Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: SteveH
Marriage is not necessarily a one to one relationship.

Then "adultery" is the wrong word for the guilt of marrying another. Adultery, by definition, is intercourse with someone else's husband or wife. If you marry someone else, regardless if you put another wife away improperly, it could not be adultery.

IIRC it was your argument that we are male and female and thus monogamous.

Not just that we are made "male and female," but that Adam was given only one woman, Eve. It is with this same logic that Christ condemns divorce.

I was not addressing divorce. I was addressing polygamy (and polyandry).

You stated that polygamy was not condemned in the Old Testament. Thus I replied, neither was divorce. It is here condemned by Christ.

44 posted on 11/05/2014 10:56:37 PM PST by Greetings_Puny_Humans (I mostly come out at night... mostly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]


To: Greetings_Puny_Humans

adultery is (whatever)

ok but we’re talking marriage, not adultery. There is no guilt associated with something (polygamy) that is not ever condemned.

adam was given only one woman

so what? never does that preclude many to one relationships. and why bring up just one example? why not bring up solomon, for example? and i thought the original thrust of your argument was that male and female somehow implied monogamy. you are straining and stretching.

with this same logic, Christ...

this is your inference, but it is not logically . inferred. let’s extract the essence of your logic, which is: “relationship R1 was 1 to 1. therefore all relationships R2, R3, ... R-infinity must be 1 to 1.” extrapolated without logical justification— yes. logically inferred— no.

so what if divorce was not condemned in the OT? I don’t know if it was or was not. I was not addressing divorce, only the polygamy type of marriage. You are the one who keeps bringing up straw person arguments concerning side issues. I am not here arguing against Christ condemning divorce, because you have not demonstrated that divorce is logically relevant to the topic of polygamy, at least in the sense that condemning one implies condemning the other.

Be logical first. Without logic, we abandon our reason to emotions. Then we start finding meanings that we want to find rather than meanings that are. History is full of wars that were fought over this type of stuff. I am not a fan of illogical religious wars. Alas, illogical religious wars continue.


45 posted on 11/05/2014 11:19:49 PM PST by SteveH (First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson