Not a word against polygamy. How is it poffible, in any reafon, to think that this, if a fin, fhould never be mentioned as fuch, by GoD-by Moses-or any one of the prophets?

Here I may particularly mention Elijab the Tifbbite, who could with truth fay of himself, 1 Kings xix. 10. 'n P zelando zelatus fum. Mont. Which emphatical reduplication we tranflate by

I have been VERY JEALOUS for the LORD OF HOSTS. This holy man was fired with zeal for GoD's law, and was a most faithful and undaunted reprover of fin, even to the very face of king Ahab (who at that time reigned in Ifrael, and was doubtless a polygamist, by his having Seventy fons) yet not a word is faid about his polygamy; which could hardly have been omitted, had it been a fin against either the primary law of marriage, or the feventh commandment. The fame zeal which led Elijah to tell Abab, that he and his father's houfe had troubled Ifrael, by forfaking the commandments of the LORD, and following Baalim, muft furely have led him to reprove Ahab's polygamy, had that alfo been a forfaking the commandments of JEHOVAH. The fcripture, 1 Kings xvi. 31. ftrongly remarks, as an aggravation of Ahab's fuperlative wickedness,

K 3

that

་

that he married an idolatrefs, contrary to Deut. vii. 3. Had his polygamy been contrary to Exod. xx. 14. this would hardly have efcaped the reproofs of the prophet Elijah, who did not forget Fezabel, and the prophets which ate at her table. I Kings xix. 19.

Although it be true, that none of the prophets before the captivity mention it as a fin, yet did not MALACHI, after the return from the captivity, fpeak of it, and in very fevere tèrms condemn it? thus clofing the canon of the Old Testament with a most awful reprehenfion of it? Mal. ii. 14, 15:

As this famous paffage is taken for granted to be a condemnation of polygamy under the Old Teftament, let us examine it, and we shall find that it does not even relate to the subject: if it did, it would be very ftrange, that fo material a point fhould efcape all the prophets that went before him, Mofes himself not excepted. This fingle circumstance should make one fufpicious of the common interpretation given to this portion of fcripture by the general run of commentators, who, miftaking the found of the words for the fenfe of the text, have followed one another like fheep, who keep the fame track, only because others have gone before

them.

them. The words, as they ftand in our tranflation, are thefe-THE LORD bath been witness between thee and the wife of thy youth, against whom thou haft dealt treacherously: yet he is thy companion and the wife of thy covenant. And did not He make one? yet hath He the refidue of the Spirit. And wherefore one? That he might feek a godly feed. Therefore take heed to your Spirit, and let none deal treacherously against the wife of his youth; for the LORD GOD of ISRAEL faith, that he hateth

PUTTING AWAY.

The laft words are a key to the reft, and fhew, that the inftance in which they dealt treacherously with their wives, was putting them away; and this, in order to take heathen women in their room. This is manifeft from ver. 11. JUDAH bath dealt treacherously, and an abomination is committed in ISRAEL and JERU SALEM; for JUDAH bath prophaned the bolinefs of the LORD which he loved, and bath married the daughter of a strange god.

EZRA *, who lived about this time, hath recorded the fact at large, and fully explains the matter; chap. ix. 1. The people of ISRAEL and the priests have not Separated themselves from the people of the lands, for they have taken of their daughters

* See alfo Nehemiah xiii. 23-29.
K 4

for

for themfelves, and for their fons, and the boly feed have mingled themfelves with the people of thofe lands.

Ver. 10. And now, O LORD, what shall we fay after this? for we have forfaken thy commandments, which thou haft commanded by thy fervants the prophets, faying, The land which ye go to poffefs is an unclean land, &c.

Ver. 12. Now therefore give not your daughters unto their fons, neither take their daughters to your fons, &c.

Chap. x. 2. We have trefpaffed against our GOD, and have taken ftrange wives of the people of the land. Now therefore let us make a covenant with our GOD, to put away all the wives, and fuch as are born of them, ver. 3.

The putting away these heathen women was a duty, and this by the pofitive law of GOD. For GOD having, as it were, forbidden the banns in express words (Deut. vii. 3.) their marriages were abfolutely null and void ab initio; they could contract no valid marriage whatfoever with them, and therefore must put them away. This affords us a strong proof of the lawfulness of polygamy, where the woman was not excepted againft, as by the law above mentioned, or by fome other: for if this were otherwife, we should hear

of

of putting away all but the first in all cafes. GOD would not have fuffered any marriage which was contrary to the Seventh commandment, any more than those which were contrary to Deut. vii. 3. When we compare EZRA and MALACHI together, we find by the former, that the Jews took heathen women for their wives; and by the latter, that they not only did this, but put away their Ifraelitish wives for that very purpose. This is plainly what ver. 14. calls dealing treacherously with their wives, their divorcing them for this unhallowed purpose. There the prophet uses the like arguments against them as he had before used, ver. 10. with regard to their dealing treacherously with their brethren Have we not all one father? hath not one GOD created us? why do we deal treacherously every man against his brother, by profaning the covenant of our fathers? When they put away their Jewish wives, and married the heathen idolatrous women, they profaned the covenant of their fathers; that is, that command of GOD delivered to their fathers, not only in the original inftitution of marriage, which forbad putting away, but also that pofitive law, Deut. vii. 3. which forbad marriage with heathens. They dealt treacherously with their bre

thren;