Book Review - Sex and the Believer
Echad = One
Moshe Koniuchowsky’s views on the word “echad” are also a little skewed. Yes, it is true that the word can be translated as meaning either a singular or a plural (unified) one, but he tries to prove that the word can be used to indicate a plural marriage, but fails to show how one man and two women can become echad, or one. Even the verses that he claims prove this do nothing of the kind. “First Corinthians 11:2 confirms the same; many members married to ONE husband,” he states, misquoting the Scripture referenced (it should be Second Corinthians.) So, does this verse actually show this? Let’s see:
For I am jealous for you with a godly jealousy; for I betrothed you to one husband, so that to Christ I might present you as a pure virgin. (2 Corinthians 11:2)
I don’t understand how the phrase “a pure virgin” describes multiple wives. Even his translation, which reads, “that I may present you as an innocent virgin,” indicates a singular bride. He concludes the first chapter with the following question, which he then answers. “The question is, do we really believe that ANY heterosexual marriage bed that honors set apart matrimony is truly undefiled? We better, because for the believer, there is no other game in town.”
The second chapter spends more time on the concept of a unified one. This is where we learn of his “one flesh principle, namely that 1 + 1 = 1, or that 1 + 2 = 1, or that 1 + 3 = 1, etc.” Continuing on, he states, “As long as a man leaves parents and clings to a wife, they are basar echad with the new wife, as the principle lives on.” Excuse me? I don’t understand how a man can leave his parents and cling to his wife, only to leave his parents again to cling to another. Once he has left his parents, the only way to go back is through divorce, or am I missing something here?
It also seems that Mr. Koniuchowsky believes that he understands the heart of God better than all others, as he boldly states, “YHWH would never allow monogamy as the only alternative today, as Paradise rules do not apply in a post Paradise environment.” Very interesting revelation, don’t you agree? To think, the rules that governed the garden no longer apply… I guess that rocks floated and trees grew down instead of up. His proof for this statement? He refers the reader to Isaiah 1:13:
“Bring your worthless offerings no longer, incense is an abomination to Me. New moon and sabbath, the calling of assemblies– I cannot endure iniquity and the solemn assembly.” (Isaiah 1:13)
If you fail to see the connection, do not feel alone. These verses were addressed to those who have turned away from the Holy One of Israel, and make no mention of the rules of the garden, nor the fact that they no longer apply. He then writes, “As mentioned earlier, what clearly did survive intact was the principle of one flesh, not the original design which was limited to monogamy.” Again, the author is claiming proof where none exists.
Although Moshe admits that the first polygamous union was a son of Cain, he still seems to read that Adonai Himself ordained this type of union and that it was actually His idea in the first place. Again, a simple reading of the verses in question does not support his theory. Regardless of this truth, Moshe claims, “The problem starts when monogamous marriage is mandated by LOST mankind, out of touch with his Creator, as the only acceptable form of matrimony.”
The Bible clearly indicates that God’s will for mankind is monogamy and that polygamy was man’s idea. Mr. Moshe K. seems to have this backwards, instead believing that polygamy was Adonai’s idea and even a part of His overall plan for mankind. We will see more of this later in the book. He spends five pages demonstrating how the word echad can mean singular or plural, depending on the circumstances. This does not prove, however, that three people can become one (echad).
But because of immoralities, each man is to have his own wife, and each woman is to have her own husband. (1 Corinthians 7:2)
“One Aramaic scholar claims that this verse is a clear ‘monogamy only’ verse. He states that ‘the possessive “his own” and “her own” seem to indicate exclusivity between male and female,’ allegedly meaning only one wife per husband. (One thing is for sure, a Yisraelite woman can only have one husband).
“He continues ‘If more spouses were allowed, the nouns for husbands and wives would be plural and the verbs would match accordingly. They don’t. Every indication in all these verses shouts for exclusive singularity.’
“Does it? Here’s an example of how it would not. Ziman’s Cement Contracting requires that each worker have his own automobile to get to the different job sites. Would the Ziman’s Cement Contracting avoid hiring a worker solely because the applicant has two automobiles instead of one? Of course not! Some workers may have more than one car, but must have AT LEAST ONE to work.”
I have quoted the above paragraphs in their entirety because this argument is vital to his beliefs. Apparently this argument only applies to the men in the verse and not the women, as they are still allowed only one spouse. This verse is also the bases for his teaching that men in leadership MUST be married. I can’t help but wonder if he has even taken Yeshua’s ministry into account when he made this argument.
He then quotes the 19th verse of the same chapter, stating that it holds the key to understanding what the verses are truly saying.
Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but what matters is the keeping of the commandments of God. (1 Corinthians 7:19)
Continuing, Moshe states, “Whatever the TORAH COMMANDS, believers must do.” This is true. We must follow the commands of God. The question we must ask ourselves is this: Did God command polygamy? It sounds like Moshe K. believes that He did, but then he follows the above statement with this: Paul never would and never did have the audacity to overturn YHWH’s allowance for leaders to have more than one wife in the Torah. (Emphasis mine.) So, which is it? Did Adonai allow multiple wives or command it?
I do not believe that Paul was teaching that a leader MUST have a wife. I believe that he is stating just what it says; that we should each have our own spouse, and not take multiple spouses. Why do I believe that? Well, a man who can’t control his lustful urges in regards to his spouse would not be the best person to have in charge of a congregation. Not only that, but would he have the time to devote to his congregation while caring for and nurturing multiple wives?
These verses from the first letter to Timothy seem to confirm my understanding:
It is a trustworthy statement: if any man aspires to the office of overseer, it is a fine work he desires to do. An overseer, then, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, prudent, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not addicted to wine or pugnacious, but gentle, peaceable, free from the love of money. He must be one who manages his own household well, keeping his children under control with all dignity (but if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how will he take care of the church of God?), and not a new convert, so that he will not become conceited and fall into the condemnation incurred by the devil. (1 Timothy 3:1-6)
Moshe takes issue with the above translation, however, claiming that what it actually says is, “he must have at least one, or else as a single man he would be open to the vilest of temptations. Since we know that the New Testament can NEVER contradict Torah, this MUST be the meaning!” Once again, he is acting as if polygamy was not just allowed, but that it was actually commanded by God. It seems that he has also forgotten that married men are just as susceptible to temptations as are those who are single.
At this point he also touches on the verse in Deuteronomy 17 that forbids the king from taking multiple wives, quickly dismissing it as not applicable to Renewed Covenant leaders, but only to the ancient kings of Israel. In addition he writes:
Kings could not MULTIPLY wives because with that multiplication came MULTIPLE PAGAN DIETIES. Even though mankind may not know the difference between addition and multiplication, YHWH does. Yisraelites are allowed to ADD wives for a CERTAIN NEED, or PURPOSE like sex, more sex, cleaning help, income help, companion needs, or needs of emotional well being. They are NOT allowed to multiply for numerical purposes alone!
I guess that Mr. Koniuchowsky needs to educate Adonai as well as He seems to be confusing addition and multiplication too. I would like to know what Scriptural evidence he has for this allowance? Where is it said that Adonai allows for additional wives for these purposes alone? Even if the reason was for a larger number, the king could always claim that the real reason was more sex, and that would be fine. Oh, and by the way, the word “add” and the word “wife” are never found together in the Bible.
Although Solomon broke this command (not to multiply wives) and the results are evident to all, Mr. K. claims, “Solomon’s sin was not polygyny, but idolatry in an unending attraction to experience the activities of the demonic gods of his wives, who pulled away his heart from YHWH.” The term polygyny refers to the taking of multiple wives, as opposed to multiple spouses. As the Bible does not make allowances for multiple husbands, the point is moot. What I would like to point out, however, is the appearance of another blanket statement without Scriptural evidence to back it up.