(Denver;9008)
Hugh, you're picking at words and missing what I am trying to say.A type is nothing more than a type, an ideal. That differs greatly from a commandment or God's Word which makes it a sin. Polygamy is not a sin. There's no hedge in what I say so please quit trying to make one. You're constructing the hedge, not me. It's not there.Having a type is just that, a type. We have Nebuchadnezzar as the type of antichrist, but he is not the antichrist. We have Joshua as a type of Christ, but he is not the Christ. Monogamy is the ideal when it comes to man and woman, but that doesn't mean polygamy is a sin.
Yep.This was exactly where I ended up at.I believe we have the 'ideal'...what was called 'good' in the beginning.But the evidence is so overwhelming that one has to really try to overlook it to miss it...which is where Ive been on this issue for a very long time.It was sort of funny because this polygamy issue was one of the few that Ive never discussed with either of my mentors...just never came up.I decided about 10 days ago just to give them each a ring and give them a scenario about a modern day polygamist and to my surprise both of these absolutely monogamous men said pretty much the same thing...that polygamy cannot be defined as 'sin'. The both believe in the ideal, of course, but I wonder if (like with myself) that that might be a cultural thing...we all are US citizens. If they both lived where polygamy was common, would they still hold to the ideal or would they be more likely to not even notice polygamy much ?For myself, one wife is enough. The responsibility of a single wife is plenty.But it is simply self deception, in my opinion, to try to create a prohibition where one does not exist and call something God has permitted 'sin'.