Posted on 01/15/2006 3:06:52 PM PST by SirLinksalot
Bible is full of polygamy and you haven't made that go away
The polygamy was in the OT and I don't deny it or am I trying to make it go away. If you had read my post I said that it changed from Acts on in the NT. The few verses that I said are only a few of a great many verses that talk about one wife. Do a concordance search on "one wife" and then on "wives" and you'll see what I am talking about. Essentially in the NT God gave new quidance on this issue of monogamy. What I am not saying is that if a family has one husband with many wives that that converts to Christianity God is saying to get rid of all the wives except one.
But that admonition is never made to the rank and file members of the church
Do a concordance search in the NT from Acts on for "one wife" and you will see that monogamy is presented as a new doctrine, not an admonition. There were verses that I presented that are directed to the rank and file but there are a whole lot more of them. What I see is that to be an overseer (same word for bishop and deacon) you can only have one wife. But I am not saying that upon conversion to Christianity polygamists must turn monogamous by getting rid of all but one wife.
I think you are avoiding answering. How can a man have a second wife without violating what Jesus said?
Do you believe that if you follow the letter of the law in the bible, you will be pleasing God?
Who do you say Jesus is?
Inasmuch as you are a true bible-believing Christian (unlike those heathen Mormons you love to condemn), does this mean you intend to follow the biblical examples of Abraham, David, and Solomon and practice polygamy?
No, but as a true believing Mormon, I see that you do!
Maybe the spiritually mature approach would be to follow the principle in this passage from 1 Corinthians 8:
9 Be careful, however, that the exercise of your freedom does not become a stumbling block to the weak. 10For if anyone with a weak conscience sees you who have this knowledge eating in an idol's temple, won't he be emboldened to eat what has been sacrificed to idols? 11So this weak brother, for whom Christ died, is destroyed by your knowledge. 12When you sin against your brothers in this way and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ. 13Therefore, if what I eat causes my brother to fall into sin, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause him to fall.
If we grant for the sake of the arguement that polygamy is not proscribed, wouldn't follow from the passage in Corinthians that we should still avoid it because of the probability that we would cause another to stumble spiritually and we we should subordinate our own desires to the spiritual wellbeing of others? This is precisely why I quit bringing a cooler full of Guiness Stout to church potlucks. : )
I did and it doesn't.
Bishops and deacons are not the same position, office or Greek word.
And as you pointed out, there is no admonition against multiple wives because there is no doctrine demanding it. It is clear from the KJV that it was a common practice and that those who sought to serve should only have one wife.
Can a person marry without lust?
Do you mean Jesus Christ the only begotten Son of God?
Or do you have another in mind?
Sure but if they are not going to have sex, why bother? At some point the purpose of marriage is sex and at some point one spouse will look at the other with sex on their mind. The second that happens to someone who has a spouse, Jesus's command is broken.
I would still like to hear you answer the question: Who do you say Jesus is.
Actually, 1 Tim 3:2 is an argument in support of polygamy existing in the primitive church. Otherwise, why the admonition that Bishops are to have but one wife? It's a meaningless qualifier unless there are Christians in polygamous relationships within the church.
If you look through the old testament, you will find that polygamy was for the purpose of having a large posterity. One man with 4 wives can have a LOT of children.
Just as a side point of interest, this is also the reason given for the LDS practice (Jacob 2:30). It is specifically given by special dispensation for the sole purpose of God raising up seed "unto me." In other words, righteous posterity.
Abraham took his handmaid to wife to have a child. It was lack of faith on his part, not trusting the Lord to give him one through Sarah, but Abraham was not condemned for it, nor did he lose his promised blessings (as David did when he committed adultery and murder).
Jacob, on the other hand had 4 wives (Rachel, Leah, and their handmaids) for the sole purpose of bringing forth the nation of Israel, through which the Messiah would come in fulfillment of the promise given to Abraham that all the world would be blessed through his posterity. Jacob's polygamy was recognized, approved and blessed by God.
Bishops and deacons are not the same position, office or Greek word.
You're right, thanks for the correction.
Do you mean Jesus Christ the only begotten Son of God?
Or do you have another in mind?
It is truly apparent that you don't understand the difference between love and lust.
God tolerated lots of behavior he thought sinful. The Israelites wanted a king and God begrudgingly let them have one. Does this mean that God condones the monarchy cause he tolerated it? Let's tear down our government and erect a monarchy cause it's the way the ancient Israel was governed by one. Silly isn’t it? Same as the errant teaching that God condones polygamy, slavery, and revenge. It's a problem some people have not interpreting scripture correctly, by not taking into account the historical and culture reference when doing biblical interpretation. I personally like Hank Hanegraff and the Christian Resource Institute, he's known as the "Bible answer man". He eloquently debunked the Mormon justification for polygamy.
You never lust after a spouse? Your idea of marriage is a bit different than mine.
BTW, Who do you say Jesus is. In as much as you want to use him as an authority I figured you might have something to say about him.
There was and probably always will be some polygamy in the church. Why? Because divorcing a 2nd or 3rd wife if worse than the polygamy in the first place.
But polygamy has always been the exception so there will always be individuals (bishops or elders) whom God can entrust to teach the truth of his plan, including one man one wife, without the compromise of having to justify their own lifestyle.
Simply put, a polygamist is not to be revered as a respected teacher in the Christian church.
Typical anti-mormon propaganda. Isn't it funny that they never include verse 30 when they quote Jacob? You know, the one right after the last one you quote where the Lord basically says: If I want to raise up a righteous posterity, I will specifically command my people to enter into polygamy, otherwise they are to not do it.
Of course, that would put the Book of Mormon right in line with the Old Testament on polygamy (approved when specifically commanded for the purpose of having posterity -- see Jacob, Rachel and Leah for more information), and we can't tolerate that. So a little deception, all in the good cause of helping save people from the evil cult, and, oh, let's make a few bucks off it, 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.