"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." (De Wette II, 459, ibid., pp. 329-330.) Or Tertullian"As I think, moreover, each pronouncement and arrangement is (the act) of one and the same God; who did then indeed, in the beginning, send forth a sowing of the race by an indulgent laxity granted to the reins of connubial alliances, until the world should be replenished, until the material of the new discipline should attain to forwardness: now, however, at the extreme boundaries of the times, has checked (the command) which He had sent out, and recalled the indulgence which He had granted; not without a reasonable ground for the extension (of that indulgence) in the beginning, and the limitation of it in the end.OR Justin Martyr"And this one fall of David, in the matter of Uriah's wife, proves, sirs," I said, "that the patriarchs had many wives, not to commit fornication, but that a certain dispensation and all mysteries might be accomplished by them; since, if it were allowable to take any wife, or as many wives as one chooses, and how he chooses, which the men of your nation do over all the earth, wherever they sojourn, or wherever they have been sent, taking women under the name of marriage, much more would David have been permitted to do this."OR Augustine"Again, Jacob the son of Isaac is charged with having committed a great crime because he had four wives. But here there is no ground for a criminal accusation: for a plurality of wives was no crime when it was the custom; and it is a crime now, because it is no longer the custom. There are sins against nature, and sins against custom, and sins against the laws. In which, then, of these senses did Jacob sin in having a plurality of wives? As regards nature, he used the women not for sensual gratification, but for the procreation of children. For custom, this was the common practice at that time in those countries. And for the laws, no prohibition existed. The only reason of its being a crime now to do this, is because custom and the [secular] laws forbid it."I am in agreement with Augistine on this and for this "Christian" belief, I am being abused on this forum, Oh well I feel at home among my Brethren who are seekers after truth. U Said: You believe in Polygamy. You;re heart's desire is to have 78 or more virgins to be given to you to service you forever in eternity. You desire to be God.
I believe that telling a freeper what he believes is not allowed on FR, and in this case at least your mind reading is as accurate as your scripture interpreting, for I have no desire to participate in a moral polygamous marriage, it would be Illegal, against the instructions of my preferences and most of all unwelcome in that I am happy with my current and only wife, thanks, but you are wrong about me.
I also happen to believe in the right to defend yourself to the point of killing an attacker, that does not mean I desire to murder.
U Said: That is the ultimate goal of every LDS man. It is why you pay tithes. It is why you go on your Mission. It is why you do your "Duty" to the church. It is so that you can someday be a polygamist God (Like YOUR Heavenly Father) over a world where people will refer to YOU as THEIR HEAVENLY FATHER.
You speak in absolutes, thus your point is easy to disprove, I am an LDS man, I do not desire to have more than one wife (your first premise falls here) I pay my tithes, and even offerings because the Lord has commanded it. (your second premise falls here) My duty to the preferences is my love and devotion to Jesus Christ, and I served my mission because he (Jesus preferences) asked me to. (your third and fourth premises fall here). I have no desire to be a polygamist God. (your fifth premise falls here) and I have no desire to rule over "a world" where God's children will worship me as God indeed, I do not believe such a thing to be possible, according to the Gospel I have learned. (your last premise falls here) I do hope to gain salvation through faith in Jesus Christ, and by being a doer of the word and not just a hearer only, and in that salvation I hope to inherit all that the Father hath becoming a Co-inheritor with Jesus by his grace and mercy.
U Said: It is, in a word........ SICK!
One of us is sick, one of us insists on focusing on the prurient, One of us is in denial one of us...
Have a nice day.
You put waaay too much time into this stuff.
Still haven’t gotten that context thing right yet huh DU. God specifically blessed Abraham before the whole hagar incident. And no where in the bible will you see hagar referred to as Abraham’s wife.
U Said: Clearly God did not approve of the relationship between Abram and Hagar.
Clearly you believe that, however, The scriptures disagree with you.
Show me the scripture from the bible where God recognizes hagar as Abraham’s wife.
(The story of Abraham's youth is in the Book of Abraham and in the Dead sea scrolls BTW)
LOL, DU pulls out his fraudulently translated piece of papyri, containing a pagan prayer for a priest named Hor and pronounces it describes Abraham’s youth, as well as psudographic (do you know the definition DU) work telling fictional accounts as well.
If you think God did not approve of Abraham's marriage to Hagar, then you don't understand Abraham, or the passage in the scriptures.
For emphasis – show me where God refers to hagar as Abraham’s wife in the bible.
Jesus never made polygamy a sin, so it's OK for an unmarried man to look upon a woman with lust? Wake up and smell what you are shoveling here.
The clearest verse comes from Jesus in His teaching on divorce:
Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. 9 I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery." (NIV Matt 19.8-9, pp. Mark 10.1-12)
The key thing to note here is that this argument fails if polygamy is acceptable! Jesus' point is that improper divorce does not nullify a marriage, and if the first marriage still stands, then a "second" marriage is adultery--and NOT simply polygamy! This is very clear. Jesus also eliminated the double standard; a man consorting with two women is as adulterous as a woman consorting with two men. (http://www.christian-thinktank.com/polygame.html). I guess joey agreed that it was ONE and not at least one.
It all goes back to that little context thing I was trying to teach you about in an earlier post. Unless you have recently cut the nose off your face, it is pretty clear here.
I've looked and all the scriptures I can find or have even been quoted here, do not make polygamy a sin, but Divorce (which seems to be accepted here on FR) a sin.
See previous above, had to do your home work for you again.
U Said: The New Testament makes it clear that polygamy is not to be tolerated in the Church and no man who was married to more than one woman was allowed to hold any official office in the church.
The at least one interpreted as one, go look it up, it's a famous disagreement And it's been happening outside of the "preferences" sphere for a long time.
Well, you’ve only had one day to correct your concordance errors.
So then, if she marries another man while her husband is still alive, she is called an adulteress. But if her husband dies, she is released from that law and is not an adulteress, even though she marries another man. (Rom 7) Notice that a polyandrous relationship would also be adultery.
Those in Church government/leadership are to be monogamous (the 'husband of one wife' clause shows up in both statements of elder/deacon qualifications: 1 Tim 3.2 and Titus 1.6). Oh, and to clarify the little weasel wording – as far as correctly translated – goes, in the JST, 1 Tim 3:2 reads: 2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behavior, given to hospitality, apt to teach; ( http://www.centerplace.org/hs/iv/iv-1ti.htm)
Or Tertullian
Yours is unreferenced, and out of context most likely. Try this:
Tertullian (c.207) was also explicit:
"Chapter II.-Marriage Lawful, But Not Polygamy. We do not indeed forbid the union of man and woman, blest by God as the seminary of the human race, and devised for the replenishment of the earth and the furnishing of the world, and therefore permitted, yet Singly. For Adam was the one husband of Eve, and Eve his one wife, one woman, one rib. (ANF: Tertullian, To His Wife)
OR Justin Martyr
Justin Martyr (c.160) rebukes the Jews for allowing polygamy:
"Your imprudent and blind masters [i.e., Jewish teachers] even until this time permit each man to have four or five wives. And if anyone sees a beautiful woman and desires to have her, they quote the doings of Jacob." [ANF, vol. 1, p. 266]
The principle of polygamy (discussed above)--like the statements of principle about divorce-- indicate the behavioral norm that we are to follow. The exceptions in history to those overarching statements of principle and life are just that--exceptions, called forth by either extreme situations or called forth by our own moral weakness (e.g. hardness of heart). Or in joey’s case, his inability to hear god correctly confusing the god edict condemning polygamy (D&C – 1935) with god edict – enforced by an angel w/ sword – to be polygamous. Can’t your committee of gods get their story straight?
The above is YOUR opinion.
What HE said was FACT.