Why is it adultery if God is good with men having multiple wives? Might as well be a free for all.
Last edited:
Does the "husband of one wife" requirement mean that polygamy was common in the early church?
- Thread starter St. SteVen
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Adultery is sexual relations outside of marriage with someone else's spouse. (despite the number of spouses)
Jesus referred to an adulterous generation. Marriage is a symbol of our relationship with Him. (forsaking all others)
There is physical fidelity and infidelity, and spiritual fidelity and infidelity.
[
BeforeThereWas
Active Member
It was never classified as adultery. If it were, we could expect to see Abraham and all the other Patriarchs burning in the pits of Hell.
MM
It was the fall that brought in the multiple wives thing and all the conflict, confusion, and brokenness that goes with it. God made provision because of the hardness of men's hearts. He "winked at sin." If multiple wives was the original perfect intent of God He would have made multiple women for Adam ...He would have chosen multiple wives for Noah and his 3 sons .. and Jesus wouldn't have said this ...
Mark 10:2-9
10.2 And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? tempting him.10.3 And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you?10.4 And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away.10.5 And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept.10.6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.10.7 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;10.8 And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.10.9 What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
BeforeThereWas
Active Member
He winked at sin? Seriously? This sentiment makes God out to be a perpetrator of sin, then, because He gave David two of his already plural wives.
Folks, please don't allow the pervasive, cultural tendencies of feministic bull crap tarnish ones understanding of scripture.
MM
Timothy was stationed in Ephesus....the Banker's home city.
Roman's and Greeks believed in only having one wife....zero polygamy. Not many Jews in the early church congregation there either.
Greeks and Roman's DID believe in having consorts/concubines. Paul referred to them as wives to infuriate the Greeks....but said it privately to Timothy and not publicly. This is what you get when reading someone's mail.
I would say that this predates feminism.
This is a matter of western culture versus eastern culture.
The purpose of this topic was to question that perception.
Notice that the Apostle doesn't discourage polygamy, he only makes a requirement for elders to have one wife.
(whatever that means)
Polygamy was assumed in the early church due to the eastern culture they were living in.
[
It's just a figure of speech.
Jesus Himself said that "because of the hardness of men's hearts" some things were allowed, and things that were not according to God's original intent and design were given provision for ....because of the hardness of men's hearts. Sin was covered by sacrifices before Jesus came. Now, we are given the Holy Spirit and hearts of flesh (not hard) with the law written in our hearts.
You and @St. SteVen just want to make excuse to fulfill your fleshly lusts. Go ahead ....get more wives. But God isn't in it. I have him (the self-proclaimed "saint" Steven) on ignore ...and you as well now. I don't care to go back and forth with so-called Christians who reject the Word of God and want to form God after their own likeness.
Last edited:
That's not what I am saying at all. Even two wives would be double trouble. - LOL
More wives equals more headaches, not more sex. IMHO
To be clear, I love the wife I have. I won't risk trying to find another.
[
In that case you should answer the topic question:
Does the "husband of one wife" requirement mean that polygamy was common in the early church?
[
The Apostle Paul referred to all the members of the churches to whom the epistles were addressed as saints.
I dare you to reveal to readers what your user name means.
Philippians 1:1 JKV
Paul and Timotheus, the servants of Jesus Christ,
to all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons:
[
BeforeThereWas
Active Member
Feminism started in the Garden. First, Eve took upon herself the authority to state a falsehood to the serpent when claiming the Lord allegedly instructed them to not even touch the fruit on the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Then she instructed Adam to eat of it after her disobedience to him to abstain, claiming it being good. Adam at all listening to her demand was the downfall the Lord knew was going to happen, and that fit in perfectly with His plans. No other alternative scenario was at all possible.
Secondly, the Patriarchs who took to themselves multiple wives and concubines, and who were in communication with the Lord at various times, never were made aware of plural wives being anywhere near sin and a violation of God's will for some men. As I had pointed out earlier, the Lord actively gave to king David two of his already plural wives after Saul's death, later revealed through Nathan the prophet.
So, where it may be true that polygyny within the early Church may have been somewhat influenced by culture, it cannot be said that culture was the only influence...excluding hormones...
You're right that Church leadership was not to have more than one wife, even though free radicals out there spew their feministic hatred to the extent of subjectively splattering that disallowing across all others not in leadership, as if the Lord had empowered them to make that determination upon all believers. I personally know believing men with plural wives to this day who are not Mormons but rather Bible believing Christians with very stable and loving families. One is even a Southern Baptist minister no less.
Just wanted to state some things for the benefit of others here as well.
MM
Last edited:
BeforeThereWas
Active Member
Many who have conversed on this topic through the years have blindly assumed blanket intent behind God having given Adam only one wife. They do so with blind indifference to other considerations not in keeping with their assumptions nowhere stated in scripture.
MM
Lambano
Well-Known Member
- Jul 13, 2021
- 10,001
- 12,776
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
Me neither. The Sweet Lady is a VERY good shot with her AR-15.
Lambano
Well-Known Member
- Jul 13, 2021
- 10,001
- 12,776
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
Ooo, we haven't tried that. There's a trap and skeet course about an hour south of here. I haven't tried it, but one of my buddies took his son there and says it's a blast. The Sweet Lady hasn't tried a shotgun yet; I'll bet she'd love it.
Last edited:
Grailhunter
Well-Known Member
We do not know the numbers on how common polygamy and concubinage was with Jewish-Christians. But there was no reason for them not to have polygamous and concubine relationships.
Polygamy and concubinage was fair common with the Jews. The scriptures never puts and end to polygamy and concubinage and the Mosaic Law regulated it and God took credit for King David’s wives. In the Jewish culture a man having many wives and children was seen as a blessing of God. For the Jews these relationships were fairly common for a thousand years after the the biblical period.
Now how often did Christians take multiple wives?…..enough that the Apostle Paul had to restrict church officials from having multiple wives.
Then again the Gentiles and Gentile Christians did not have a custom of polygamy and concubinage. So there were probably few occurrences of these types of relationships with them….
The Catholic Church ruled against polygamy in 673 AD.
Then again Martin Luther said he could not condemn polygamy because the scriptures did not, but polygamy has not been a custom in Protestant denominations.
Polygamy and concubinage was fair common with the Jews. The scriptures never puts and end to polygamy and concubinage and the Mosaic Law regulated it and God took credit for King David’s wives. In the Jewish culture a man having many wives and children was seen as a blessing of God. For the Jews these relationships were fairly common for a thousand years after the the biblical period.
Now how often did Christians take multiple wives?…..enough that the Apostle Paul had to restrict church officials from having multiple wives.
Then again the Gentiles and Gentile Christians did not have a custom of polygamy and concubinage. So there were probably few occurrences of these types of relationships with them….
The Catholic Church ruled against polygamy in 673 AD.
Then again Martin Luther said he could not condemn polygamy because the scriptures did not, but polygamy has not been a custom in Protestant denominations.
No, it was basically nonexistent in the Greco-Roman world. That is also why there are zero instructions in the New Testament about it. It was actually more common in the Jewish communities than in the Gentile communities, in the 1st century.
"Husband of one wife" probably means not divorced/remarried.
Titus was in Crete.....not a Jewish city or known for its Jewish community. (Lazy brutes)
Timothy was in Ephasus....the Romans bankers paradise.
No large Jewish community there either.
Both Titus and Timithy were Hellenistic Jews. Outwards appearing as Greeks but with a Jewish heritage.
Any Church in Crete or Ephasus would be mostly Greeks and Romans, there wouldn't be many Jews whatsoever. Best guess is that they either met in a house or at the gymnasium/city community center.
These two were located in large cities with tens to hundreds of thousands of people. Their church would be possibly a few dozen members.
Greeks and Romans didn't have multiple wives. They thought the Jewish practice of polygamy was barbaric and disgusting. It was effectively banned in Greek territories. (This isn't exactly hard to find historical information)
Paul would not mention it if it wasn't important....and he wouldn't lie about it either. He had no reason. Paul at times was very fond of sarcasm and dry wit. (Common among Prophets in the Old Testament)
And yet no one wants to explain the paradox (I have....but nobody likes it)
Wealthy Cretans and Wealthy Bankers would all have consorts....social status would almost demand they do so. And women had status in society for being a consort. (Nothing new there either) Consorts weren't shameful secret things that we consider them to be today. Just the opposite.
Men took pride in their wives AND who their consort was.
Timothy was in Ephasus....the Romans bankers paradise.
No large Jewish community there either.
Both Titus and Timithy were Hellenistic Jews. Outwards appearing as Greeks but with a Jewish heritage.
Any Church in Crete or Ephasus would be mostly Greeks and Romans, there wouldn't be many Jews whatsoever. Best guess is that they either met in a house or at the gymnasium/city community center.
These two were located in large cities with tens to hundreds of thousands of people. Their church would be possibly a few dozen members.
Greeks and Romans didn't have multiple wives. They thought the Jewish practice of polygamy was barbaric and disgusting. It was effectively banned in Greek territories. (This isn't exactly hard to find historical information)
Paul would not mention it if it wasn't important....and he wouldn't lie about it either. He had no reason. Paul at times was very fond of sarcasm and dry wit. (Common among Prophets in the Old Testament)
And yet no one wants to explain the paradox (I have....but nobody likes it)
Wealthy Cretans and Wealthy Bankers would all have consorts....social status would almost demand they do so. And women had status in society for being a consort. (Nothing new there either) Consorts weren't shameful secret things that we consider them to be today. Just the opposite.
Men took pride in their wives AND who their consort was.
Similar threads
