Biblical Error?

[shunyadragon]

Have you read the first chapter of the Gospel of Matthew? Clearly the Jewish audience felt it was important to know the genealogy of Jesus if he was truly who he claimed to be.

Beyond this claim the Jews could care less.

 

[Etritonakin]

I am reposting this under a new title in the hopes of getting more interest and response. This originally comes from my thread Gradual Dominance: Esau's Descendants and The Rulers of Edom: Genesis 36

In the Bible there is the following conflict in reporting on Esau's wives...

Genesis 26
When Esau was forty years old, he married Judith daughter of Beeri the Hittite, and also Basemathdaughter of Elon the Hittite

Genesis 36
Esau took his wives from the women of Canaan: Adah daughter of Elon the Hittite, and Oholibamahdaughter of Anah and granddaughter of Zibeon the Hivite— also Basemath daughter of Ishmael and sister of Nebaioth.

Granted that in Genesis 26 we might allow that Esau only married two wives at that time, we have one match but the other wife in Genesis 26 doesn't match either of the other two offered in later scripture. And Oholibamah's father seems to be different in each case.

It would appear that either there was an unfortunate failure on the part of the editor to correct these contradictions or it was felt that both sources were authentic and although contradictory had to be kept intact. Perhaps the separation of ten chapters was the best the authors could come up with in order to minimize the impact of the contradiction. In any case this would appear to be a fairly clear cut example of literalistic error in the Bible.

Don't really know what this is about, but why could he not have had all of those wives? Women from two fathers having the same name is certainly not impossible. The two reports were not necessarily written at the same time -may reflect the truth, but not the whole truth which could only be written after the fact.
Example....
If I had some wives now and someone wrote about it -then married more later and someone wrote about it -and two had the same name but were not of the same father.... It would not be as someone writing a complete account after I had lived.

 

[sealchan]

This matters why?

It matters to me because I have found it immensely helpful to understand what in the Bible doesn't make sense. I have found that just a few answers go a long way towards clarifying the text in many places. Not too long ago I would probably have said that Genesis was poorly written...now I would say the opposite, that it is one of the most skillfully written works (in modern literary terms) I have come across. The points of clarification are of a literary nature, not dogma.

I expect that such a perspective might surprise a lot of people. Being able to explain myself is my goal and one that I think would be educative to others.

 

[sealchan]

Don't really know what this is about, but why could he not have had all of those wives? Women from two fathers having the same name is certainly not impossible. The two reports were not necessarily written at the same time -may reflect the truth, but not the whole truth which could only be written after the fact.
Example....
If I had some wives now and someone wrote about it -then married more later and someone wrote about it -and two had the same name but were not of the same father.... It would not be as someone writing a complete account after I had lived.

In the scope of Biblical debate this is probably not seen as too important. But it does stand as an example of the Word and an appearance of conflict. In my study of Genesis the skill of the writing is such that I don't see any room for sloppiness and when I don't have an explanation for what appears to be, in my ignorance, sloppiness, I want to know better.

At this point I feel that all the answers offered seem like a rich source of possible perspectives such that I don't have the concern about the apparent conflict between the two scriptures. But for me it seems necessary to appreciate the literary qualities of the scripture in order to understand where these apparent conflicts came from. In this case, terseness and possible familiar backstory (omitted for the sake of terseness perhaps) goes a long ways for me.

If this thread seems a bit myopic...that is how I tend to work. Once I finish my study of Genesis I hope to collate some general insights and write them all out.

 

[blü 2]

I expect that such a perspective might surprise a lot of people. Being able to explain myself is my goal and one that I think would be educative to others.

Thanks. I respect your goal, though I'm still surprised that you'd start a second thread for that particular question.

Even so, good hunting as you continue your search.

 

[sealchan]

And I'd have said the meaning to be attributed to ancient typos was not a pressing concern. But perhaps I'm missing something and @sealchan will put me straight.

Although many might be surprised to learn this, Genesis and other books of the Bible were written with a precision craft comparable to the precision skill of the greatest of the illustrations in the Book of Kells. This craft is a decidedly literary one. My personal inspiration (which began with reading a translation of "The David Story" by Robert Alter) is to uncover further the literary craft of the Bible focusing currently on Genesis. I have found that the variations arranged on motifs across stories to be pervasive. Also the whole epic of Genesis so far seems to have had its origins in either the Mahabharata or a common epic tradition shared by both.

What this yields are the keys to the goals and intentions of the original authors. These intentions also indicate the direction one should look when proclaiming "Biblical truth". For me this sort of analysis is potentially revolutionary. I also feel personally called upon by God to undertake this work.

 

[sealchan]

Thanks. I respect your goal, though I'm still surprised that you'd start a second thread for that particular question.

Even so, good hunting as you continue your search.

Thanks! I'm restarting after a lapse and I wanted to get some feedback to what had been a fairly dead thread previously. This chapter isn't on everyone's mind when they pray but it fits into the larger puzzle that is the design of the whole story.

 

[Thinking Homer]

Although many might be surprised to learn this, Genesis and other books of the Bible were written with a precision craft comparable to the precision skill of the greatest of the illustrations in the Book of Kells. This craft is a decidedly literary one. My personal inspiration (which began with reading a translation of "The David Story" by Robert Alter) is to uncover further the literary craft of the Bible focusing currently on Genesis. I have found that the variations arranged on motifs across stories to be pervasive. Also the whole epic of Genesis so far seems to have had its origins in either the Mahabharata or a common epic tradition shared by both.

What this yields are the keys to the goals and intentions of the original authors. These intentions also indicate the direction one should look when proclaiming "Biblical truth". For me this sort of analysis is potentially revolutionary. I also feel personally called upon by God to undertake this work.

I would appreciate it if you can start a new thread sometime in the future with regards to the creation story in Genesis and how you would interpret it. How literal/figuratively should we take the whole thing? Thanks.

 

[nPeace]

I am reposting this under a new title in the hopes of getting more interest and response. This originally comes from my thread Gradual Dominance: Esau's Descendants and The Rulers of Edom: Genesis 36

In the Bible there is the following conflict in reporting on Esau's wives...

Genesis 26
When Esau was forty years old, he married Judith daughter of Beeri the Hittite, and also Basemathdaughter of Elon the Hittite

Genesis 36
Esau took his wives from the women of Canaan: Adah daughter of Elon the Hittite, and Oholibamahdaughter of Anah and granddaughter of Zibeon the Hivite— also Basemath daughter of Ishmael and sister of Nebaioth.

Granted that in Genesis 26 we might allow that Esau only married two wives at that time, we have one match but the other wife in Genesis 26 doesn't match either of the other two offered in later scripture. And Oholibamah's father seems to be different in each case.

It would appear that either there was an unfortunate failure on the part of the editor to correct these contradictions or it was felt that both sources were authentic and although contradictory had to be kept intact. Perhaps the separation of ten chapters was the best the authors could come up with in order to minimize the impact of the contradiction. In any case this would appear to be a fairly clear cut example of literalistic error in the Bible.

I did some research into this, and evidence seem to suggest that each woman possibly were identified by two names.

Judith - possibly Oholibamah / Aholibamah

Aholibamah (Hebrew אָהֳלִיבָמָה, Standard Hebrew Ahalivama, Tiberian Hebrew ʼĀhālîḇāmā; "My tabernacle of/is height/exaltation" or "Tent of the High Place"), is an eight time referenced matriarch in the biblical record

Aholibamah was the daughter of Anah of Zibeon the Hivite. Her maternal grandfather was Zibeon the Hivite son of Seir the Horite. She was one of two Canaanite women who married Esau, the son of Isaac, when he was in his forties. However, her In-Laws were greatly opposed to this union. So as to pacify them, Esau changed her name to the Hebraic name "Judith".


Basemath - possibly Adah

Adah
Hebrew: עָדָה‬, Modern ʿAda, Tiberian ʿĀḏāh; adornment
......
the first wife of Esau, the daughter of Elon the Hittite. It has been suggested by biblical scholars that she is the same person as "Bashemath the daughter of Elon the Hittite" mentioned as a wife of Esau in Genesis 26

Basemath, Bashemath, or Basmath (Hebrew: בָּשְׂמַת‬, Modern Basmat, Tiberian Bāśəmáṯ, "Sweet-smelling", Arabic: بسمة; "Sweet-smile")
Before Esau married his third wife, he had named one of his Canaanite wives after Basemath, probably because he knew of her, since they were cousins. The wife whom Esau named as Basemath, was Adah the Hittite, his first wife. So after he married his third wife, Esau changed Basemath the Ishmaelite's name to Mahalath.

BASEMATH
(Basʹe·math) [Perfumed; Balsam Oil; Spicy].
1. A wife of Esau. She was a daughter of Elon the Hittite, therefore either the same person as Adah or her sister. Basemath was “a source of bitterness” to Isaac and Rebekah. - Gnesise 26:34, 35; 27:46; 28:8; 36:2.

2. Another wife of Esau, possibly the same as Mahalath. She was a daughter of Abraham’s son Ishmael, sister of Nebaioth, and therefore Esau’s first cousin. Esau took her as wife after seeing his father’s great displeasure over his Canaanite wives. She bore his son Reuel. - Genesis 28:8, 9; 36:3, 4, 10.

Esau's wives would then be...
1. Basemath (Ahad?) - daughter of Elon the Hittite.
2. Basemath (Mahalath?) - daughter of Ishmael,
3. Oholibamah (Judith) - daughter of Beeri the Hittite and granddaughter of Zibeon the Hivite
See Anah.

I believe these are only possibilities that we can never prove, in this lifetime at least - as is the case with other parts of the texts.

 

[sealchan]

I would appreciate it if you can start a new thread sometime in the future with regards to the creation story in Genesis and how you would interpret it. How literal/figuratively should we take the whole thing? Thanks.

I have started the following thread...

Genesis: A Literary Whole

Thank you for your interest!

 

[sealchan]

I did some research into this, and evidence seem to suggest that each woman possibly were identified by two names.

Judith - possibly Oholibamah / Aholibamah

Aholibamah (Hebrew אָהֳלִיבָמָה, Standard Hebrew Ahalivama, Tiberian Hebrew ʼĀhālîḇāmā; "My tabernacle of/is height/exaltation" or "Tent of the High Place"), is an eight time referenced matriarch in the biblical record

Aholibamah was the daughter of Anah of Zibeon the Hivite. Her maternal grandfather was Zibeon the Hivite son of Seir the Horite. She was one of two Canaanite women who married Esau, the son of Isaac, when he was in his forties. However, her In-Laws were greatly opposed to this union. So as to pacify them, Esau changed her name to the Hebraic name "Judith".


Basemath - possibly Adah

Adah
Hebrew: עָדָה‬, Modern ʿAda, Tiberian ʿĀḏāh; adornment
......
the first wife of Esau, the daughter of Elon the Hittite. It has been suggested by biblical scholars that she is the same person as "Bashemath the daughter of Elon the Hittite" mentioned as a wife of Esau in Genesis 26

Basemath, Bashemath, or Basmath (Hebrew: בָּשְׂמַת‬, Modern Basmat, Tiberian Bāśəmáṯ, "Sweet-smelling", Arabic: بسمة; "Sweet-smile")
Before Esau married his third wife, he had named one of his Canaanite wives after Basemath, probably because he knew of her, since they were cousins. The wife whom Esau named as Basemath, was Adah the Hittite, his first wife. So after he married his third wife, Esau changed Basemath the Ishmaelite's name to Mahalath.

BASEMATH
(Basʹe·math) [Perfumed; Balsam Oil; Spicy].
1. A wife of Esau. She was a daughter of Elon the Hittite, therefore either the same person as Adah or her sister. Basemath was “a source of bitterness” to Isaac and Rebekah. - Gnesise 26:34, 35; 27:46; 28:8; 36:2.

2. Another wife of Esau, possibly the same as Mahalath. She was a daughter of Abraham’s son Ishmael, sister of Nebaioth, and therefore Esau’s first cousin. Esau took her as wife after seeing his father’s great displeasure over his Canaanite wives. She bore his son Reuel. - Genesis 28:8, 9; 36:3, 4, 10.

Esau's wives would then be...
1. Basemath (Ahad?) - daughter of Elon the Hittite.
2. Basemath (Mahalath?) - daughter of Ishmael,
3. Oholibamah (Judith) - daughter of Beeri the Hittite and granddaughter of Zibeon the Hivite
See Anah.

I believe these are only possibilities that we can never prove, in this lifetime at least - as is the case with other parts of the texts.

Thanks!

I appreciate these sorts of responses. One might think, "why can't he just look that up himself?" My answer is that I believe the Bible was written in order that it be discussed. Who knows what open, public discussion might do for its participants, even those who merely "listen in". I also enjoy hearing those with a sincere and passionate interest in the Bible, for or against, speak in response to the sincere questions I ask.

 

[QuestioningMind]

I am reposting this under a new title in the hopes of getting more interest and response. This originally comes from my thread Gradual Dominance: Esau's Descendants and The Rulers of Edom: Genesis 36

In the Bible there is the following conflict in reporting on Esau's wives...

Genesis 26
When Esau was forty years old, he married Judith daughter of Beeri the Hittite, and also Basemathdaughter of Elon the Hittite

Genesis 36
Esau took his wives from the women of Canaan: Adah daughter of Elon the Hittite, and Oholibamahdaughter of Anah and granddaughter of Zibeon the Hivite— also Basemath daughter of Ishmael and sister of Nebaioth.

Granted that in Genesis 26 we might allow that Esau only married two wives at that time, we have one match but the other wife in Genesis 26 doesn't match either of the other two offered in later scripture. And Oholibamah's father seems to be different in each case.

It would appear that either there was an unfortunate failure on the part of the editor to correct these contradictions or it was felt that both sources were authentic and although contradictory had to be kept intact. Perhaps the separation of ten chapters was the best the authors could come up with in order to minimize the impact of the contradiction. In any case this would appear to be a fairly clear cut example of literalistic error in the Bible.

After reading those quotes, how exactly is it that followers of the bible can claim that in God's eyes marriage is between one man and one women?

 

[sealchan]

After reading those quotes, how exactly is it that followers of the bible can claim that in God's eyes marriage is between one man and one women?

I think that the authors of Genesis understood that the present time for their audience emerged out of a prior time when things were different. Be careful not to think, as so many naive Christians do, that every person in every story is meant to exhibit a perfect, moral character even by, and especially by, the standards of the story-teller's own perspective.

 

[QuestioningMind]

I think that the authors of Genesis understood that the present time for their audience emerged out of a prior time when things were different. Be careful not to think, as so many naive Christians do, that every person in every story is meant to exhibit a perfect, moral character even by, and especially by, the standards of the story-teller's own perspective.

Yet God who is supposed to have a moral objection to any marriage that isn't between one man and one woman never once chastises all of these men who have multiple wives. Which suggests that this moral objection doesn't actually come from God, but from fallible human beings.

 

[sealchan]

Yet God who is supposed to have a moral objection to any marriage that isn't between one man and one woman never once chastises all of these men who have multiple wives. Which suggests that this moral objection doesn't actually come from God, but from fallible human beings.

It all comes from human beings...but with a sincere desire to understand God. I won't defend any inconsistences by claiming otherwise. But I do defend that the Bible does describe throughout at least the Jewish Testament that the relationship of God and humanity has developed and progressed over time. This view is at odds with many people's interpretation of the Bible but not with what I would consider an honest interpretation of the Bible. Many of the patriarchs, even those cited for their faithfulness were also clearly shown to lack faith...and God regretted his creation at one point later promising never to act to destroy it. That doesn't sound like a consistent moral uprightness nor a perfect creator to me...yet this is clearly the Biblical account.

 

[nPeace]

I try to understand the Bible from an overall perspective. So I don't think looking at one portion, and judging it would allow me to do that.

Also because of seeing evidence that the Bible is harmonious throughout, and contains wisdom, and other information far beyond what is common, I think it merits serious attention, if one is to gain the treasures within it.

On that note, I believe it is exactly as it says, that those treasures are hid away from fools - that is, those who reject the wisdom of God.
So with that in mind, I become a student of the Bible, not a judge, and dictator, and I have found that the understanding I have gained is truly... it's actually hard for me to describe in words, what it's really like. Awesome is the only word I can think of right now.

Here are a few examples of what I think taking a student's position, rather than a judge's position, would look like.
An angel of God turns bad.
Student: Why did God not destroy him? There must be a reason. Let me see if the Bible has the an answer.
Judge: God is all powerful. He could simply have removed the angel, and prevented all the carnage we see today. Either God is weak, or just plain stupid and cruel.

I see God's actions working in harmony with the qualities the Bible describes him as having - his mercy, justice, love, wisdom, and even though all powerful, he doesn't act in a vindictive way, and wipe out anyone who speaks against him.

If it were me, I probably would have, because I don't have the patience and love that he has, and sometimes I feel the anger building up inside when I hear people speak so arrogantly and ignorantly about things that seems to me so easy to grasp for those who love right. Then I have to suppress my anger and remind myself that these people are just looking for excuses to rebel, because they somehow believe that having what they form as an excuse will excuse them.

However, I understand why God leaves them in ignorance, because sometimes I do feel like this knowledge is too precious to be given to unappreciative people, and I don't feel like explaining anything.

However, I try to develop godly thinking, so I try to be patient, considering that I could have been arrogant too. Thankfully I'm not.

I think that's what helped me to see that God acts fairly / justly. I think a student of the Bible comes to this realization, as they gain a better understanding through serious study of the Bible.

I see so many situations in the Bible that can be easily understood if we are students of the Bible, rather than judges.
Right now I don't feel like explaining, this one, ...

However, this post made a statement that changed my mind. @sealchan,
Thanks for reminding me that not everyone is arrogant, and some may be just looking for sensible answers.

Understanding God's ways involves taking into account all the details, not just picking at parts to attack, because we think that that one can give us a good argument.

Picking cherries is good, but it makes no sense going to a tree, and looking for all the bad ones. It makes sense to look for the good ripe ones, and pick them. Those are the ones you benefit from. Once you taste them, and they taste good, you obviously will return to the tree again, during the season, and pick more.
If they are bitter, or acid, you might try one or two more, but if you are not satisfied, what do you do? You leave the tree. You don't pick anymore. That's it for that tree.

People have different tastes. Millions of people will eat fruit from the same seeds, and say they don't like, while millions will say they like.
That's apparently the situation we are seeing imo.

Regarding why God allowed polygamy, we may ask, why did God allow the disgusting practices committed by the nations around, to continue? Why did he not just wipe them out?
Why did he put up with the Israelites constant rebellion?
The answers are found in the same Bible. So we will find them if we study the Bible as students, and not judges.

I will just give two scriptures.
(Acts 17:30, 31) . . .God has overlooked the times of such ignorance; but now he is declaring to all people everywhere that they should repent. 31 Because he has set a day on which he purposes to judge the inhabited earth in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed, and he has provided a guarantee to all men by resurrecting him from the dead.”

(Romans 3:23-26) 23 For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and it is as a free gift that they are being declared righteous by his undeserved kindness through the release by the ransom paid by Christ Jesus. 25 God presented him as an offering for propitiation through faith in his blood. This was to demonstrate his own righteousness, because God in his forbearance was forgiving the sins that occurred in the past. 26 This was to demonstrate his own righteousness in this present season, so that he might be righteous even when declaring righteous the man who has faith in Jesus.

This scripture shows that even before Christ died as a ransom, God was already forgiving sins based on that ransom, because it was guaranteed - even before it took place.
That demonstrates how righteous God is.
None of us rightly should be alive, but because of God's mercy, we are.
Clearly, God's mercy, justice, and love, are exceedingly great, and those qualifies are perfectly balanced with his power and wisdom.

@sealchan
Indeed, correctly understanding the Bible can be a bit tricky, that's why God didn't leave it up to everyone to figure it out for themselves. He always uses people to help, and since the Christian congregation has been established by the Christ, it is being used to teach people everywhere the truth from God's word the Bible.
However, if one is not HHH (hungry, humble, and honest), they will not benefit from that provision.

Take the verse Genesis 6:7 . . .for I regret that I have made them. . .
Is God saying that he regrets creating humankind?
If that were the case, why did he not just wipe out mankind, and forget about it? Perhaps create a new species? But wait! Why would he need a new species, anyway, when he has tens of thousands of spirit beings like himself?
Why bother?

The fact that God saved Noah and others, and had Noah preach to the people, should cause us to look at that statement in a new light.
Could it be that it means simply that God regretted how they turned out?
Does it not also reveal that God does not know everything, unless he chooses to, nor does he predestine mankind to any particular fate?

I think if we study the Bible in this way - like a student - we can learn a lot about what the Bible is really saying.

 

[allright]

Genesis 26 just lists Esau's first two wives

Genesis 36 is genealogy and would only list Esau's wives who had sons who survived and they in turn bore other sons to continue his line

Also Esau could have married more than one woman with the same father just as Jacob did

 

[iam1me]

Generally speaking, there is no question that there are errors in the scripture.

 

[sojourner]

I am reposting this under a new title in the hopes of getting more interest and response. This originally comes from my thread Gradual Dominance: Esau's Descendants and The Rulers of Edom: Genesis 36

In the Bible there is the following conflict in reporting on Esau's wives...

Genesis 26
When Esau was forty years old, he married Judith daughter of Beeri the Hittite, and also Basemathdaughter of Elon the Hittite

Genesis 36
Esau took his wives from the women of Canaan: Adah daughter of Elon the Hittite, and Oholibamahdaughter of Anah and granddaughter of Zibeon the Hivite— also Basemath daughter of Ishmael and sister of Nebaioth.

Granted that in Genesis 26 we might allow that Esau only married two wives at that time, we have one match but the other wife in Genesis 26 doesn't match either of the other two offered in later scripture. And Oholibamah's father seems to be different in each case.

It would appear that either there was an unfortunate failure on the part of the editor to correct these contradictions or it was felt that both sources were authentic and although contradictory had to be kept intact. Perhaps the separation of ten chapters was the best the authors could come up with in order to minimize the impact of the contradiction. In any case this would appear to be a fairly clear cut example of literalistic error in the Bible.

The discrepancy depends on the source material. There are many such discrepancies. The conflicting geneaologies of Jesus leap to mind. They’re not “errors,” so much as they are “different stories.”

 

[sealchan]

I try to understand the Bible from an overall perspective. So I don't think looking at one portion, and judging it would allow me to do that.

Also because of seeing evidence that the Bible is harmonious throughout, and contains wisdom, and other information far beyond what is common, I think it merits serious attention, if one is to gain the treasures within it.

On that note, I believe it is exactly as it says, that those treasures are hid away from fools - that is, those who reject the wisdom of God.
So with that in mind, I become a student of the Bible, not a judge, and dictator, and I have found that the understanding I have gained is truly... it's actually hard for me to describe in words, what it's really like. Awesome is the only word I can think of right now.

Here are a few examples of what I think taking a student's position, rather than a judge's position, would look like.
An angel of God turns bad.
Student: Why did God not destroy him? There must be a reason. Let me see if the Bible has the an answer.
Judge: God is all powerful. He could simply have removed the angel, and prevented all the carnage we see today. Either God is weak, or just plain stupid and cruel.

I see God's actions working in harmony with the qualities the Bible describes him as having - his mercy, justice, love, wisdom, and even though all powerful, he doesn't act in a vindictive way, and wipe out anyone who speaks against him.

If it were me, I probably would have, because I don't have the patience and love that he has, and sometimes I feel the anger building up inside when I hear people speak so arrogantly and ignorantly about things that seems to me so easy to grasp for those who love right. Then I have to suppress my anger and remind myself that these people are just looking for excuses to rebel, because they somehow believe that having what they form as an excuse will excuse them.

However, I understand why God leaves them in ignorance, because sometimes I do feel like this knowledge is too precious to be given to unappreciative people, and I don't feel like explaining anything.

However, I try to develop godly thinking, so I try to be patient, considering that I could have been arrogant too. Thankfully I'm not.

I think that's what helped me to see that God acts fairly / justly. I think a student of the Bible comes to this realization, as they gain a better understanding through serious study of the Bible.

I see so many situations in the Bible that can be easily understood if we are students of the Bible, rather than judges.
Right now I don't feel like explaining, this one, ...

However, this post made a statement that changed my mind. @sealchan,
Thanks for reminding me that not everyone is arrogant, and some may be just looking for sensible answers.

Understanding God's ways involves taking into account all the details, not just picking at parts to attack, because we think that that one can give us a good argument.

Picking cherries is good, but it makes no sense going to a tree, and looking for all the bad ones. It makes sense to look for the good ripe ones, and pick them. Those are the ones you benefit from. Once you taste them, and they taste good, you obviously will return to the tree again, during the season, and pick more.
If they are bitter, or acid, you might try one or two more, but if you are not satisfied, what do you do? You leave the tree. You don't pick anymore. That's it for that tree.

People have different tastes. Millions of people will eat fruit from the same seeds, and say they don't like, while millions will say they like.
That's apparently the situation we are seeing imo.

Regarding why God allowed polygamy, we may ask, why did God allow the disgusting practices committed by the nations around, to continue? Why did he not just wipe them out?
Why did he put up with the Israelites constant rebellion?
The answers are found in the same Bible. So we will find them if we study the Bible as students, and not judges.

I will just give two scriptures.
(Acts 17:30, 31) . . .God has overlooked the times of such ignorance; but now he is declaring to all people everywhere that they should repent. 31 Because he has set a day on which he purposes to judge the inhabited earth in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed, and he has provided a guarantee to all men by resurrecting him from the dead.”

(Romans 3:23-26) 23 For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and it is as a free gift that they are being declared righteous by his undeserved kindness through the release by the ransom paid by Christ Jesus. 25 God presented him as an offering for propitiation through faith in his blood. This was to demonstrate his own righteousness, because God in his forbearance was forgiving the sins that occurred in the past. 26 This was to demonstrate his own righteousness in this present season, so that he might be righteous even when declaring righteous the man who has faith in Jesus.

This scripture shows that even before Christ died as a ransom, God was already forgiving sins based on that ransom, because it was guaranteed - even before it took place.
That demonstrates how righteous God is.
None of us rightly should be alive, but because of God's mercy, we are.
Clearly, God's mercy, justice, and love, are exceedingly great, and those qualifies are perfectly balanced with his power and wisdom.

@sealchan
Indeed, correctly understanding the Bible can be a bit tricky, that's why God didn't leave it up to everyone to figure it out for themselves. He always uses people to help, and since the Christian congregation has been established by the Christ, it is being used to teach people everywhere the truth from God's word the Bible.
However, if one is not HHH (hungry, humble, and honest), they will not benefit from that provision.

Take the verse Genesis 6:7 . . .for I regret that I have made them. . .
Is God saying that he regrets creating humankind?
If that were the case, why did he not just wipe out mankind, and forget about it? Perhaps create a new species? But wait! Why would he need a new species, anyway, when he has tens of thousands of spirit beings like himself?
Why bother?

The fact that God saved Noah and others, and had Noah preach to the people, should cause us to look at that statement in a new light.
Could it be that it means simply that God regretted how they turned out?
Does it not also reveal that God does not know everything, unless he chooses to, nor does he predestine mankind to any particular fate?

I think if we study the Bible in this way - like a student - we can learn a lot about what the Bible is really saying.

Thanks for this.

My emphasis right now is mainly on understanding the subtle art of scripture and this leaves me with a focus on the more technical aspects of scripture. What I have found and have continued to find is that the Bible is technically accurate in a deep way as to the words it contains. When I don't perceive this I know there is likely an explanation. It is also ironic and unfortunate that so many people, believers or not, don't realize the deeper, subtle beauty that is the Bible. History and experience cloud a better, more honest reading.

Your words above remind me that there is also a deeply important heart-based understanding, one which I don't mention so often. This is partly due to the scope of my deeper study of the Bible, partly due to my personality.