HWT@bnr.ca (H.W.) (02/28/91)
In article <Feb.14.07.08.43.1991.23359@athos.rutgers.edu>, ta00est@unccvax.uncc.edu (elizabeth s tallant) writes: |>common sense dictates that if it is adulterous to divorce a wife and |>marry another, then it must be adulterous to marry another without |>divorcing her. I'm not sure that you can defend this meaning - common sense today is not common sense in 30 A.D. Palestine. Well, common sense in North America is rank foolishness in Papua New Guinea, today - and vice versa. A response to a related question indicated that the Jews have only been bound to monogamy for circa 1000 years. If the Jews were polygamous, even if only to the extent of taking the dead brother's wife, the quotation does not directly address having more than one wife. Can anyone with a Greek New Testament check the sense of the original, specifically with regard to implied number? Henry Troup - BNR owns but does not share my opinions | The .signature is the P.O. Box 3511, Stn. C. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1Y 4H7| lowest form of humour ...!bnrgate!hwt%bwdlh490 HWT@BNR.CA +1 613-765-2337 |