On the footing of this law, the marriage of both women is equally lawful, GOD calls them both wives (for fo the word must be rendered in this place, as the context fhews plainly) and He can't be mistaken, if He calls them fo they certainly were fo. If the fecond wife bore the first son, that fon was to inherit before a fon born afterwards of the first wife. Here the issue is exprefsly deemed legitimate, and inheritable to the double portion of the first-born; which could not be, if the fecond marriage were not deemed as lawful and valid as the first.

The wisdom of this world, as at present conftituted, would fay-the man was an adulterer-the fecond wife an adulterefsour law would make the man a felon-our ecclefiaftical courts would pronounce the Second marriage null and void-the iffue would be baftardized-and our devout people would lift up their hands and eyes, and deem the whole a monftrous piece of wickedness! Which view of the matter is most agreeable to the mind and will of GOD, must be left to the judicious reader to determine.

But farther. To fay that polygamy is finful (for if it ever was it certainly is, and if ever it was not it certainly is not, unless some positive law hath made an alteration, VOL. I. I

ог

or unless good and evil change their nature by length of time, like the fashion of our cloaths) is to make GOD the au thor of fin; for not to* forbid that which is evil, but even to countenance and promote it, is being fo far the author of it, and acceffary to it in the highest degree. -And shall we dare to say, or even to think, that this is chargeable on HIM who is of purer eyes than to behold evil, and who cannot look on iniquity? Hab. i. 13. GOD forbid !

When He is upbraiding DAVID, by the prophet Nathan, for his ingratitude towards His Almighty benefactor, (2 Sam. xii.) He does it in the following terms: ver. 8. I GAVE THEE thy mafter's houfe,

and

*Puffendorf, b. vi. c. 1. § 16. obferves, that "the Mofaical law was fo far from forbidding this "cuftom, that it feems in feveral places to fuppofe "it;" and refers to Deut. xxi. 15. xvii. 16, 17. and 2 Sam. xii. 8.

+ When Efau met Jacob with his wives and children, he afked-who are thofe with thee? and Jacob faid-The children which GOD hath GRACIOUSLY GIVEN thy fervant. Gen. xxxiii. 5. Now, can we fuppofe that God's gracious gifts are beftowed on acts of rebellion againit His pofitive laws? Yet we muft either fuppofe this, or that Jacob's polygamy was no tranfgreffion of the law.-See Gen. xxx. 16, 17, 18, another remarkable inftance of God's fpecial bleffing on polygamy.

The mention of Efau reminds me of a remarkable part of his hiftory. He took two wives, both Hit

and thy MASTER'S WIVES INTO THY BOSOM, and I gave thee the houfe of Is

tites, idolatreffes-which were a grief of mind unto Ifaac, and to Rebekah. Gen. xxvi. 34, 35. But whence arose this grief of mind in Efau's parents? Not on account of his polygamy, but because he had married heathen women, as is clear from xxvii. 46: therefore Jacob is fent to Padan-Aram, that he might not take a wife of the daughters of Canaan, but of his mother's family; and when Efau faw that the daughters of Canaan pleafed not Ifaac his father, he went and took a wife of the daughters of Ishmael, unto the wives which he had-but we hear of no lamentation of Ifaac and Rebekah over this fresh act of polygamy. As for Jacob, we read of his return out of Syria with no less than four wives-that when he came to Mahanaim, and heard of Efau's approach, he rose up that night, and took his two wives, and his two women-fervants (called alfo his wives-See Gen. xxx. 4, 9.) and his eleven fons, and passed over the brook fabbock. Gen. xxxii. 22. And Jacob was left alone, and there wrestled a man with him, &c. This man is called ver. 30. GOD.; in Hof. xii. 4. Tan angel; and ver. 5. the Lord God of Hoftswhich, all put together, fhews us, that it was not a mere man, nor created angel, but the angel

JEHOVAH-the messenger of the covenant, Mal. iii. 1. who appeared often in an human form under the Old Testament, in token of His future incarnation under the New Teftament, even the man, the GODman, CHRIST JESUS-He who is reprefented by commentators as ranking polygamy with adultery, Matt. xix. 9. But what was his conduct towards Jacob?-Doth He reprove him for the fin af polygamy, in which he was living? No-He faid, Thy name shall no more be called Jacob, but Ifrael; for as a prince haft thou power with GOD and with men, and haft prevailed and be BLESSED him there. Comp. Deut. xxvii. 26. and Gal. iii. 10. I 2

AEL

RAEL and JUDAH, and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given thee fuch and fuch things.

Can we fuppofe GOD giving more wives than one into DAVID'S bofom, who already had more than one, if it was fin in DAVID to take them? Can we imagine that GoD should thus tranfgrefs (as it were) His own commandment in one inftance, and yet fo feverely reprove and chaftife DAVID for breaking it in another? Is it not rather plain, from the whole transaction, that DAVID committed mortal fm in taking another living man's wife, but none in taking the widows of the deceafed SAUL? that therefore, though the law of GoD condemned the first, yet it did not condemn the second?

This paffage of 2 Sam. xii. 8. is fo conclufive a proof of God's allowance of polygamy, that writers on the other fide of the question have not been able to get rid of it, but by a downright corruption of the text. Inftead of the plain, obvious, and literal meaning of the word p' which fignifies the " breaft or bofom,

from the throat to the pit of the ftomach,' have conftrued it into power, and would tell us that "GOD gave SAUL'S wives "into DAVID's power as a fovereign, not "into his bofom as an husband."

"Take

"Take this expreffion in its ftrongest " and most strict fenfe" (fays the late reverend and learned Dean Delaney, in a book called "Reflections on Polygamy," printed at London, 1737, under the name of Phileleutherus Dublinienfis) "as "where Sarai tells Abram that he had given her maid into his bofom, (Gen. xvi.

66

5.) what more can be meant by it, "than that she gave her into his power?"

We have but to look at the whole context of that paffage, and this learned man's question receives a full and explicit anfwer, and his whole argument an abfolute refutation. Gen. xvi. 1. &c. Now SARAI, ABRAM's wife, bare him no children, and she had an handmaid, an ÆGYPTIAN; whofe name was HAGAR; and SARAI faid unto ABRAM, Behold now the LORD hath reftrained me from bearing, I pray thee Go* IN UNTO MY MAID, it may be that I

may

*The fequel of this chapter feems to afford, to every candid mind, a very conclufive proof, that this propofal of polygamy to Abram by his wife Sarai, was not finful, neither Abram's complying with it in the leaft difpleafing to GOD; for on Hagar's departure from Sarai, on account of hard usage, ver. 6. the angel of the LORD recommends it to her to re-. turn, and promises to multiply her feed exceedingly, that it should not be numbered for multitude-tells her fhe fhould bear a fon--which promife was ful filled

I 3