Meet My Wives

Bridegroom Press ^ | Steve Kellmeyer

[John O]

Like onanism?

That's not birth control. I was thinking barrier methods (condums primarily) or coitus interruptus. Barring conception from happening is ok. Killing the baby once conceived is right out

[skellmeyer]

Sex was created for pleasure as well as for procreation.

You should read my book Sex and the Sacred City. It goes into a full explanation of how sex fits into God's plan for us, from pleasure through procreation. A whole chapter is devoted to the theology behind procreation and its alternatives.

[cjshapi]

It wouldn't suprise me one bit. Too many cooks in the kitchen and all that.

[Askel5]

=== That's not birth control.

lol ... you're too much.

I'll leave you to your Personal Interpretations.

[Kaslin]

Why couldn't you have posted your whole article? I don't see that your blog site is on the Exerpt list

[muir_redwoods]

It seems to me that if "sin" and "virtue" are words that are to have any meaning, people should be politically free to pursue either. There is no virtue in avoiding a sin one is not allowed to commit.

I see no threat to traditional marriage from allowing other forms of union that want to call themselves "Marriage". The marriage my parents had and the marriage I had will never be undermined by the actions of others and most of us would agree that heterosexual marriage is often a travesty of a sacred union. As such it still doesn't threaten mine.

[MrB]

We need a constitutional amendment defining what marriage - civil - is in this nation. One man and one woman. Period.

We need a Constitutional amendment, but not to "define marriage" - it's already defined.

We need the amendment in order to keep some pointy-headed know-better-than-you self defined intellectual elitist from telling us what his NEW definition of marriage is.

[John O]

All interpretations are personal (as in "this is how I interpret it") The question is whose interpretation do you trust most. I trust the hours and years of study that have gone into the basis for mine. You may choose another. That's up to you.

Since I have a personal relationship with Jesus it only makes sense that I'd have a personal understanding of His word

[John O]

I'll try to get to it this weekend.

[Caipirabob]

I seem to remember that God felt the Eve was enough for Adam to be complete in flesh. Now if he had created Eve and her 3 sisters, aside from Adam being short several ribs, I'd be a lot more inclined to embrace the concept.

Yet I'm afraid that my perspective is not so much derived from the bible as the fact that my wife finds that traditional "Colombian Neckties" are funny, and I have no desire to further goad her sense of humor.

[Boiler Plate]

Have you ever read Genesis? Are you implying that having multiple wives and concubines worked out well for Jacob you must be skimming the text and the idea that "God was pleased" is really making something up out of whole cloth. Remember how Jacob wound up with two wives? Do you think God was pleased with Laban deceiving Jacob. Poor Leah was always feeling unloved. The rivalry between Leah and her sister was the stuff of legendary proportions. Did not Jacob show favoritism to Levi and Joseph just because they were Rachel's children. So the other 10 sons were jealous enough of Joseph to want to kill him.

Again to suggest that this was a happy situation is pretty far fetched.

[Askel5]

Regarding your personal interpretation of onanism as "not" a method of birth control ... what is the primary purpose, then, of withdrawal?

[Askel5]

Here's the Scripture reference to which I'm referring, if that helps:

8 Juda, therefore said to Onan his son: Go in to thy brother's wife and marry her, that thou mayst raise seed to thy brother.

9 He knowing that the children should not be his, when he went in to his brother's wife, spilled his seed upon the ground, lest children should be born in his brother's name.

10 And therefore the Lord slew him, because he did a detestable thing.

[skellmeyer]

Are you implying that having multiple wives and concubines worked out well for Jacob you must be skimming the text and the idea that "God was pleased" is really making something up out of whole cloth.

Well, I remember that Rachel - his intended - didn't beget a child until Joseph, number 11 in a series of 12. And Leah wasn't exactly blessed with fertility to begin with either. God gave the concubines the kids to start out. Since children are a blessing from the Lord, what does that make wives versus concubines?

The problem is that there is no clear-cut prohibition on polygamy and lots of examples where people did it without being struck dead or anything.

[Boiler Plate]

Hello. Why did Rachel allow her handmaiden to sleep with Jacob? So that she could get back at Rachel!

Genesis 29:30
Jacob lay with Rachel also, and he loved Rachel more than Leah. And he worked for Laban another seven years.

29:31
When the LORD saw that Leah was not loved, he opened her womb, but Rachel was barren.

Genesis 30
1 When Rachel saw that she was not bearing Jacob any children, she became jealous of her sister. So she said to Jacob, "Give me children, or I'll die!"
2 Jacob became angry with her and said, "Am I in the place of God, who has kept you from having children?"
3 Then she said, "Here is Bilhah, my maidservant. Sleep with her so that she can bear children for me and that through her I too can build a family."
4 So she gave him her servant Bilhah as a wife. Jacob slept with her, 5 and she became pregnant and bore him a son. 6 Then Rachel said, "God has vindicated me; he has listened to my plea and given me a son." Because of this she named him Dan. [1]
7 Rachel's servant Bilhah conceived again and bore Jacob a second son. 8 Then Rachel said, "I have had a great struggle with my sister, and I have won." So she named him Naphtali. [2]
9 When Leah saw that she had stopped having children, she took her maidservant Zilpah and gave her to Jacob as a wife. 10 Leah's servant Zilpah bore Jacob a son. 11 Then Leah said, "What good fortune!" [3] So she named him Gad. [4]
12 Leah's servant Zilpah bore Jacob a second son. 13 Then Leah said, "How happy I am! The women will call me happy." So she named him Asher. [5]
14 During wheat harvest, Reuben went out into the fields and found some mandrake plants, which he brought to his mother Leah. Rachel said to Leah, "Please give me some of your son's mandrakes."
15 But she said to her, "Wasn't it enough that you took away my husband? Will you take my son's mandrakes too?"
"Very well," Rachel said, "he can sleep with you tonight in return for your son's mandrakes."
16 So when Jacob came in from the fields that evening, Leah went out to meet him. "You must sleep with me," she said. "I have hired you with my son's mandrakes." So he slept with her that night.
17 God listened to Leah, and she became pregnant and bore Jacob a fifth son. 18 Then Leah said, "God has rewarded me for giving my maidservant to my husband." So she named him Issachar. [6]
19 Leah conceived again and bore Jacob a sixth son. 20 Then Leah said, "God has presented me with a precious gift. This time my husband will treat me with honor, because I have borne him six sons." So she named him Zebulun. [7]
21 Some time later she gave birth to a daughter and named her Dinah.
22 Then God remembered Rachel; he listened to her and opened her womb. 23 She became pregnant and gave birth to a son and said, "God has taken away my disgrace." 24 She named him Joseph, [8] and said, "May the LORD add to me another son."


Oh Yeah! Genesis 30 truly describes Martial bliss. You are really whitewashing what is CLEARLY a horrible family situation.

Are you Mormon by any chance?

[Junior]

The detestable thing he did was disobey. That he chose to disobey by whacking off is beside the point.

[Junior]

Sorry. The kitchen is my territory.

[The_Media_never_lie]

Good post. Will read completely later.

[Askel5]

The Lord will slay a person for failing to follow a mortal's command to impregnate?

he went in to his brother's wife, spilled his seed upon the ground, lest children should be born in his brother's name.

Somehow I don't get the impression he was merely masturbating.

[Askel5]

Sorry ... see my reply to John O above.

I didn't notice at first it was "Junior" not John O who'd responded.