Posted on 10/03/2018 1:38:25 PM PDT by pastorbillrandles
And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.(Genesis 2:23-25)
For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.(Romans 1:26-32)
The ancient world was a very brutal, merciless place. In our day we marvel at the beautiful Greco/Roman architecture, (for example), the impressive art, roads and public buildings, and the incredible technological accomplishment of our forefathers. For an example, Aqueducts, which allowed a flow of millions of galloons fresh water into many Romans cities, from hundreds of miles away!
But for most people , life was short, miserable and squalid. One of the things which insured this was sexual anarchy. A man could have a wife for breeding children, He could also have a concubine, ( a wife with a lesser status), it wouldn’t be uncommon for that same man to be deeply involved in pederasty.
Even religious festivals were often sex saturated frenzies, there were whole classes of women, and even children devoted as “Heiros Gamos“, i.e. temple prostitutes by which the worshippers would come into “oneness” with their god through degrading sexual rituals.
Slavery was common, with all of the debauchery and debasement that that cruel institution involved.
Children were used and abused with little consequence because unless they were the children of the powerful and successful, they truly were of little consequence. It was common in the ancient world that “unwanted” children were simply abandoned and often newborns were left on hillsides, exposed to the elements or wild animals.
The civilization of Canaan was of the same sordid nature. The frightening (and uncannily modern) story of Sodom and Gommorrah illustrates this. Lot once lived in the desert with his uncle Abraham. But for business reasons he moved towards Sodom. Next thing we see He lived in Sodom. By the time of the story in Genesis, he served in the city leadership of Sodom.
Though Lot was a righteous man, just living in Sodom corrupted him and his family considerably. His sons died in Sodom as did his Sons in law, for they were unable to believe(or unwilling) that God would ever judge Sodom in righteousness.The Sons in law laughed off the warning of LOT. Lot’s daughters obviously were corrupted by living there, for they did what would be unthinkable, they seduced their own father and had children by him.They weren’t born that way.
Lot himself was so utterly corrupted, (even though he was a believer), he thought little of offering his own daughters to a crazed mob intent on raping his (Angelic) guests.
The worship of the Canaanites was steeped in aberrant sexuality.Baal was the male principle in nature worship, Ashtorath his consort. First born children would routinely be offered to Moloch, burned alive on the brass altar. The priests of Baal would castrate themselves in a religious frenzy,(Transgender?) . The corruption of such worship produced homosexuals, incest, child murderers, rapists, and every other form of abominable and destructive sexuality.
This was the dark side of the ancient world, sexual obsession and anarchy was an almost universal phenomenon.It made for very cruel and exploitive societies. It seems as though the progressive left sees this as the ideal to strive for , but such a world is cruel and twisted.
But when God revealed his LAW to Moses, it set off a “Sexual revolution” which set the world on course for the next three thousand years, leading directly to the Judeo/ Christian world, and the most benevolent and successful civilization the world has even known.
Dennis Prager, a Jewish Rabbi, ethicist, author and talk radio host put it brilliantly in his article Judaism’s Sexual Revolution
When Judaism demanded that all sexual activity be channeled into marriage, it changed the world. The Torah’s prohibition of non-marital sex quite simply made the creation of Western civilization possible.Societies that did not place boundaries around sexuality were stymied in their development. The subsequent dominance of the Western world can largely be attributed to the sexual revolution initiated by Judaism and later carried forward by Christianity. This revolution consisted of forcing the sexual genie into the marital bottle. It ensured that sex no longer dominated society, heightened male-female love and sexuality (and thereby almost alone created the possibility of love and eroticism within marriage), and began the arduous task of elevating the status of women.
It is probably impossible for us, who live thousands of years after Judaism began this process, to perceive the extent to which undisciplined sex can dominate man’s life and the life of society. Throughout the ancient world, and up to the recent past in many parts of the world, sexuality infused virtually all of society.
Of course confining sexuality to one man and one woman for life, was not novel, it was in fact a call back to the Creator’s original intent for the maximum happiness of man and woman, and the benefit of all of society. Moses took us back to what God wanted for us in the garden, and to what alone is true to the way we were created.
One of the consequences of the strict insistence of the Torah upon sexual fidelity within marital monogamy, and sexual fidelity, was and is the elevation of women and children. The woman is no longer considered chattel, Scripture teaches that woman also is made in the Image of God. She is the man’s valued “help meet”, and the “joint heir of life” with her husband. He protects her, she honors him, and together they bring children into the world of their mutual love, whom they protect and guide unto adulthood.
By worshipping Jahweh, according to the Law of Moses the Jewish people would be “Holy”, i.e. separate from the seriously confused, sexually obsessed, morally spent and ruined pagan nations around them. A “Holy Nation” of happily married families raising their own children, preparing them to be productive and healthy adults would be able to shine amidst the squalor of the pagan world.
The Biblical expression, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth…” is a revelation of God that contrasts with the hyper sexualized pagan religions. The only true God created all things out of nothing, by the Word of His power, when He said, Lux Fiat,”let there be light”.
The pagan gods engaged in various sexual activities in order to bring about rain,fertility, spring, summer and fall, thus the worship of false gods was and is utterly infused with various degrading sexual practices.
The sexual component of paganism proved to be a serious snare to Israel, constantly drawing them into idolatry which brought the judgment of the Holy God upon them, such as the account of Baal Peor, in Numbers 25.
There is a deep spiritual component to the sexual confusion we are seeing today as well, and to abortion, feminism, birth control and the confusing array of new “gender identities” which currently confront us.
The only way to understand the gender issue is to realize the spiritual dimension of it, how we have all to a certain extent been seduced by it, and the need for deep repentance and even deliverance from the evil forces we have courted through it.
The old testament does not forbid multiple wives. Author is re-interpreting.
for this cause shall a man leave his father and mother and shall cleave unto his wife and they shall be one flesh...
Nor was divorce, but neither was part of the original Design.
Hence Jesus spoke of the hardness of heart as the cause.
“The old testament does not forbid multiple wives. Author is re-interpreting.”
Polygamy is not from God. It was a descendant of Cain who came up with the concept of polygamy:
Genesis 4:19
And Lamech took unto him two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah.
There are several cases of polygamy in the Old Testament, and they are all negative examples of why it does not work. Jacob was tricked into it and, as such, is the least culpable. There was favoritism and sibling rivalry that almost escalated to the murderous path of Cain. Joseph was insensitive and proud, and acted with a sense of entitement toward his brothers by boasting of his dreams. Even his father had to reprove him. He had to undergo great suffering to bring him to the place necessary to undo the damage that his father’s polygamous marriage had caused.
Christ’s own explanation of first principles shows that polygamy is similar to divorce and remarriage. Yes, God tolerated it but did not bless it or command it.
Matthew 19:7-9
They said to Him, “Why then did Moses command to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?” He said to them, “Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.”
Notice that Christ’s enemies described divorce as a “command,” but Christ said it was merely “permitted” not commanded. Likewise, God does not command anyone to have multiple wives. People do not do this because they are following God. And Christ implemented a higher standard for His disciples to follow.
Those who want to use the Bible to justify polygamy are simply making excuses for their own ungodliness and sexual immorality. Under the New Covenant and under grace, God requires a higher standard. The judgment on such behavior is more severe.
Hebrews 10:28-29
Anyone who has rejected Moses’ law dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace?
John 3:19
And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
John 15:24
If I had not done among them the works which no one else did, they would have no sin; but now they have seen and also hated both Me and My Father.
Under Christ’s teaching and example, polygamy is impossible. His relationship to the Church is compared to a husband’s relationship with a wife. So, the apostles commanded men in the Church to love their respective wives as Christ loved the Church and gave His life for her.
“The old testament does not forbid multiple wives. Author is re-interpreting.”
Polygamy is not from God. It was a descendant of Cain who came up with the concept of polygamy:
Genesis 4:19
And Lamech took unto him two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah.
There are several cases of polygamy in the Old Testament, and they are all negative examples of why it does not work. Jacob was tricked into it and, as such, is the least culpable. There was favoritism and sibling rivalry that almost escalated to the murderous path of Cain. Joseph was insensitive and proud, and acted with a sense of entitement toward his brothers by boasting of his dreams. Even his father had to reprove him. He had to undergo great suffering to bring him to the place necessary to undo the damage that his father’s polygamous marriage had caused.
Christ’s own explanation of first principles shows that polygamy is similar to divorce and remarriage. Yes, God tolerated it but did not bless it or command it.
Matthew 19:7-9
They said to Him, “Why then did Moses command to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?” He said to them, “Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.”
Notice that Christ’s enemies described divorce as a “command,” but Christ said it was merely “permitted” not commanded. Likewise, God does not command anyone to have multiple wives. People do not do this because they are following God. And Christ implemented a higher standard for His disciples to follow.
Those who want to use the Bible to justify polygamy are simply making excuses for their own ungodliness and sexual immorality. Under the New Covenant and under grace, God requires a higher standard. The judgment on such behavior is more severe.
Hebrews 10:28-29
Anyone who has rejected Moses’ law dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace?
John 3:19
And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
John 15:24
If I had not done among them the works which no one else did, they would have no sin; but now they have seen and also hated both Me and My Father.
Under Christ’s teaching and example, polygamy is impossible. His relationship to the Church is compared to a husband’s relationship with a wife. So, the apostles commanded men in the Church to love their respective wives as Christ loved the Church and gave His life for her.
That is rubbish religion interprreration not science. You are answering a science question with rubbish religion dogma. Next thing you’ll claim is that the world is flat, the earth was created in 4k years, the sun revolves around the earth. and witches and bob christians shiuld be burned at the stake and that we should all be prepared to drinj kool aid and board the alien mother ship. Ok... lol
My understanding is that old testament rabbis did not forbid men having multiple wives. The ot describes many men having multiple wives and none are explicitly condemned. The fact is that the practice of multiple wives was accepted in ot times.
Jesus addressed multiple wives only in the context of what he considered an improper divorce, and in no other context. That is at best highly ambiguous given the detailed arguments jesus had with the pharisees.
One flesh is in obvious reference to each wife being
married to only one man under genesis, which fored the basis of ot law as practiced by ot rabbis.
Jesus said he came not to replace the ot but to fulfill it, so jesus did not change the ot rabbi interpretation— subsequent revisionist did (and thus your confusion btw.
The proper mathematical way to regard the Marriage relationship is as a non injective non surjective function, from married women to men. One flesh describes a set of one or several women married to a single man. Nowhere does the bible condemn that.
The bible describes numerous polygamous families witout condemnation. In laetixular david. Jesus descends according to matthew from bathsheba who is davids 8th wife. Jesus would not be descended from a blashpemius marriage becuase that would be a contradiction of g*ds will and law that you would have to explain otherwise. Keep in mind no one is perfect (except g*d jesus and mary) in the bible.
I suggest you might want to Read your bible more carefully next time and dont just take revisionists interpretations at face value. Think about it.
“It is probably impossible for us, who live thousands of years after Judaism began this process, to perceive the extent to which undisciplined sex can dominate man’s life and the life of society. Throughout the ancient world, and up to the recent past in many parts of the world, sexuality infused virtually all of society.”
Now we live in an era where the majority of folks, including kids, can see anything sexually, wherever they want, given they have a modern phone. I predict that it will not end well.
Freegards
You are right my FRiend
“That is rubbish religion interprreration not science. You are answering a science question with rubbish religion dogma.”
The opposite is true. Science can never answer questions of morality. Science can be a tool for applying moral principles, but moral principles are themselves not based on science. For example, science can tell us that there are exactly 2 biological sexes. Science does not tell us sex outside of marriage is immoral, or that marriage is only between a man and woman. It can tell us who is a man and who is a woman. It can tell us the health consequence of sexual promiscuity. It can not tell us that murder is a sin. It can tell us that a baby is a unique, living human being, so that we can expose the lie that an unborn child is merely a glob of cells.
“the earth was created in 4k years”
Creation took God 6 days. Time itself is relative based on the frame of reference being used.
“witches and bob christians shiuld be burned at the stake”
I don’t know what a “bob christian” is. Maybe a typo. Non-Christians are in danger of burning somewhere worse than on a steak, and witches should only be executed when they commit capital crimes like murder, kidnapping, etc. Their bodies were burned in the Old Testament for a reason (but only after being executed in a more humane way). Demons attach themselves to people, places, and things. Fire is one way you break this attachment. (Demons don’t like fire. Reminds them of their destiny.)
Even in the New Testament occult books were burned. But those who had demons, like a spirit of divination, were exorcised and saved. This is one way that the age of grace is superior to the age of law.
“we should all be prepared to drinj kool aid and board the alien mother ship”
Jesus is coming back. But antichrist is coming first. He’s the one with the “kool aid”. Anyone who permanently identifies with him by taking his “mark” will end up in the lake of fire. People can belittle Christian doctrine if they want, but when these things happen, they’ll be completely unprepared and easily deceived into following antichrist, because “everyone” will be doing so.
“My understanding is that old testament rabbis did not forbid men having multiple wives. The ot describes many men having multiple wives and none are explicitly condemned. The fact is that the practice of multiple wives was accepted in ot times.”
I’ve already answered this with scripture. You seem to be very preoccupied with defending polygamy. Not accusing you of anything, but you need to ask yourself why this is important to YOU.
Yes, polygamous marriage (of a man with more than one wife) can be legitimate in the sense that the covenants are binding. But marriage is a covenant that requires the consent of both parties. Coercing a bride to agree to accept other women is ungodly, selfish, and lustful. It is not the self-sacrificial love that Christ demonstrated and which the New Testament commands Christian men to emulate. Further, any man who pledged to “forsake all others” in his marriage vows would be a covenant breaker to practice polygamy. A woman who willingly agreed to allow this (she would have to agree in the marriage covenant or the marriage would be fraudulent) would be foolish and should look for a husband who will love her as Christ loves His bride.
There are specific warnings about polygamy even in the Old Testament.
Deuteronomy 17:17
Neither shall he multiply wives for himself, lest his heart turn away; nor shall he greatly multiply silver and gold for himself.
Guess what. That’s exactly what happened to Solomon. He disobeyed and committed very serious sins of idolatry because of this disobedience.
We can go down the list of every person who had more than one wife in the Old Testament. And every one of them had severe consequences due to it. Show me one person who did not. And there are no examples of Christians in the New Testament having multiple wives. In fact, in the New Testament, leaders could not have multiple wives. Polygamy was a disqualification for leadership. Even being divorced and remarried was a disqualification.
1 Timothy 3:2 & 12
A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior, hospitable, able to teach... Let deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.
Christ and Paul even taught that there were advantages for the servants of Christ to never marry at all and dedicate their lives to God’s service. Christ and Paul did this. However, Christ Himself will be married in eternity to His bride, which is the Church. He is the pattern and example to follow, and He does not have multiple brides. He also sacrificed Himself for the Church. Desiring to have multiple sexual partners reveals lust and covetousness which is not about a man putting his wife first. A wife is not there merely to meet the husband’s needs. He is to meet hers also. This is a challenging job that is impossible to do with multiple wives.
“Jesus addressed multiple wives only in the context of what he considered an improper divorce, and in no other context. That is at best highly ambiguous given the detailed arguments jesus had with the pharisees.”
That is the same argument that homosexuals often make about Jesus not specifically addressing homosexuality. For one, He did address the need for repentance in Sodom. Second, He addressed the sin of fornication. Third, homosexuality was not practiced within the communities to which Christ preached and ministered. There are many wicked practices that He did not specifically address. But He did teach a higher law regarding things like meekness, humility, unselfish love, and other principles that contradict the selfish motives behind the desire to have multiple sex partners.
Polygamy was not being practiced within Judaism during Christ’s earthly ministry. It was not particularly common among the Gentiles of the early church either. The apostles had to deal with widespread fornication which was clearly forbidden and had to be abandoned by anyone who came to Christ.
“Jesus said he came not to replace the ot but to fulfill it,”
Jesus taught a higher law. The apostles gave instructions for getting married and how for men to treat their wives. Nowhere is there any consideration for Christians engaging in polygamy. If someone was converted who had multiple wives, he could be a Christian but not a leader. He could not set the proper example for other Christians. There is a lot of warning in the New Testament about those who wanted to go back to the Mosaic Law as the standard of morality. Jesus demanded more. As I’ve already pointed out, the Pharisees were focussed on what was permitted in marriage rather than what God actually commanded.
God does not command anyone to engage in polygamy. He never did. He warned people of the consequences. He gave us a different example to follow. He gave us a higher doctrine of what He intended in the pattern of marriage. A true follower of Jesus is not looking for loopholes to do his own will and be selfish. He is looking to please his Master, and this means either celibacy or faithful fidelity to his one spouse. When these ideals can not be achieved, those who follow Christ seek to get as close to the ideal as is possible.
I will add that I am only speaking as to what Christians should do. God’s perfect Law permitted polygamy as part of a legal system in an imperfect world. It would not be unreasonable for Christians to accept and tolerate polygamy outside of the Church as a less-than-ideal practice, but not an abomination like homosexuality. (Homosexuals are welcomed to become Christians but must abandon their homosexual practices.) But it would also be a step backward for society in my opinion, just like slavery was also tolerated in the Old and New Testaments. Yet Christ came to set people free, not lead them into bondage.
“The opposite is true. Science can never answer questions of morality.”
I was addressing your claim that polygamy did not come from g*d. the book the dawn of sex written by scientists as well as other sources claim otherwise. the scientific consensus monogamy was introduced around the time of the agrarian revolution (that is, it is a cultural artifact). some cultures still practice polygamy.
polygamy is not a question of morality. it is a human behavior and a cultural artifact. that you don’t approve does not make it immoral. it might however make you ignorant.
“I’ve already answered this with scripture.”
No, you have answered it with your incorrect and illogical interpretation of scripture. You must first re-read scripture and compare it with your statements.
Then you must admit that this is possible before you can progress to a better understanding.
” You seem to be very preoccupied with defending polygamy. Not accusing you of anything, but you need to ask yourself why this is important to YOU.”
My motivation is irrelevant to what the scripture states. With all due respect, that is a specious argument and you know it. I have not challenged your motivations but I could do tit for tat. Why is monogamy so important to you? ...See how that works?
“Yes, polygamous marriage (of a man with more than one wife) can be legitimate in the sense that the covenants are binding. But marriage is a covenant that requires the consent of both parties. Coercing a bride to agree to accept other women is ungodly, selfish, and lustful. It is not the self-sacrificial love that Christ demonstrated and which the New Testament commands Christian men to emulate. Further, any man who pledged to “forsake all others” in his marriage vows would be a covenant breaker to practice polygamy. A woman who willingly agreed to allow this (she would have to agree in the marriage covenant or the marriage would be fraudulent) would be foolish and should look for a husband who will love her as Christ loves His bride.”
You are extrapolating that all wives in polygamous marriages are not happy. That is simply a false over generalization easily disproven by a simple web search unless you think there are thousands of polygamous bots on the net. As for “forsake all others” does that appear in the bible? if not, then it is irrelevant to g*d’s word. I’m going out on a limb and claim it is not in the bible. why bring it up then? —because your argument is that weak that it does not support itself.
“There are specific warnings about polygamy even in the Old Testament.”
Those are all interpretations. Jesus descended from a polygamous marriage. So if it is true then Jesus is what— a warning to us that our descendants will be cursed?
“Deuteronomy 17:17
Neither shall he multiply wives for himself, lest his heart turn away; nor shall he greatly multiply silver and gold for himself.”
The consensus translation is take many wives, not multiply wives. Either way, does not put a hard math limit on the number of wives. And is only relevant for kings. Biblical monogamy absolutists have a habit of dropping context. Why do they drop context? Weak argument. Why do you drop argument? Either you did not know about it (ignorance) or you felt it detracted from your argument (fraud). Which was it?
“Guess what. That’s exactly what happened to Solomon. He disobeyed and committed very serious sins of idolatry because of this disobedience.”
OK, Solomon (a) took many wives and (b) committed idolatry. You can’t state that (a) caused (b) just because (a) was a precondition of (b). Solomon could have ignored his wives. His sin was idolatry, not polygamy. A person can be influenced by any other person. The relationship between the persons is rather immaterial.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/idolatry
1 : the worship of a physical object as a god.
the bible specifically did not say the sins of idolatry and polygamy. If polygamy was a sin, then logically we could expect the bible explicitly to condemn Solomon for the sin polygamy also. Then everyone would be clear. But the bible does not do so. That is consistent with the contention that polygamy is not a sin.
“We can go down the list of every person who had more than one wife in the Old Testament. And every one of them had severe consequences due to it. Show me one person who did not.”
Jesus was the product of a polygamous relationship. So are you contending that Jesus is a severe and negative consequence? Just because some bad things happened to people and were noted does not mean that good things did not happen as a result as well. The part that is missing in your argument is that just because bad things happen to people who do certain practices, those certain things caused the bad things, and therefore the certain practices are sinful. Polygamy is never described as a sin. And no proof exists that bad things happen to polygamists, either in the past or now. You’ve got to bridge those logical gaps in the bible and they can’t be bridged because the words and the logic are simply not there.
“And there are no examples of Christians in the New Testament having multiple wives.”
But Jesus is a Jew and lived under OT law. The NT describes a part of Jesus’ life. Not necessarily his full life. There is no requirement that the NT include polygamy, any more than a requirement that the NT include how to make bronze. It’s not relevant to the main points that the NT communicates. The absence of polygamy in the NT does not prove polygamy is a sin any more than making bronze is a sin. Your logic is severely flawed if you contend otherwise.
” In fact, in the New Testament, leaders could not have multiple wives. Polygamy was a disqualification for leadership. Even being divorced and remarried was a disqualification.”
So says Paul (not Jesus). For bishops (not laity).
“1 Timothy 3:2 & 12
A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior, hospitable, able to teach... Let deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.”
“Christ and Paul”
No, just paul
even taught that there were advantages for the servants of Christ to never marry at all and dedicate their lives to God’s service. Christ and Paul did this. However, Christ Himself will be married in eternity to His bride, which is the Church. He is the pattern and example to follow, and He does not have multiple brides. He also sacrificed Himself for the Church.”
OK, that’s for bishops and Jesus. What about laity? Nothing. And it’s Paul, and Paul is on record as explicitly giving opinions in his letters. He’s not Jesus. If Jesus thought something important then he would have stated it clearly. Jesus never stated anything about polygamy. It’s either permitted or not important according to the words of Jesus. “I came not to abolish the law but to fulfill it.”
“Desiring to have multiple sexual partners reveals lust and covetousness which is not about a man putting his wife first.”
You contention only— not in the scripture!!
” A wife is not there merely to meet the husband’s needs. He is to meet hers also. This is a challenging job that is impossible to do with multiple wives.”
Your contention only— nowhere in the scripture!!
“That is the same argument that homosexuals often make about Jesus not specifically addressing homosexuality.”
Now you are straining and trying to use some form of dissembling. I said nothing about homosexuality one way or another. I am only addressing polygamy in the scriptures. You are introducing another topic and trying to use guilt by association. Let me cut you off right there— homosexuality pro or con is not relevant to polygamy. They are two different topics. Equating them in any way to try to prove something by any projected similarity is dissembling. Be honest in your arguments.
“Polygamy was not being practiced within Judaism during Christ’s earthly ministry.”
It was not banned within Judaism until the 11th century. Before then it was legal in Jewish law.
“It was not particularly common among the Gentiles of the early church either.”
Legally it was fairly common outside of Roman law— which probably explains Paul’s aversion to it for bishops.
” The apostles had to deal with widespread fornication which was clearly forbidden and had to be abandoned by anyone who came to Christ.”
So?
“Jesus taught a higher law.”
I quoted Jesus teaching. And Fairly prominent Jesus at that. Matthew 5 is the Sermon on the Mount— where Jesus speaks directly to the laity. Don’t lecture me on higher Jesus saying versus Lower Jesus saying. You just make yourself sound more and more silly and ignorant.
“The apostles gave instructions for getting married and how for men to treat their wives. Nowhere is there any consideration for Christians engaging in polygamy.”
So?
” If someone was converted who had multiple wives, he could be a Christian but not a leader.”
In Paul’s *opinion*. Not OT g*d’s law. Not Jesus’ law. Paul’s *opinion*. For *bishops*.
Read the bible! For the Nth time, Don’t just parrot out other people’s unfounded misinterpretations.
“He could not set the proper example for other Christians. There is a lot of warning in the New Testament about those who wanted to go back to the Mosaic Law as the standard of morality. Jesus demanded more. As I’ve already pointed out, the Pharisees were focussed on what was permitted in marriage rather than what God actually commanded.”
“God does not command anyone to engage in polygamy. He never did. He warned people of the consequences. He gave us a different example to follow. He gave us a higher doctrine of what He intended in the pattern of marriage. A true follower of Jesus is not looking for loopholes to do his own will and be selfish. He is looking to please his Master, and this means either celibacy or faithful fidelity to his one spouse. When these ideals can not be achieved, those who follow Christ seek to get as close to the ideal as is possible.”
None other biblical scholar than Martin Luther read the bible but could not find a specific argument against polygamy: “I confess that I cannot forbid a person to marry several wives, for it does not contradict the Scripture. If a man wishes to marry more than one wife he should be asked whether he is satisfied in his conscience that he may do so in accordance with the word of God. In such a case the civil authority has nothing to do in the matter.” Maybe you are claiming Martin Luther did not read the bible carefully enough? Or that the quality of his scholarship should be brought into question? I am mentioning this because you seem to perceive it as a fringe position when it is actually not so.
It sounds like you are hung up about sex and ashamed about it for some reason. You are using the bible to justify spreading your sexual hangups to others. Maybe you should consider Seeking professional help.
“I will add that I am only speaking as to what Christians should do. God’s perfect Law permitted polygamy as part of a legal system in an imperfect world. It would not be unreasonable for Christians to accept and tolerate polygamy outside of the Church as a less-than-ideal practice, but not an abomination like homosexuality. (Homosexuals are welcomed to become Christians but must abandon their homosexual practices.) But it would also be a step backward for society in my opinion, just like slavery was also tolerated in the Old and New Testaments. Yet Christ came to set people free, not lead them into bondage.”
I am not here advocating homosexuality either directly or indirectly. In fact I could go through the entire exercise I went through on marriage and the bible for homosexuality. Personally I am not a fan of homosexuality. However, it is difficult for me to justify, morally, entering someone else’s home, sneaking into their bedroom, and observing their private sexual practices with a consenting adult of either gender. Hiding under someone else’s bed to enforce my concept of sexual morality is more abhorrent than any sexual act between two or more consenting adults under any circumstances. That’s where I draw the line, and I don’t even need any book (even the bible) to help me draw that line.
How about you?
“My motivation is irrelevant to what the scripture states. With all due respect, that is a specious argument and you know it. I have not challenged your motivations but I could do tit for tat. Why is monogamy so important to you? ...See how that works?”
No, it’s an entirely Biblical argument. Not specious. A proper understanding of the Bible and the correct interpretation of it requires submission to it. James says it is to be received with “meekness” and engrafted into our lives.
John 7:17
If anyone wills to do His will, he shall know concerning the doctrine, whether it is from God or whether I speak on My own authority.
The difference is that I am not looking for proof texts to support that I would prefer to be able to copulate with many beautiful women. This is a base instinct that all of us fallen men can potentially be enticed by.
When our understanding of the message of the Bible is in conflict with what we would prefer it to say, that’s a good indication we are not allowing our own preferences to dictate what it means.
“You are extrapolating that all wives in polygamous marriages are not happy. That is simply a false over generalization easily disproven by a simple web search unless you think there are thousands of polygamous bots on the net.”
I’m not talking about subjective experiences. There might be millions of people in long-term homosexual relationships that claim to be “happy.” That’s not proof they are approved by God. When examples are given in the Bible, they are for our learning, according to 1 Corinthians 10 and Romans 15. ALL of the examples of polygamy in the Bible are bad. You cannot provide a single example of an exemplary, “happy,” polygamous marriage.
There are two model marriages in the Bible: Adam and Eve, and Christ and the Church. There are a number of other positive examples of relationships within marriages. In fact, Jacob’s love for Rachel and his willingness to work for seven years to win her hand in marriage is a positive example, even though he ended up being tricked into a polygamous relationship.
“As for ‘forsake all others’ does that appear in the bible? if not, then it is irrelevant to g*d’s word. I’m going out on a limb and claim it is not in the bible. why bring it up then? —because your argument is that weak that it does not support itself.”
Because breaking covenants is condemned by God in the Bible over and over again.
2 Samuel 21:1-2
Now there was a famine in the days of David for three years, year after year; and David inquired of the Lord. And the Lord answered, “It is because of Saul and his bloodthirsty house, because he killed the Gibeonites.” So the king called the Gibeonites and spoke to them. Now the Gibeonites were not of the children of Israel, but of the remnant of the Amorites; the children of Israel had sworn protection to them, but Saul had sought to kill them in his zeal for the children of Israel and Judah.
Here Israel had entered into an unwise covenant, contrary to the will of God, yet God punished them for not keeping it. Even if polygamy is permissible in the Bible, it is never commanded. So, if someone ignorantly included the phrase “forsaking all others” in his wedding vows but later decides that the Bible permits him to take additional wives, then he is still a covenant-breaker.
When you make a promise, you are supposed to keep it:
Psalm 15:4
In whose eyes a vile person is despised,
But he honors those who fear the Lord;
He who swears to his own hurt and does not change;
“Jesus descended from a polygamous marriage. So if it is true then Jesus is what— a warning to us that our descendants will be cursed?”
Jesus also descended from David through Bathsheba. By your logic that would justify murdering a man to avoid getting caught committing adultery with his wife. But the text does not support your arguments.
“the bible specifically did not say the sins of idolatry and polygamy. If polygamy was a sin, then logically we could expect the bible explicitly to condemn Solomon for the sin polygamy also. Then everyone would be clear. But the bible does not do so. That is consistent with the contention that polygamy is not a sin.”
The difference is in the remedy. The way to remedy idolatry is to stop doing it and destroy the idols. Neither Solomon nor David could undo what had been done by entering into marriages that were wrong to begin with. Even though David’s marriage to Bathsheba was based on great wickedness, after he repented the marriage was still valid. He could not put her away as that would have just added to the evil. Yet, because of this, evil would never depart from the house of David—a terrible judgment.
2 Samuel 12:10
Now therefore, the sword shall never depart from your house, because you have despised Me, and have taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your wife.
But unlike Sodomite “marriages” this could not be remedied by ending it. The marriage was valid and permanent.
“But Jesus is a Jew and lived under OT law. The NT describes a part of Jesus’ life. Not necessarily his full life. There is no requirement that the NT include polygamy, any more than a requirement that the NT include how to make bronze. It’s not relevant to the main points that the NT communicates. The absence of polygamy in the NT does not prove polygamy is a sin any more than making bronze is a sin. Your logic is severely flawed if you contend otherwise.”
Your comparison between polygamy and making bronze is somewhat analogous to the false teachers in Paul’s day who compared sex with eating food. Paul replied that even though the belly is made for digesting food, the body was not made for committing fornication.
The Bible tolerates the existence of polygamy and slavery. It advocates for monogamy and freedom. The Bible has a lot to say about those who do according to their own will. When a person tries to fit the Bible and Christian life into doing what they want to do, it leads to doctrinal error and twisting the scriptures, and ultimately destruction. Following Christ is about surrendering our will to His. It is not about getting what I want.
“I am only addressing polygamy in the scriptures. You are introducing another topic and trying to use guilt by association. Let me cut you off right there— homosexuality pro or con is not relevant to polygamy.”
Sorry. It does not work that way. The subject is sexual morality and fidelity. If several adults share the same house but never engage in anything remotely sexual, then we are not discussing polygamy but a lease contract. Polygamy implies a sexual component. ALL of what God says on the subject of sexuality becomes relevant to the discussion.
“OK, that’s for bishops and Jesus. What about laity? Nothing. And it’s Paul, and Paul is on record as explicitly giving opinions in his letters. He’s not Jesus.”
I never said that the Bible forbids polygamy—at least not explicitly. But the same can be said of Muhammad’s child marriage to Aisha. There is no specific age requirement in the Bible to be married, but the very concept of marriage implies the ability of both parties to understand on some level the nature of the covenant they are entering into and be able to consent to it. So the Bible also does not say you cannot marry a rock, but it does not need to say it in order to know that this would not be a marriage.
But the idea that these are merely opinions of Paul underscores just how far an obsession with justifying polygamy can lead a person into error. Paul gave wise, Spirit-led “opinions” on certain matters which he explicitly declares to NOT be commandments. This includes how Christian parents should treat marriage for their children as they enter adulthood. Paul encourages celibacy, but only if a person is able to do so without it causing him or her to sin. Christ taught the same thing. Remember “not all men can receive this saying”?
1 Corinthians 14:37
If anyone thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord.
It is the very nature of Paul’s writings being scripture that indicates they are not merely opinions. His apostolic authority confirms the same. Further, Peter confirms this:
2 Peter 3:15-16
And consider that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation—as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.
“Jesus never stated anything about polygamy.”
It’s funny (ironic) that this is a frequent argument homosexuals use to justify homosexuality. Of course they ignore that Jesus does address the general sins of lust and fornication which obviously include homosexual sin. Likewise the Bible does not need to describe every possible way murder can be committed in order to condemn it. No one can say, “Yeah, but it does not prohibit strangling.”
The Bible is full of commands of what we are supposed to do. Where is the command to enter into polygamous marriages? If God commands it, who am I to oppose it.
“It sounds like you are hung up about sex and ashamed about it for some reason. You are using the bible to justify spreading your sexual hangups to others. Maybe you should consider Seeking professional help.”
You’ve lost it. To suggest that defending the God-ordained, Biblical pattern of monogamous marriage as exemplified by God’s order at creation and His divinely arranged marriage between Christ and the Church means I have “sexual hangups” and need “professional help” is the most ludicrous argument you’ve made so far. This is textbook projection for anyone who has taken even an introductory psychology course.
“However, it is difficult for me to justify, morally, entering someone else’s home, sneaking into their bedroom, and observing their private sexual practices with a consenting adult of either gender. Hiding under someone else’s bed to enforce my concept of sexual morality is more abhorrent than any sexual act between two or more consenting adults under any circumstances. That’s where I draw the line, and I don’t even need any book (even the bible) to help me draw that line. How about you?”
It’s weird to discuss a matter on the basis of what the Bible teaches and then to suddenly switch gears in your closing argument to make the discussion about societal and legal standards. We may agree when it comes to how the law in a post-Christ culture should operate.
But this is not a privacy matter. It has to do with the environment that children are raised in. It has to do with whether someone can be legally harassed and punished for their religious beliefs when it comes to homosexual relationships. The Supreme Court decision creating so-called “homosexual marriage” came from a setup which involved tricking the police into entering a private residence to catch two men in a homosexual act so that they could be charged and the charge could be contested. They didn’t really want privacy. They were never content with privacy. When certain activities become legally sanctioned, the outcome is that others are forced to accept it to some degree or another in the public square. And when children are involved, it impacts all of society.
“the scientific consensus monogamy was introduced around the time of the agrarian revolution (that is, it is a cultural artifact). some cultures still practice polygamy”
First, science is not determined by consensus. It may be received by consensus, but the opinion of scientists has no effect at all on the function of gravity. It operates the same with or without their “consensus.” I’m not saying that expert opinion is irrelevant, but when it is used as a final authority to settle all dispute, then it is merely the logical fallacy of appeal to authority.
Second, as I’ve already pointed out, science does not operate in the realm of morality. It is ill-equipped (i.e. incapable) of making moral determinations. Moral determinations may rely on scientific evidence but not vice versa. For example, a forensic scientist might be consulted in a murder case to determine when the time of death occurred and what the cause of death was. But neither religious leaders nor legislators or judges contact scientific researchers to ask whether murder should be treated as a scientific inevitability and be removed from the scope of moral or legal regulation.
Third, science is very weak at history when compared with the ability of science to test theories in controlled lab experiments. Science analyzes history using interpolation and, even worse, extrapolation.
The inference of “still practice” is that there is a singular overarching trend down through the corridors of time. Romans 1 gives a different analysis: individuals, cultures, cites, nations, and other groups descend into moral depravity over time. Compare Genesis 15:16. It’s looking more and more like the whole of human history will follow the same trajectory of descent into evil. Harking back to God’s design is a legitimate basis for a moral argument against polygamy. Appealing to “we’ve always done it this way” is not a valid argument for its morality.
“polygamy is not a question of morality”
Anytime someone argues something is not a moral issue, that’s a pretty good indication that it is. There is a big difference between defending the moral advantages of something and simply dismissing the whole moral question with the wave of a hand.
“it is a human behavior and a cultural artifact”
So is bestiality, homosexuality, incest, rape, torture, kidnapping, and human sacrifice. And just like polygamy, some “cultures” still practice these things.
“that you don’t approve does not make it immoral. it might however make you ignorant”
And likewise with your opinion. When it comes to morality, the ultimate test will be on judgement day when God decides how to repay us for what we’ve done. None of your or my arguments will matter. There will be no appeal to a higher authority if we don’t like the ruling. It will be final.
While there are moral absolutes, we find in the Bible, different people and cultures being treated differently based on their situation. The earlier example I gave from Genesis shows that God was not ready to dispossess the inhabitants of the land of Canaan. He gave them time to repent, but they chose not to do so. Likewise, God had a training program for Israel to purge a lot of the sinful problems they had among them, which I mentioned in earlier posts related to the classic example and best-case scenario of polygamy—Jacob’s two wives. The favoritism of Isaac toward Esau was compounded in Jacob’s open favoritism toward the sons of Rachel. It led to envy, jealousy, pride, boasting, violence, deceit, and kidnapping. Such sibling rivalry was not recorded at that point since Cain killed Abel.
People often question the morality of the Bible when it comes to the severe punishments in Israel under Moses. A man and his family were killed because he took some illicit objects and hid them under his tent. Some died for complaining. One man died for picking up sticks on the Sabbath. We don’t see this strictness in most other times in the Bible. However, this was a time when God had just come down from Heaven, destroyed all of the idols of Egypt, and made a visible appearance in a cloud and pillar of fire to the whole nation, which lasted continuously for 40 years.
This follows the principle of justice that Christ taught:
Luke 12:48
But he who did not know, yet committed things deserving of stripes, shall be beaten with few. For everyone to whom much is given, from him much will be required; and to whom much has been committed, of him they will ask the more.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.