So, nothing about polygamy, right?
I suppose that " husbands, love their wives" could refer to multiple wives if applicable.
Again, how much of our western cultural values do we lean on to interpret these passages?
/
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!
I suppose that " husbands, love their wives" could refer to multiple wives if applicable.
Again, how much of our western cultural values do we lean on to interpret these passages?
/
Consorts were so much an integrated part of Roman life that it wasn't secret or scandalous whatsoever. It was actually a status symbol to be a consort of a wealthy man. These consorts relied solely upon their boyfriends for their monetary support. It had no relationship to today's standards of decency or morality. Paul was reticent to have Christian men kick their consorts to the curb. He just didn't want wealthy men with consorts to be running church affairs as an extention of their business practices.
That's my question. How much of "today's standards of decency or morality" do we impose on the scriptures?
So, Paul didn't make an issue of the men keeping consorts?
But didn't want them running church affairs?
How did you arrive at the conclusion?
BTW; I appreciate your posts on this topic. Thanks.
/
Lambano
Well-Known Member
I could foresee American society embracing polygamy in the not-so-distant future. It'll really drum up the business for the divorce lawyers. And those who write pre-nups.
As for me... polygamy is not a good idea. My wife wants to make sure I know that she can put 30 rounds in a 1-inch diameter circle in the heart of a range target at 25 yards with her AR, and she's almost as good with her Glock 48 at 15 yards. Say, does this meatloaf taste funny?
Polygamy was mandated by the Torah in certain instances. (See Ruth) David had many wives as did Solomon in excess...many kings in Israel had many wives. But so did Moses. Moses's second wife was "one of the cushite barbarians" that Egypt built all its military fortifications to prevent their invasion.
Esau and Jacob both had plural marriages. So did Abraham after Sarah died. In the Ancient Near East polygamy was extremely common. However you had to be wealthy in order to afford more than one wife.
In today's modern society there are a few instances of polygamy practiced by Mormon Fundamentals. And what the reality show demonstrated was that the one husband was so busy trying to please all of his wives that he didn't have time to do any ministry work except as a token. His passion was for his entire family and wives....nothing else.
And if you think that this is something that should be acceptable in today's society?
You got some issues.
Christian men are to blend in with today's culture by appearances only. Meaning that we dress like everyone else and live an average life like everyone else. We aren't "entitled " to something extra or special. Treating women like property is not exactly what Jesus ever hinted at was acceptable. They are people too.
Reminds me of a couple of cannibal jokes.
Readers beware --- cannibal jokes below --- (fair warning)
Two cannibals are eating a jazz musician.
One cannibal turns to the other and asks...
"Does this taste funky to you?"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Two cannibals are eating a clown.
One cannibal turns to the other and asks...
"Does this taste funny to you?"
/
Do you see any indications of this?
I would rather stay where I am.
I don't really want to move to Utah. - LOL
/
To answer your question, I would say no. Jesus was coming back to get a pure, spotless, bride, and they were people who faithfully laid their lives down for Christ. I believe that because of this being the bride of Christ which Yeshua would come back, there would be no fault, or polygamy in it.
LOL
My point is that it was common in ancient times. Even in the Christian church.
But unacceptable by today's cultural standards.
It was common in that day. Jesus upheld the law concerning fornication as the only grounds for divorce.
Which made the daughter given in marriage the property of her parents then given as property to her husband.
If that new husband thought he had received damaged goods (not a virgin) he could divorce her.
And Jesus approved of this. We have a complete misunderstanding of this today.
The church teaches that adultery is grounds for divorce. That's NOT what Jesus said.
/
We often try to place our lense of modern society into the scriptures regularly and have for centuries. Where human behavior has not improved and been a constant...it has gotten better in some ways...less barbaric and bloody in some ways. But just as deadly and violent just the same. We simply have new and improved ways of enslaving people and killing them. We have sanitized warfare with precision weapons and rifles. We have the promise of vast wealth for young women to entice them into the adult entertainment industry. (The truth is that they usually make only a few dollars and have destroyed their ability to get a respectable job or husband in the future)
As far as Paul's reticence to have the men put away the consorts?
Paul himself was never going to go against scriptures. Polygamy is mandated by the Law and every Patriarch had multiple wives....just because Roman society didn't claim that consorts were wives didn't make it true in Paul's understanding of the situation.
Families were, and are, a major functional part of the human condition. We are capable of living in peace...and should. Paul wasn't after a cultural change. He was after people forming a relationship with God which would create a morality change as God is the sole arbiter of morality.
Today we have a "Christian Right" who seeks to mandate morality upon everyone by force. Not exactly what God had in mind for converting people into loving Him.
God's kingdom is His Kingdom and there is no need for "Law" there. There are no politicians, prisons, orphanages, or hospitals in heaven.
The Earth isn't Heaven. And it won't be.
God made the template in the garden whether one wants to follow it or not is on them. God allowed people to make their own choices to be married to more than one person if they wanted to however, it just caused problems in the end. That is what should be noted when it comes to this subject.
Genesis 2:
23 Then the man said,
“At last this is bone of my bones,
And flesh of my flesh;
[a]She shall be called [b]‘woman,’
Because [c]she was taken out of [d]man.”
24 For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.
Genesis 2:
23 Then the man said,
“At last this is bone of my bones,
And flesh of my flesh;
[a]She shall be called [b]‘woman,’
Because [c]she was taken out of [d]man.”
24 For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.
Can you prove that Polygamy was mandated by the law? What law? Mans law or God's law? I would like to see it.
Actually the daughter was SOLD to her husband. Then he was given a dowry. Which she was to be given if he wanted to divorce her.
And the "fornication " Jesus discussed is only ONE of the many reasons for divorce. What Jesus intended was more in line with the "fornication " found in prophetic literature of being unfaithful to God moreso than just simple adultery. This greatly encompasses many horrible behaviors instead of just one. (Which has been literally fought over for Centuries...I'm not looking to keep up the fight I just am relaying the truth if you wish to hear it)
Women were not treated or accepted as equal to men. So of course polygamy was common and acceptable. Today's society where we even let women have equal pay and voting rights which has never been done before in any society in the history of mankind.....we just don't find polygamy or polyandry acceptable.
Refer you to the book of Ruth. Your concordance will list them out.
I can't remember the specific scriptures chapter and verse numbers.
Okay, I dont trust you on the notion of that it was mandated by Law if it is not in the Torah. I understand what it was like back then, but I would like to see where God approved of polygamy if it is possible because I do not believe he ever did, but he allowed people to make choices to what they would do as far as wives in that day in age, there was some who had mulitple, some who just stayed to one... and God desired for his bride to be married to his Son, and I believe those who were of the church in that day in age before Yeshua came and got them, was pure, and blameless, and there wouldn't have been any polygamy at all. What are the benefits to polygamy if there any? Is it really good to say you love your one wife, and say you also love your other wife, even while they have hardships?
Like 1 Samuel ? Here is a man who has two wives, named Elkanah.
1 Samuel 1
New International Version
The Birth of Samuel
1 There was a certain man from Ramathaim, a Zuphite[a] from the hill country of Ephraim, whose name was Elkanah son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an Ephraimite. 2 He had two wives; one was called Hannah and the other Peninnah. Peninnah had children, but Hannah had none.3 Year after year this man went up from his town to worship and sacrifice to the Lord Almighty at Shiloh, where Hophni and Phinehas, the two sons of Eli, were priests of the Lord. 4 Whenever the day came for Elkanah to sacrifice, he would give portions of the meat to his wife Peninnah and to all her sons and daughters. 5 But to Hannah he gave a double portion because he loved her, and the Lord had closed her womb. 6 Because the Lord had closed Hannah’s womb, her rival kept provoking her in order to irritate her. 7 This went on year after year. Whenever Hannah went up to the house of the Lord, her rival provoked her till she wept and would not eat. 8 Her husband Elkanah would say to her, “Hannah, why are you weeping? Why don’t you eat? Why are you downhearted? Don’t I mean more to you than ten sons?”
9 Once when they had finished eating and drinking in Shiloh, Hannah stood up. Now Eli the priest was sitting on his chair by the doorpost of the Lord’s house. 10 In her deep anguish Hannah prayed to the Lord, weeping bitterly. 11 And she made a vow, saying, “Lord Almighty, if you will only look on your servant’s misery and remember me, and not forget your servant but give her a son, then I will give him to the Lord for all the days of his life, and no razor will ever be used on his head.”
12 As she kept on praying to the Lord, Eli observed her mouth. 13 Hannah was praying in her heart, and her lips were moving but her voice was not heard. Eli thought she was drunk 14 and said to her, “How long are you going to stay drunk? Put away your wine.”
15 “Not so, my lord,” Hannah replied, “I am a woman who is deeply troubled. I have not been drinking wine or beer; I was pouring out my soul to the Lord. 16 Do not take your servant for a wicked woman; I have been praying here out of my great anguish and grief.”
17 Eli answered, “Go in peace, and may the God of Israel grant you what you have asked of him.”
Exactly.
Interesting that "slaves" are mentioned in the Sabbath commandment.
Why would a man need a male or female servant?
Exodus 20:8-11 NIV
“Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy.
9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work,
10 but the seventh day is a sabbath to the Lord your God.
On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter,
nor your male or female servant, nor your animals,
nor any foreigner residing in your towns.
11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth,
the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day.
Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.
/
Perhaps they are hired workers, Steven.
You bring up a good point about slaves, Paul talks about becoming slaves to righteouseness.
Romans 6:15-23
New International Version
Slaves to Righteousness
15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under the law but under grace? By no means! 16 Don’t you know that when you offer yourselves to someone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one you obey—whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? 17 But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin, you have come to obey from your heart the pattern of teaching that has now claimed your allegiance. 18 You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness. 19 I am using an example from everyday life because of your human limitations. Just as you used to offer yourselves as slaves to impurity and to ever-increasing wickedness, so now offer yourselves as slaves to righteousness leading to holiness. 20 When you were slaves to sin, you were free from the control of righteousness. 21 What benefit did you reap at that time from the things you are now ashamed of? Those things result in death! 22 But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the benefit you reap leads to holiness, and the result is eternal life. 23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in[a] Christ Jesus our Lord.
I wondered about that. More evidence that women were property in ancient times.
We gave them an inch and they took a mile. - LOL
/
Maybe I'll look into it, I wish you were more on spot about your knowing for sure cause it just leaves it up in the air, either you are right or your wrong, but if God wanted people to be in polygamy, perhaps he would have made an extra female rather than just eve. Yahava got upset with his chosen people for going after idols, for a very long time, up until the final divorcement, which he had everything burned to the ground. Now how the Law is laid out and things like that, I do not have any problems with it, the hebrew people were a people very different than us today, and were under mandate by Yahava himself, compared to all the rest of the Gentile nations. However it was a law they could never keep in the first place, even in Samuels day, Eli the priest, had been foretold he was going to lose his whole family line due to them doing evil in the eye of the LORD. This again is another reason people shouldn't just believe what people say on the internet, and always go and seek for what is true, and if it is true in the bible. That definitely helps clears things up, sometimes.
Samuel is not exactly a story that is going to be useful. Eli was a horrible priest. So let's divert away and use Judah and Tamar.
Judah was supposed to give Tamar to another husband of one of his sons...
And if not he was supposed to marry her himself to keep the lineage going for his dead son.
But he didn't want to marry her either even though he was personally responsible for her being married to someone. And the moment she came up pregnant he was more than ready to execute her for being a prostitute....
But then she proved it was actually his child that she got out of him by being deceitful. "She is more righteous than I" was what Judah said. Judah was willing to waste his seed on a prostitute but unwilling to give her a child. (He had issues)
A young wife? What's not to like? Something was definitely wrong with these people.
A brother was supposed to marry a deceased brother's wife to continue his lineage for him. Also to provide economic support (life insurance policy) to her if he died. Others simply because of wealth married a second or third woman because they could...and Legacy was a huge prize of pride in the Ancient Near East. The more children and the more wealth they generated the larger the legacy.
One day you and I both will leave Earth bound for Heaven. What legacy will we leave behind? One of substance or one of sin and self service? There are many notable people in history that have left us legacies of their actions. Edison, Einstein, Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, and even Henry the 8th.
Polygamist want a legacy through one or more of their children. Through Jacob we have the Nation Israel. (Big legacy)
As far as hardships?
Every life has hardships...even the wealthy elite have hardships. Life is not easy for anyone, anywhere, at anytime throughout history.
Similar threads
