Polygamy and the Bible (Aberrant Theology Alert)

The Holy Bible is polygamous from cover to cover. However, the biased mind, steeped in centuries of cultural and religious tradition, can take a little time to adjust. The bottom line is honesty (a willingness to adjust inherited tradition in the light of God's Word) and logic (a willingness to stick with the mental process and not fall back on feelings and sentiment when the Word upsets cherished beliefs).

Before we begin, it is necessary to examine all assumptions in the polygamy issue as it relates to the Bible:

Q1. Do you accept the Bible as God's Word (in the original Hebrew/Aramaic manuscripts) from cover to cover?

If your answer is "no", then there is no point in your continuing with this essay because we will be working on different assumptions. Instead I suggest you read my earlier article, Objections to Polygamy: The Secular Viewpoint. The reason I categorise you as "secular" is because the arguments advanced by secularists are practically the same as those advanced by those who do not wholly accept the Bible's teachings. Somewhere along the line Yahweh's infallible Word is judged by those "Christians" who find it difficult to accept what Yahweh says in the same way as secularists do. Those who only accept the Bible in part only accept Yahweh in part. Though we could debate this matter, it is not what this Home Page is about and you would be advised to examine these issues on other Christians websites.

If your answer is "yes" to Question No.1 then I am going to hold you to your word. In my experience, though, the vast majority of Christians who say they accept God's Word from cover to cover rarely do. When God's Word contradicts what they believe, instead of confessing their error and readjusting their lives accordingly (this is the process the Bible calls "repentance") they wriggle and squirm and try to twist Scripture to conform to them. This is human nature, the fallen side of our spirit, which always resists any change in thinking, feeling or practice that requires any sort of sacrifice. We all "wriggle and squirm" from time to time, sad to say. This site acknowledges that the heart and flesh are a little slow in responding to the truth sometimes and we will show grace in that area, as we hope the same grace will be shown to us as we adjust to the truth in our daily walk with Yahweh. However, we will not permit illogical argumentation on this site and shall expect honesty and integrity of thought.

Not everyone, however, has been taught to think logically. In some countries and cultures we are simply expected to absorb "facts" without being encouraged to think. This is both a tragedy and a traversty. Accordingly New Covenant websites engage in much "mental exercise" in order to promote clear thinking. At this site we shall follow the same principle. Accordingly we shall first and foremost be led by thought before feeling, and we shall expect God's Word, the Bible, to lead both.

Q2. Does the Bible anywhere state that polygamy is wrong, sinful, unlawful or ungodly?

This site maintains that the answer to this question is crystal clear: "no". If you can find any scriptures that give an affirmative answer, I shall be most interested to hear them. However, I shall expect more than isolated scriptures (though these shall not, of course, be set aside) but will expect (1) isolated scriptures to be cited in context, and (2) isolated scriptures to be examined in the light of all scriptures on the subject. If, for example, one or two scriptures seem to maintain an anti-polygamy stance, and yet a dozen seem to maintain a pro-polygamy stance, then I shall expect an in-depth study to determine why there is an apparent discrepancy for both positions cannot possibly be right. It is here that we must make an important decision: Either (1) God's Word is contradictory and not reliable and cannot therefore be 100% true; or (2) The minority passages have been misunderstood or mistranslated by humans, God's Word being internally consistent and harmonious, or 100% correct.

No matter what topic we study, we will find apparent inconsistencies from time to time. What we cannot afford to do is accept one of two positions and ignore or "explain away" the position we don't like. If this is going to be a problem for some of our readers, then I suggest you deal with the issue of whether the Bible is wholly God's Word or not before confronting the sensitive polygamy issue. It is important that we have that matter sorted out before going any further. A person doesn't go and have riding lessons if he is uncertain about the morality of riding motorcycles - first we must be certain we think motorcycles are OK. Only then ought we to take lessons. And so we must do the same with the polygamy issue.

There are many biblical issues I have had problems with in the past but I have always discovered that the problems have stemmed not from a fault in God's Word but from an incomplete understanding of it. We live in pagan cultures (for the most part) where the whole thinking pattern is contrary to Yahweh's and to Yahweh's people's. The assumptions about life in each generation not based in God's Word change and we must become aware of this problem. Becoming a Christian requires nothing less than a total reorientation in the way we think, feel, and behave as is true, indeed, in embracing any new religion or (supposed) non-religion like atheism.

I maintain unhesitatingly that the Bible nowhere condemns polygamy as wrong, sinful, immoral, ungodly, wicked, or unlawful in Yahweh's eyes. In fact, I find exactly the opposite - Yahweh positively sanctions it, protects it, and indeed uses it Himself as an illustration of His own relationship with Israel (Judah and Ephraim) and the Church/Messianic Community (the saints), something He would hardly do if it were sinful as this would merely confuse people.

Polygamy is not, as some people mistakenly believe, a type of marriage that gives men the right to do whatever they want with women even though historically it may have been so abused. There are strict laws and regulations governing its practice. It is essential to understand this. We shall be looking at these restrictions in another article. All freedoms bring responsibilites and polygamy is no less than, for example, the freedom to eat food. Everybody acknowledges that eating is not only good but essential. However, Yahweh has placed certain dietary rules for our benefit when it comes to eating, one of which is that we eat in moderation and not become gluttons. Over-eating is a sin, but not the act of eating itself. By the same token, the multiplication of wives is a sin but not polygamy itself. The Bible strictly warns kings not to go overboard as Solomon, for example, did. Gluttony destroys one's sense of taste in the same way as a man marrying too many women destroys his ability to have a proper relationship with them. Though the Bible places no specific limitations on the number of women who may enter a polygamous relationship, the community I belong to limits it to twelve, with seven being the average - a maximum of four for Deacons, seven for Elders, and twelve for Patriarchs-Apostles. There are other restrictions too such as the ability of the husband to financially take care of so many women. This I will discuss in another article.

Q4. Is there any evidence from the Bible that polygamy was repealed in the New Testament?

None that I have been able to find. There is a school of theological thought that the whole Law of Moses was brought to an end at the time of the crucifixion and a new "Law of Christ" instituted to replace it. Such a teaching is not to be found in the Bible though bad translations have not made the matter straightforward. Besides, polygamy existed before the Law of Moses and Paul declares that His Gospel and Abraham's were essentially one and the same.

The Bible, in fact, nowhere mentions the words "monogamy" or "polygamy" because no such distinction existed. All marriage was polygamous whether there was one, two, three or more wives. Let me use the food analogy again. In some cultures only one course is served per meal. In others, several courses. However, that doesn't mean that there are different kinds of "eating" - we don't speak of "mono-eating" or "poly-eating" because such a distinction is silly. However, picture a culture which says that one course is all that is allowed and condemns all those who eat more than one. To distinguish between the two they must introduce new words into the vocabulary. "Monogamy" and "polygamy" are, in terms of history, relatively new concepts. So really it would be more appropriate to call this the "First European Christian Marriage Page" since that is nearer the biblical truth. One group of people have excluded more than one wife from the marriage covenant and called themselves "monogamists". (Why they did this, and how they justify themselves, we shall examine in other articles).

There are only a couple of places in the New Testament where polygamy is hinted at and the translators, with their monogamous bias, have altered the meaning of ceretain words and created very confusing passages indeed. For as they stand it appears as though Church leaders cannot have more than one wife but ordinary church members can! Which is you think about it, is completely contradictory and nonsensical, for if we follow the monogamy-only paradigm, we are being taught that members can sin but leaders can't. This is rather like saying that ordinary members can be homosexuals or murderers (since both are sins) but deacons and elders can't! A close examination of the original Greek text clears up the (ludicrous) discrepancy - Paul wasn't concerned about whether church leaders had more than one wife or not but whether, as polygamists, they were being faithful to their first wives and not using polygamy as an excuse to get rid of wives they didn't fancy any more. (Another school of thought maintains, and which I have since come to accept as the better of the two interpretations, that these passages are merely stating that Elders and Deacons must be married to qualify for leadership).

So, no, there is no evidence in the New Testament that Christ ever repealed polygamy. Quite the opposite - He repeatedly cites polygamists as men and women of God to emulate, even commanding His followers to "do the works of Abraham". And Abraham was a polygamist.

Q5. Is there anywhere in the Bible where God actually commands or is positive about polygamy?

He is nowhere negative about it. Nowhere. Indeed, He specifically states to one King of Israel (David) that He has given him his wives (2 Samuel 12:8). And this through a prophet of Yahweh (Nathan) who was rebuking him for other sins (adultery and murder). So if the King had been living as an adulterer or in sin because of polygamy, you can be sure that the prophet would have upbraided him about polygamy along with his other sins. But he didn't. Instead, He not only said that Yahweh had given the King his present wives but He would, if necessary, give him more. To me that is polygamy-positive. If polygamy is a gift of Yahweh then it cannot possibly be anything other than a blessing and for all concerned (for husbands as well as wives).

It is usually at this point that those, steeped in the monogamous tradition, go into an inner catharsis. If that is so, then I urge you to PRAISE YAHWEH because He is revealing to you how far you have departed from Him even if you think you are walking with Him. It is at such moments of crisis that we have to make really fundamental decisions and either embrace Yahweh or wage war on Him. The issue is really about the personality of El Elyon (Almighty God). If you are turned off by this revelation (and indeed any other biblical revelation) then there is a pretty good chance that you are not worshipping the God of the Bible but some other god.

I say this not to destroy your faith but to seek further. Yahweh will not force you to follow Him but He will most certainly challenge you to be honest about His claims even if you are not about your own. The God of the Bible is represented allegorically as a polygamist and so are all His followers, whether they are married in one-wife or several-wife families. What we are actually facing here is of such fundamental importance that I believe it will be used as one of the touchstones of true faith in the last days. Again, I repeat, accepting that Yahweh is allegorically polygamous and that all true Christian marriages are polygamous does not necessarily mean that all Christian marriages should have more than one wife. In fact, it is my conviction that the majority of Christian marriages will only consist of one man and one woman. What is important, however, is that you understand and accept that a one-wife marriage is no different from a one-child family and that if a family wants several children, then that's fine too. Families have children, right? There's no such thing as a mono-children or a poly-children family, is there? They're not two different types of family! In the same way, families with one wife or more than wife are not "two different kinds of marriage" either. That is the lie we have been made to believe by an apostate church for centuries. That lie, however, is now being exposed by this and other polygamy websites. And this truth will spread as Christian men and women return to the Word and abandon the traditions of the whore of Babylon who loathes polygamy but adores fornication and adultery.

Now you'll be wanting concrete biblical evidence for all of these statements. This you can read at the Królewiec Wives Site and in other articles on FICP. You'll not only be surprised by just how much there is but how anyone could have been so blind to the truth. Ultimately the issue is not, as I have already said, about how many wives a marriage may incorporate but the personhood of God. Men and women, ever in rebellion against truth, have preferred to invent their own gods rather than go to He who is the source of all life, joy and peace.

To know the truth is to enthrone men and women as true patriarchs and matriarchs and not to emasculate men and defeminise women which is the result of turning to falsehood. The trend of our modern paganism is to turn men and women into a single sex - a unisexual being - which is out of harmony with itself and which is bleeding to be free and come alive. True polygamy is about freedom for men and women - and I underline the word "true" deliberately because there is a false form of polygamy too which is degrading to women and destructive of the true man. We under no circumstances stand for the latter. We at this site do not defend all forms of polygamy (whether secular, Muslim, Mormon, Hindu, Christian, or whatever) any more than we defend all forms of monogamy - we are defenders of New Covenant Echad Patriarchal Marriage. And it is important that our readers make this distinction and do not require us to defend other paradigms, for we will not.

May Yahweh-Elohim, the Lord God of Israel, enlighten you - men and women - and free you from any kind of mental or emotional bondage as you read these pages, especially those of you who believe the Bible to be the Word of God.

First of all, it seems that the poster EagleEye has laid the groundwork here. Rather humorously I might add!

You wrote: "In the NT, where Christianity is moving into Pagan cultures where polygamy may be the norm, the guideline for Christian behavior is being laid out."

Let me stop you right here. To be more precise, prior to Jesus's resurrection, a covenant relationship with God was only available, more or less, to the descendants of Abraham. After Jesus died and rose EVERYBODY could have that same if not better covenantal relationship with God.

So, to characterize this phenomena as 'Christianity moving into pagan cultures' while not untrue, reflects a rather fuzzy kind of thinking. But, your point is well taken and SPECIFICALLY addressed in the Bible. The Jewish leaders came together and, seeing that gentiles were now allowed to have covenant with God (which at first blew them away) made decisions on how they should behave. Their decision is found in Acts 15:19-20:

19 "It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. 20 Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood.

If you're line of reasoning were correct, than they most certainly would have told these Pagan cultures where polygamy may be the norm to stop having more than one wife. But they didn't. Sexual immorality basically means having sex with someone you're not married to. Like David did with Bathsheeba, for which he was condemned. He was NOT condmened for taking more than one wife however.VERY important and foretelling distinction.

"Granted this is for church leaders, but the principle of one wife/one husband for everyone is an underlying there."

Not really.

Mature Christians, the type who led churches, are to have one spouse. Elsewhere in the NT all are exhorted to grow into maturity. I see that as the point to refute those who don't aspire to become elders/deacons.

Now you are conflating 'maturity' with practical requirements made of church leaders. But the Bible makes it very CLEAR that only married men (and married one time only) are to lead churches. Does that mean women cannot be mature? Or single men? There's no such thing as a mature divorced man???

There is plenty of evidence against the practice of polygamy in the Bible.

Sorry, as much as you may want it to be true, it's not. There is no express prohibition/condemnation of polygamy in the Bible.

Right. And, to be fair, it's not necessarily rousingly endorsed either. lol! Of course, ... there is also no express prohibition/condemnation of sticking a fork into a live electrical outlet in Bible either.

Wow! Talk about a cheap shot. See...you just WANT it not to be legit.

But we are counseled (commanded) ... to be wise ... and to live lives (as christians) ... free from even the appearance of selfishness and sin. Every single example of polygamy in the Bible is portrayed as having negative results ...

Oh really?? Can you share with us the 'negative results portrayed in the Bible as a result of Gideon taking more than one wife? How bout Noah's dad, cause he had a couple too? And do be specific. lol!

With these as the fruit of polygamy protrayed in the Bible, I don't think that anyone could claim that such a lifestyle could be considered a 'wise' choice.

Well, since your premise if flawed, no need to counter. But I don't disagree that polygamy may not be a wise decision. That seems a legit point. It's just that people have that choice to make (unwise though it may be) and nothing in the Bible outright condemns (nor encourages) it...

No, it is quite precise. Christianity, therefore the covenant of Grace, did not reach the entire world in 33 A.D. There is a historical progression, as described in the Epistles and various non-Scriptural writings.

Well, I hate to split hairs but you almost have to on a topic like this in which clearly polygamy is NOT condemned yet so many people think/wish/want it to be., so...

Here is a simple, explanation of what happened: Adam sinned.

God blood Covenanted with Abraham allowing HIS descendants to be a part of that protective pact.

Jesus lived.died.rose and thus opened that covenant (built on better promises) to anyone with faith.

The requirements put on those now open to faith is found in Acts 15 and do NOT include abandoning polygamy. Sorry, it just doesn't.

Does that mean women cannot be mature?

No, it does not. But I am answering the question posed, not writing a comprehensive systematic Theology.

Translation: My statement has been proven to be illogical and irrelevant to the discussion of polygamy.

"But, some people, for whatever reason, determine that certain things are disobedience when they are not. For example, many people believe because of the prohibition found in Acts 15:20, that it would be 'disobedient' to receive a blood transfusion."

"So, they don't because they don't want to be 'disobedient.' "

"But there is NO prohibition against blood transfusions in the Bible."

Yes, there are cults out there that would like to believe that a blood transfusion is the same as EATING blood, which it is not. They twist Bible verses found in Genesis, Leviticus, and Acts. For example, Leviticus 17:10-12

[10] And whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth any manner of blood; I will even set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people.

[11] For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.

[12] Therefore I said unto the children of Israel, No soul of you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger that sojourneth among you eat blood.

This is another reason why I could never be Catholic. Their Communion requires imagining the grape juice or wine is transformed to be the blood of Christ and the wafer His body. I see imaginary cannibalism as a consistent no no in the Bible.

Jehovah's Witnesses also don't acknowledge the Trinity or that Jesus Christ is God in the flesh and on and on it goes. SO because they have twisted Scripture and wrong headed beliefs ... that makes them CREDIBLE? LOL! It only serves to show they are not Christians - followers of Christ and have their own gospel.

BTW, two opposing beliefs cannot be true at the same time. This is basic logic. This is not mental giant stuff.

"Same with polygamy. (except for in the case of elders.)"

Oh my ... here we go again ... why oh why isn't God's word good enough for you? He's doesn't advocate polygamy. He advocates a traditional marriage.

There are many verses in the Bible that support, one man for one woman: (An excerpt from #44)

Eph 5:31

For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.

1Ti 3:2

A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behavior, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

1Ti 3:12

Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.

1Co 9:5

Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?

1Co 9:5

Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?

1 Cor 7:2 2

Nevertheless, because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband.

1Co 9:5

Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?

1 Cor 7:2 2

Nevertheless, because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband

1 Cor 7:3 3

Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband.

This was God's plan all along. He didn't create multiple Eve's. He created ONE Eve for Adam. Just because man has a habit of being disobedient doesn't justify disobedience. In EVERY situation where polygamy took place in the Bible, without God's blessing, nothing good has come from it. It seems clear to me that there is nothing good about polygamy. I believe we were to learn that from the Bible and not promote polygamy or pretend to be confused about it being wrong.

"Very true and the world as a whole is still paying for Abraham & Sarah's impatience.

Sad but soooo true.

Believe me I don't support the insane act :>} I just realize why it was necessary in mans early history.

Why? There's no ABSOLUTE NECESSITY of polygamy at any time in human history. You could argue that for incest at the beginning and after the flood, but there's never been a time where man HAD to practice polygamy. Nor is there now. It's just not outlawed by the Bible.

And still ... others here on "conservative" FR (LOL), still don't find God's will acceptable. Wow! So, it's not God's will for people to be polygamous. Why didn't he said that. God certainly wasn't shy about divorce, he says 'I hate divorce.' Seems pretty definitive. A simple 'I hate polygamy' would have settled this matter a long time ago.

Too bad it's not in there, huh?

I guess somethings never change ... what God wants for us doesn't also match up with what fallible mortals want or wish to fantasize about.

Well, you keep beating around the bush with all this 'fallible mortals', 'not God's will', 'wish to fantasize about' rhetoric. I say we cut to the chase.

Many if not most men want more than one women. Not all. Some have found their 'Eve' and their done.

But, in case you haven't noticed, even in so-called monogamous societies like ours, men having multiple women in their lives is THE NORM. Even in Christian circles. Although, I would say it's more of men 'wanting' that than actually practicing it. (At least I hope so!)

But, there's only one legitimate BIBLICAL way for man to have sex with a woman. That's to make a permanent lifetime covenant with her we call marriage.

Want more than one? Marry her.

That's how it works and is hardly anybody's fantasy. Ps It is however quite a reality that women and weak men are against polygamy for reasons that go to the heart of what fuels their non-Biblical angst. They DON'T want men to have more than one woman. lol!

Too bad the Bible won't back them up on their aversion to polygamy. But I can almost guarantee you this, as I post, there are people emailing or contacting their pastor or other trusted Christian friend to find a way to refute these points.

Too bad they'll be unsuccessful, huh?

Perhaps you need to direct this reply to who wrote this?

No, it is quite precise. Christianity, therefore the covenant of Grace, did not reach the entire world in 33 A.D. There is a historical progression, as described in the Epistles and various non-Scriptural writings.
Well, I hate to split hairs but you almost have to on a topic like this in which clearly polygamy is NOT condemned yet so many people think/wish/want it to be., so...

Here is a simple, explanation of what happened: Adam sinned.

God blood Covenanted with Abraham allowing HIS descendants to be a part of that protective pact.

Jesus lived.died.rose and thus opened that covenant (built on better promises) to anyone with faith.

The requirements put on those now open to faith is found in Acts 15 and do NOT include abandoning polygamy. Sorry, it just doesn't.

Does that mean women cannot be mature?

No, it does not. But I am answering the question posed, not writing a comprehensive systematic Theology.

Translation: My statement has been proven to be illogical and irrelevant to the discussion of polygamy.

209 posted on 03/13/2006 11:11:48 AM PST by LoveDoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I'd love to jump in there but I've already submitted my own response to you and suspect whoever you were answering here would like to do the same.

"But there is NO prohibition against blood transfusions in the Bible."

Yes, there are cults out there that would like to believe that a blood transfusion is the same as EATING blood, which it is not.

I agree with you but disagree with the motives you impugn to these people whom you call 'cult'members. I think they just have a different interpretation. One that is wrong.

Oh my ... here we go again ... why oh why isn't God's word good enough for you?

Funny...I was gonna ask you that VERY same question!

He's doesn't advocate polygamy. He advocates a traditional marriage.

Nonesense. There is no such thing as a 'traditional' marriage. God honors covenants. The most important is the one between God and man. (The New Covenant.) The 2nd most important is between man and women (which is to be a picture of the 1st most important covenant.) These are 'till death do you part' covenants.

There are many verses in the Bible that support, one man for one woman: (An excerpt from #44)

Eph 5:31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.

No contradiction to polygamy here. Everytime a polygamist marries, he becomes one with his wife.

1Ti 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behavior, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

Does not apply to non-elders. Nice try, though.

1Ti 3:12 Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.

Does not apply to non-elders. Nice try agin, though you insistence on using non-applicable scriptures reveals you really don't understand the issues at hand.

1Co 9:5 Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?

Yes or not or more than one. Nothing in here suggest he HAS to have a sister, a wife nor does it suggest he can't have more than one, although, as an elder Paul wouldn't be allowed to but heck, Paul didn't even want one wife! See, God gives us choices in this world. Too bad you want to limit men, huh?

1Co 9:5 Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?

You're repeating yourself. lol!

1 Cor 7:2 2 Nevertheless, because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband.

OK. So, you contact every single Christian in the world of marriagable age. Starting with college freshman and all the way to senior citizens centers and INSIST that they all obtain their ONE wife or husband. After all, it says so, right?

1Co 9:5 Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?

Didn't you try (and fail) to make this point a minute ago? lol

1 Cor 7:3 3 Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband.

Exactly. No matter how many wives a man has. This is a guiding truth.

This was God's plan all along. He didn't create multiple Eve's. He created ONE Eve for Adam.

Right. Before the fall. Now our 'adam' or 'eve' is Jesus. He is the ONLY one who can solely fulfill us like adam did eve and vv.

Just because man has a habit of being disobedient doesn't justify disobedience.

Sorry Miss Circuitious reasoning, but starting with the premise that something which is NOT disobedience is in fact disobedience, leads to flawed conclusions.

In EVERY situation where polygamy took place in the Bible, without God's blessing, nothing good has come from it.

I ask for the 2nd time. Please point out the horrible things the bible says happened because of polygamy when Gideon took extra wives or when Noah's dad lamech did.

Chirp...Chirp...

It seems clear to me that there is nothing good about polygamy.

Well hallelujah! Now you're making my point for me. You are as clear as mud on this issue, conflating practical requirments for church elders with guidelines for the Body of Christ as a whole as well as confusing Solomon's worship of other gods with his multiple marriages as a source of his downfall.

I believe we were to learn that from the Bible and not promote polygamy or pretend to be confused about it being wrong.

Interesting I'm clear and not pretending to be confused.

You are confused and pretending to be clear. Kind of symmetric, huh?

Ps Here's a verse she didn't mention (this is God speaking to King David thru the prophet):

I gave your master's house to you, and your master's wives into your arms. I gave you the house of Israel and Judah. And if all this had been too little, I would have given you even more....

A simple 'I hate polygamy' would have settled this matter a long time ago. Too bad it's not in there, huh?

And it would take that to satisfy you as to God's desire, huh ?

Absolutely. Once I read that about divorce. I knew divorce was NOT an option for me. And that's in the OTestament, too!

I thought that we had agreed that, per the Biblical evidence, ... polygamy is certainly not a wise choice. and God certainly commands us to be wise, ... doesn't He ? Well ... what more do you want?

My position is that polygamy is NOT denounced in the Bible but that monogamy is CLEARLY deemed to be the norm. But, as creepy as the polygamists seem to me personally, if you're a guy who wants to have sex with lots of women, then the ONLY Biblical solution for you is to marry them till death do you part.

That my friend, is NO ONE'S fantasy. lol!

Ps David's life became (and stayed) would I can only characterise as a living hell only AFTER his adulterous/murderous affair with Bathsheba.

He lived prior to that with many Wives for a number of years (as I understand it) without dealing with all the crap that came afterwards.

It was the adultery that opened up up to such a horrific life.

Solomon's many wives led him astray to worship other god's.

Moral of the story:

If you're gonna be a polygamy man, be sure to marry only spirit-filled, obedient-to-the-bible wives who will HELP your walk with God...not hinder it.

Gideon's 70th (or 71st) son ... killed all of his half-brethren ... save one.

And this, the Bible teaches, is because of Gideon taking extra wives??? I'd like to see that in black and white.

Seriously, if you're gonna blame every family's tragedy on polygamy, you're gonna have to explain how the DOZENS of stories of misfortune occuring to monogamists in the Bible could have ever happened...

Lamech's family life is not illustrated in the pages of the Bible

Whoa! I thought you said the Bible does not give us any examples of good coming from polygamy.

Here you have THE ONLY RIGHTEOUS MAN ON THE ENTIRE PLANET....and he came from a polygamous family.

I say

Game.
Set.
Match.

How about you???

Ps I think the best we can say about polygamy from the scriptures is that it's an acceptable option that must be handled with EXTREME care and wisdom.

Solomon's wives got him off track with God. David, also a polygamist, is said, in that VERY SAME VERSE, to not have lost his love for God. But David got tripped up with adultery.

With all due respect to oscar winners 'Three 6 Mafia' - It's Hard Out There for a Poly ...

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.