Posted on 10/22/2018 9:54:09 PM PDT by DeweyCA
The emphasis on repentance at many points in that history is paramount. God did make a promise to David, after all.
Didn’t Blaza Ford boast of 50+ partners before college?
if i multiply a number then there is no requirement that the number i multiply be 1.
Yes originally g*d made eve for adam but that does not preclude polygamy. Jewish OT era law permitted multiple wives in full acceptance of Genesis, hence Genesis and multiple wives were in no conflict. You are interpreting (with lack of skill).
Matthew 19 concerns itself with the topic of divorce. The topic of discussion was divorce. The Pharisees asked Jesus about divorce. The Pharisees did not ask Jesus about marriage. Pay attention! Read the bible more carefully! You don’t expect a full definition of marriage and the laws regarding marriage when asking a question about divorce! here is how to read the bible properly: don’t take things out of context. don’t interpret by placing meanings into passages that are not in the passages themselves. Interpretation is explicitly forbidden by the bible:
Proverbs 30:5-6 ESV
Every word of God proves true; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him. Do not add to his words, lest he rebuke you and you be found a liar.
Deuteronomy 4:2 ESV
You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God that I command you.
and even more powerful when love is not tinged with jealousy.
Yes it absolutely does preclude polygamy. All the examples of polygamy in Scripture are against God’s will and produced pain and suffering. The first example of a polygynist was Lamech, who married two wives, Adah and Zillah (Genesis/Bereshith 4:19); this man was a bigger sinner than Cain and openly evil, who boasted about murdering a man and declaring that God would avenge him 77-fold if he were killed for doing it (verse 24).
It is also plain that Noah and his three sons each had but one wife when they went into the ark. If God countenanced polygamy, then why would that be? Obviously polygamy is not divinely countenanced, but prohibited.
Just because something is alleged to cause pain and suffering does not mean something is against the law.
By your logic a future archaeologist could interpret current newspaper headlines concerning purported adverse long term health effects of drinking alcohol and smoking cigarettes as proving that drinking alcohol and smoking cigarettes are illegal. That is not so and your future archaeologist would be wrong. In the same manner, you are wrong in your interpretation of what the bible states.
A law is this:
thou shalt not steal.
A law is not this:
sometimes drinking alcohol can lead to harm.
Do you get the difference?
The latter requires an interpretation, and a fairly blatant interpretation at that.
And just because Noah’s sons each had one wife does not imply that multiple wives were religiously illegal. The bible does not state how to mix copper and tin to produce bronze. This does not mean that mixing copper and bronze was illegal according to g*d. It only means it was not specifically documented in the bible. Use logic. Don’t interpret. don’t read things that are not there.
Here is an example of a law making polygamy illegal:
Polygamy is a sin.
Unfortunately for your argument, “polygamy is a sin” is not found in the bible. Neither is “thou shalt not have more than one wife.”
This is the difference between an actual law, and reading unfounded interpretations.
Matthew 19
5 and said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and cleave to his wife, and they shall be — the two — for one flesh?
6 so that they are no more two, but one flesh; what therefore God did join together, let no man put asunder.’
7 They say to him, `Why then did Moses command to give a roll of divorce, and to put her away?’
8 He saith to them — `Moses for your stiffness of heart did suffer you to put away your wives, but from the beginning it hath not been so.
9 `And I say to you, that, whoever may put away his wife, if not for whoredom, and may marry another, doth commit adultery; and he who did marry her that hath been put away, doth commit adultery.’
See also 1 Timothy 3:1-12; Mark 10:1-12; Genesis 2:24; all of Ephesians 5, but especially around verse 31-33, which addresses the subject.
There is a new covenant
You're not just right, you're damn' right.
You seem a mite aggressive, even touchy, to me. Have you had your coffee yet?
“this is what Jesus was referring to “from the beginning” (Matthew 19:4, Mark 10:6).”
says you— not the bible.
the context makes it crystal clear that Jesus was answering the Pharisees concern about divorce (not marriage). Therefore Jesus answer must be taken in the context of the question put before him by the Pharisees— the question of divorce (not marriage).
You are misinterpreting the word of g*d by supplying one incorrect context — marriage — for the actual, biblical context — divorce.
As evangelists are so fond of saying, go and read the bible! But this time, read more carefully.
again, the context is divorce, not marriage.
you don’t go to a passage discussing “cats” for a definition of “dog”.
Paul gives opinions and in any case is not the word of Jesus nor the word of OT g*d as revealed by OT prophets.
Jesus’ word— “i came to fulfill the law not to abolish it” — takes precedence over Paul’s opinions, unless you want to argue the opposite, that we should take Paul’s word over Jesus’ in case of any discrepancy.
No I have not had any coffee yet. Nice idea! Thanks.
Yea, you might want to read your bible a bit more....
There are a lot of folks with Multiple Wives to be found in there.
It is a sin; polygamy is adultery. Expressly forbidden in Exodus/Shemot 20:14 and Deuteronomy/Devarim 5:18. Those that pursued and pursue righteousness have adhered to, or converted to, the rule of monogamy established at the creation of mankind. Again, if polygamy was not a sin, why wouldn’t Noah, Shem, Ham and Japheth have taken as many wives as they might have wanted instead of one wife each?
Take note that by contrast, the Koran permits polygamy and divorce in the “positive liberty” format that is common to today’s leftist constitutions.
And to answer that aside about alcohol, Scripture speaks out against drunkenness in many places (Deuteronomy 21:20, Proverbs 21:17, 23:20-21, many others).
exodus 20:14 is you shall not commit adultery. nothing about polygamy. apples and oranges, cats and dogs. same for deuteronomy 5:18.
again, just because someone in the bible chooses one wife does not mean multiple wives are against the law.
What the Koran states or does not state is irrelevant. The Koran is not the bible, so the Koran or any other book must never be used to define or argue g*d’s law. Proverbs 30:5-6, Deut. 4:2.
scripture might speak out against drunkeness but the question i posed was in terms of whether drinking alcohol itself was illegal. The answer is that it is not, neither in the OT, NT, or contemporary USA law of today. As you may recall, I was trying to use an analogy to illustrate the false logic of inferring that the absence of mention of something in a law proved that something was illegal. Wine is certainly permitted in the NT, at least at wedding ceremonies.
... at marriage ceremonies. Specifically, John 2:1-11.
Polygamy is adultery. It’s specifically commanded against in Deuteronomy 17:17, again—and remember that the law applies to all, not just the kings.
Your point about alcohol was about whether it was harmful, not whether it ought to be utterly abstained from as if all ought to be under a Nazirite vow. Drunkenness is where alcohol becomes harmful.
As for that “not abolish” meme, read Acts 11. And then there is Acts 15.
As for your ridiculous assertion that one is giving precedence to Paul over Jesus, that doesn't rise to the level of nonsense. Paul was an apostle, and while human he was inspired by God in his writings.
Christians are not subject to the ritual laws of the ancient Hebrews, but the moral law is the same for all.
Of course, you don't have to believe that, but to support polygamy is awfully progressive, IMO.
:)
The example of the father is the key:
My dad had 2 wives, with the first one having passed away. From all the family history, he never succumbed to temptation outside of marriage. I honor him, and my Spiritual Father by following Gods design. It's a lot less stressful too...
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.