Quote Originally Posted by sunofmysoul View Post

And what of polygamy? Does the Bible ever say it is wrong or a sin?

And if you own a slave, (that's permissible too according to the scriptures)
by biblical law that ownership of the slave, trumps "marital vows"

If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him. If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself. And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free: Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever. Ex.21:2-6
In regards to age requirements, the N.T. is clear that we must obey the laws of the land. Secondly, that if the laws of the land are unjust, we are to practice the higher law of God. Hence, a bishop is to be the husband of one wife in the N.T. standards states. Also, what concerns "appearance of evil" should it come down to the age difference, even though it might be lawful in a civilian status does not mean it is acceptable to practice by the Church, just as the Catholic Church does not allow "****sexual marrages." It is the perogative of the Faith in doctrine and morals to practice within their own limits. If the secular law makers take issue with it, it is better that the Church suffer the same persecution that it did in Pagan rome in the first four centuries and overcome by p***ive martyrdom than to always be chasing after every whim of the world.

In regards to O.T. law, as you suggested from Exodus 21, the law is based on prudence. The master cannot give what is not his own. The laws laid afterwards in regards to woman servants is concerned with the honor due every woman to be chaste. That is just the way in which that society operated and for the most part it worked for them. You should continue on with the p***age until verse 11. However, if male servant should be the master's servant for life, that is his own choice. It is not much different than a priest who takes holy orders, with the exception that he is celibate forever; the servant at least has a wife and children. I think it is a matter of prudence for the females under that society to find it more agreeable to be taken care of for life. Hence, when that care is not given by the master, as demonstrated in verse 11 "Should he cheat her of these three things (Food, Clothing, and Conjugal Rights v.10) she may leave, freely, without having to pay any money." This is of course related to the woman servant as a concubine, but as a matter of prudence, the spirit of the law, a master's care being unjust in any circumstance could be made aware of to the judges.