and the Talmud are against such a rendering.  It is to be borne in mind, however, that the Talmud is not the Pentateuch, and that learned and sincerely pious commentators have differed, and do so still, as widely as the poles, upon passages quite as easily understood as the one now under discussion.  There is no more proof in this verse that a woman is bound to serve and obey her husband, in the common acceptation of the term, than that a man is obligated to serve and obey his wife, or worship her with his body—­whatever that may mean—­as he solemnly vows to do in certain marriage services.  The endowment with worldly goods and the worship promised, were perhaps put in as an offset to the pledge of service and obedience.  Certainly the man’s vow to worship his wife is no more inconsistent than is the woman’s to obey implicitly; and her obedience, if it is not implicit, is not obedience at all, but is merely acceding to the wishes of her husband when they accord with her own judgment.

Infidels, in seeking to disparage the Word of God, quote this passage and kindred ones, and, accepting the commonly received idea of their meaning, endeavor to subvert the faith of the masses.  With those who do not carefully examine the matter for themselves, they often succeed.  It has been asserted, too, by those who would wish the teachings of the Koran to take precedence over those of the Bible, that the position accorded to women by the Mosaic law was quite as degrading as that accorded to them by Mohammed; but a careful reading of the Scripture warrants no such conclusion.  Many matters are spoken of, both in the law and the prophets, as having been practised and tolerated, and even rules given for their regulation, which were by no means of Divine appointment.  This distinction should always be carefully marked in regard to the sacred text; and in addition to this it should be remembered that the Word of God is not responsible for the erroneous opinions of mankind.  When the Almighty placed human beings upon the earth, he created one man and one woman, destining them to be the progenitors of the entire race, thereby indicating that monogamy was of Divine appointment.  But original purity was soon departed from; lawless passion was allowed to mar the beautiful completeness and concord of the marriage relation as instituted by God; and, in time, many even of those who were nominal worshipers of the true God, fell into polygamy.  The true idea and design of marriage, and the rights of woman, with the respect due to her, was lost sight of, and the requirements of the Divine law set at nought.  Men became the slaves of their own lusts.  God was not in all their thoughts.  Iniquity prevailed to such a frightful extent that “it repented the Lord that he had made man upon the earth, and it grieved him at his heart."[I]