on the mount affirming the superiority of Jesus over Moses and Elijah:
Matt 17:1-5 wrote:1 And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into a high mountain apart,
2 And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light.
3 And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elijah talking with him.
4 Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elijah.
5 While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.
In conclusion, Jesus being the greater authority can indeed re-assert the definition of marriage to that of what was intended and established from the beginning of creation and patterned in Adam and Eve. By using His authority he renders the intervening years from the beginning to the time Jesus speaks these words in Matt 19 to be of no effect and irrelevant. But, He does provide a glimpse into why certain things were allowed to continue and deviate from the pattern with His statement: “because of the hardness of your hearts.” It would be wise to avoid the same issue where Jesus, the Son of God, has spoken.