Slave as Second wife in Christianity?

 Some Christians boast that the system of concubines and right hand possession found in the Old Testament is nothing but a marriage between an Israelite man and a Gentile captive, and that it is a marriage like any other marriage!!! Until one of them said in response:

The captives from the war lived within the children of Israel, and if an Israelite liked a girl, he must marry her as he would marry any Jewish woman. There is no enjoyment, and the line remains open. She
must also be Jewish and convinced of Judaism in order for him to marry her.
Purity and holiness do not change. This is the true God. Let us see what the reference says.

This is the very definition of lying, deception and fraud. These are just words to throw dust in the eyes, nothing more and nothing less.

In response to this nonsense, we say:

First: The system of concubines is present in the Holy Book, and the concubine or slave girl is completely different from the wife in Jewish law.

The concubine is considered to be of a lower status than the wife, and her entering into marriage with her master does not require the existence of a marriage contract, offer, acceptance, dowry, or anything else, as the missionary wanted to suggest to others. She is a woman who is taken by buying her from the slave markets or she is a prisoner of war. Her marriage - “if we are to call it marriage” - to her master is not like a marriage contract - which is only applied to a free woman - but rather it is her entering her master’s house, trimming her nails, and shaving her head, and we will see that shortly.

We read from the Bible Dictionary:
( (Concubine: a legitimate wife according to Jewish law, but of a lower rank than the mistress of the house. This was permissible in the polygamy system, as concubines were usually taken from slaves and bought for a price, such as Hagar (Genesis 16:2 and 3) and Bilhah (Genesis 29:29 ) and Gideon’s concubine (Judges 8:31). Sometimes they were girls sold by their fathers, or prisoners of war . Divorce of a concubine was easier than divorce of a mistress, but her rights were preserved according to Mosaic law (Exodus 21:7-11 and Deuteronomy 21:10-14).

Marriage to foreign concubines was not permissible in Jewish law. However, it is clear in the New Testament, both in its text and its spirit, that marriage is limited to one wife only))
https://st-takla.org/Full-Free-Copti...2_S/S_057.html

We read From the Biblical Encyclopedia in the interpretation of concubinage:
(( Concubinage is a slave girl who is owned, and the custom of taking concubines was common in the times of the Old Testament . The law in Mesopotamia allowed the husband to have intercourse with his female slaves. In the Assyrian state, the husband could take many concubines in addition to his free wife, and they were subject to the wife. The children of the concubine had the right to inherit. The law of Horabi stipulated that a concubine who bore children and behaved arrogantly could be treated as a slave, but she could not be sold...))

And we read from the Jewish Encyclopedia:

(A concubine recognized among the ancient Hebrews. She enjoyed the same rights in the house as the legitimate wife. Since it was regarded as the highest blessing to have many children, while the greatest curse was childlessness, legitimate wives themselves gave their maids to their husbands to one, at least in part, for their own barrenness, as in the cases of Sarah and Hagar, Leah and Zilpah, Rachel and Bilhah

. The concubine commanded the same respect and inviolability as the wife; and it was regarded as the deepest dishonor for the man to whom she belonged if hands were laid upon her. Thus Jacob never forgave his eldest son for violating Bilhah (Gen. xxxv. 22, xlix. 4). According to the story of Gibeah, related in Judges xix., 25,000 warriors of the tribe of Benjamin lost their lives on account of the maltreatment and death of a concubine. Abner, Saul's first general, deserted Ish-bosheth, Saul's son, who had reproached his leader with having had intercourse with Rizpah, the daughter of his royal father's concubine, Aiah (II Sam. iii. 7); and Absalom brought the greatest dishonor upon David by open intercourse with his father's concubines (ib. xvi. 21 et seq.).))
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/ar...85-concubinage

The question is, according to Jewish law, is it possible for a concubine to enter into a marriage contract with her master simply because she is a concubine???
The answer: No, of course not, because a concubine does not enter into a marriage contract with her master.

We read from the Encyclopedia Judaica:
(( A concubine may be defined by Jewish laws as a woman dedicating herself to a particular man, with whom she cohabits without *kiddushin (see *Marriage) or *ketubbah. "What is the difference between wives and concubines? R. Judah said in the name of Rav: Wives have ketubbah and kiddushin, concubines have neither” (Sanh. 21a; Maim. Yad, Melakhim 4:4; Leḥem Mishneh and Radbaz, ad loc.). Not all the scholars adopt this reading, however, and Rashi, for instance, comments: “wives with kiddushin and ketubbah, concubines.” with kiddushin but without ketubbah” (Comm. to Gen. 25:6; see also Comm. Hagra, EH 26, n. 7). This latter reading is apparently that of the Jerusalem Talmud too (TJ, Ket. 5:2, 29d and Hagra, ibid.; but see Mareh ha-Panim thereto). The of the *posekim accept the former majority reading as the correct one (Radbaz to Yad, Melakhim 4:4; Kesef Mishneh and Leḥem Mishneh, as against the Maggid Mishneh, to Yad, Ishut, 1;4; Radbaz, Resp., vol. 4, no. 225; vol. 7, no. 33; 19:8; 25:6; Ralbag to Judg. 19:1; Hence a concubine is to be distinguished both, on the one hand from a married woman, i.e., by ḥuppah (“marriage ceremony”), kiddushin, and ketubbah, and on the other from a woman who does not dedicate herself to one particular man. exclusively, but who prostitutes herself; i.e., the harlot (Hassagot Rabad to Ishut 1:4 and see also Rema to EH 26:1).))
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/concubine

This last point was to show the ignorance of some Missionaries claim that the right hand possession is considered adultery!!!
We read from the Jewish Encyclopedia
((According to the Babylonian Talmud (Sanh. 21a), the difference between a concubine and a legitimate wife was that the latter received a Ketubah and her marriage was preceded by a formal betrothal (“ḳiddushin”), which was not the case with the former (comp. Rashi on Gen. xxv. 6, and Naḥmanides ad loc.). Judah (Yer. Ket. v. 29d), however, the concubine also received a ketubah, but without the aliment pertaining to it.))
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/ar...85-concubinage

A reading from the Talmud Sanhedrin 21 a:
((The Gemara challenges the idea that David had only this limited number of wives. But isn’t it written: “And David took more concubines and wives in Jerusalem after he came from Hebron” (II Samuel 5:13). The Gemara responds: All of these were to complete the tally of eighteen and no more. The Gemara asks about this verse: What is the meaning of “wives” and what is the meaning of “concubines” in that verse? Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: Wives receive a marriage contract and betrothal; concubines are taken without a marriage contract and without betrothal. ))

Clear and explicit words that do not need to be patched up. Secrecy is not included in a marriage contract or in engagement procedures. This also applies to a female prisoner of war, as the Talmud states from the same source.

((Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: David had four hundred children in his army, and all of them were sons of beautiful women taken captive from their gentle homes during war (see Deuteronomy 21:10–14). And they grew their hair in a gentle hairstyle, and they all sat in carriages [bikronot] of gold, and they walked at the head of the troops, and they were the strong-arm enforcers of the house of David, on whose loyalty David's monarchy relied and Rav Yehuda says that Rav says:

David's daughter Tamar was the daughter of a beautiful woman taken captive in war and was born before her mother converted. Therefore, Tamar was not considered the daughter of David according to halakha. The proof of this is in what she said to Amnon, son of David, as it is stated: “Now, therefore, speak, please, to the king, for he will not withhold me from you” (II Samuel 13:13) . And if it enters your mind to say that she was the daughter of a woman David married, would David have permitted Amnon's sister to him as a wife? Rather, learn from this verse that she was the daughter of a beautiful woman who converted after Tamar was born, so halakhically Tamar was not a daughter of David .))

https://www.sefaria.org/Sanhedrin.21...h=all&lang2=en

If the female captives of war in Jewish law become concubines among the children of Israel, and the master has the right to have intercourse with his concubine just as he has intercourse with his wife, except that she is not considered a wife, but a concubine, and there is no need for a marriage contract or even for the captive to convert to Judaism, as the missionary claimed. Rather, the mother of Tamar, the daughter of David, was a captive of war who gave birth to Tamar to David before she became Jewish.

What destroys any claim of the missionaries is that the Talmud in its interpretation quoted the text of Deuteronomy 31 (and we will return to it shortly because of the disasters it contains):
((10 “When you go out to fight against your enemies and the Lord your God delivers them into your hand, and you take some of them captive,
11 and you see among the captives a woman beautiful in appearance, and you cling to her and take her as your wife,
12 then when you bring her into your house, you shall shave her head and trim her nails
. 13 And she shall strip off her captive garments, and shall remain in your house and mourn for her father and mother for a whole month; and after that you shall go in to her and take her as your wife.
14 But if you do not delight in her, then you shall let her go for herself. You shall not sell her for money, nor make her a slave, because you have humbled her.

Today's interpreters have tried to patch up what we see by saying that this is a "consensual marriage" and that shaving the head is a sign of conversion to Judaism!!!! But the Talmud and Jewish interpretations exposed this lie and we later learned that there is no marriage contract involved and it is not a condition that the captive convert to Judaism!!

In order to further expose the deceptions and fraud of the missionaries and their patchwork, we present to you Rabbi Rashi’s interpretation of Deuteronomy 21 so that we may know the real reason why the text stipulates shaving the captive’s hair and leaving her for a month to mourn her family.

We read from Rabbi Rashi’s interpretation:
((And let her nails grow: Heb. וְעָשְׂתָה אֶת-צִפָּרְנֶיהָ. She must let them grow, so that she should become repulsive [to her captor, to induce him to change his mind about marrying her]. — [Sifrei 21:7, Yev. 48a] And she shall remove the garment of her captivity: [so that she should not be attractive to her captor,] for they are pretty [clothes], because gentle women adorn themselves during wartime, in order to seduce others [namely, the enemy] to have relations with them — [Sifrei 21:8]
and stay in your house: In the house he uses Upon entering, he will stumble upon her, and upon leaving, he will stumble upon her, see her weeping and see her unsightly appearance-all this, so that she should become despicable to him. — [Sifrei 21: 9] And weep for her father and her mother: Why is all this necessary? So that an Israeliite woman [ie, this man's Jewish wife] should be happy, and this [gentile captive woman] should be sad-stricken, an Israeliite woman should be dressed up, and this one should make herself repulsive . — [Sifrei 21:11]))
https://www.chabad.org/library/bible...showrashi/true

So the real reason for shaving the captive's head and letting her nails grow is not to convert her to Judaism as the patchworkers claim, but rather to make the international captive ugly and sad in front of the beautiful Israeli lady who must remain happy, unlike that internationalist!!!!!

This is the reason why some missionaries avoid quoting the numbers from Deuteronomy 21!

Here we ask: Why did the Bible separate the concubines of the prophets from their wives when it mentioned them???

We read from the Book of Kings, Chapter 11, about Solomon:
((3 And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines; and his wives turned his heart away.))

And we read from the Book of Samuel, Chapter 5:
((12 And David knew that the Lord had established him king over Israel, and that he had exalted his kingdom for the sake of his people Israel.
13 And David also took concubines and wives from Jerusalem after he came from Hebron; and sons and daughters were born to David.))

And we read from the Book of Judges, Chapter 8:
((30 And Gideon had seventy sons coming out of his loins, for he had many wives.
31 And his concubine who was in Shechem bore him, she And he also had a son, and named him Abimelech.

And we read from Genesis 35:
((23 The sons of Leah: Reuben, Jacob’s firstborn, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, and Zebulun.
24 The sons of Rachel: Joseph and Benjamin.
25 The sons of Bilhah, Rachel’s handmaid : Dan and Naphtali.
26 The sons of Zilpah , Leah’s handmaid : Gad and Asher. These are the sons of Jacob who were born to him in Padan-aram. ))

And we read from the Book of Genesis, Chapter 36:
((9 Now these are the generations of Esau, the father of Edom, in Mount Seir.
10 These are the names of the sons of Esau: Eliphaz, the son of Adah, Esau’s wife, and Reuel, the son of Basemath, Esau’s wife
. 11 And the sons of Eliphaz were: Teman, and Omar, and Zepho, and Gatham, and Kenaz.
12 And Timna was a concubine of Eliphaz the son of Esau, and she bore Amalek to Eliphaz. These are the sons of Adah, Esau's wife.

Second: Forcing the captive to have intercourse

We read from Deuteronomy 21 in the Common English Translation:
((10When you go out to fight against your enemies, and the Lord your God delivers them into your hand, and you take some of them captive,
11and one of you sees among the captives a woman beautiful to look at, and his heart is drawn to her and he marries her,
12and when he brings her into his house, he shall shave her head and trim her nails
, 13and strip her of her captive clothing, and she shall remain in his house mourning her father and mother for a month. After that, he may go in to her and be her husband, and she shall be his wife.
14And if he desires not to do so afterward, He keeps her, so he must set her free and not sell her for money or enslave her, because he forced her to sleep with him.

Questions we ask every patcher:
1. Why did the text use the phrase “he divorces her as a free woman” even though she was supposed to be free when he married her???
2. How does he force her to sleep with him if she is his wife??? Isn’t the missionary trying to make us believe that this is a natural marriage with purity, holiness, spirituality, etc. of patchwork talk???
3. If he wants to keep her, does he have the right to continue forcing her to sleep with him??

The Encyclopedia of the Bible says that the slave girl was of secondary status and was not considered a second wife
. The husband could buy the woman as a slave girl
, but she was clearly of a lower status than the wife.

Rashi: Wives are those whom a man marries
with a marriage contract, while concubines do not have a marriage contract.

Source:https://www.sefaria.org/Rashi_on_Genesis.25.6.2?lang=bi