Monogamy Isn’t Biblical, It’s Greek/Roman

  • 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!

evotell

Active Member
Nov 13, 2007
100
26
28
71
Red Deer
www.solutionslifecoaching.ca
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
The Bible is a collection of 66 books written by 40 authors over a period of hundreds of years. The Old and New Testament are contradictory on a number of points, such as whether God requires his followers to follow the Levitical Law. Evangelicals hold that in the New Testament, Jesus “fulfilled” the law, rendering it null and void. This alone, outside of any other contradictions, suggests that it is incredibly overly simplistic to say something is “biblically based.”

When people say that the idea of marriage being between only two people is biblically based, I have to wonder what part of the Bible they are talking about. Yes, in Genesis God creates Adam and Eve, one man and one woman, and speaks of the two becoming one flesh. But in the same book, God chooses as his follower’s men who almost universally take more than one wife—and the Bible says nothing to suggest these men were operating outside of God’s will in doing so. Jacob takes two wives and two concubines, and yet God treats his twelve sons by these four women as all equally legitimate.

In the Old Testament, God lays down laws for his people. He carefully regulates who men can take as a wife—not a niece or a sister, for instance—but never prohibits polygamy. Instead, it accommodates it, requiring men who take a second wife not to deprive the first wife of food or clothing, for example. Indeed, the entire Old Testament is, to my knowledge, bereft of any suggestion that marriage is only to be between one man and one woman. Instead, polygamy is treated as normal and accepted and, for the wealthy and powerful, even expected.

King David, who is repeatedly described as a man after God’s own heart, took nearly a dozen wives. God severely punished David for taking Bathsheba as his wife, given that she was originally married to another man and David had him killed to obtain her. But God never punished David for taking his other wives.

Polygamy isn’t condemned in the New Testament, either. In Timothy and Titus, church leaders are required to be the “husband of but one wife,” but this is the only time polygamy is referenced in any way. I’ve seen it argued that Jesus is condemning polygamy when he speaks of marriage and says “the two shall become one flesh,” but in that passage he is referencing a Genesis passage that says the same thing—and as we’ve already noted, the Old Testament permits polygamy. The New Testament writers condemn gluttony and prostitution and anger—but not polygamy, despite the fact that polygamy existed in Jewish culture.

Don’t get me wrong, creationists like Ham try to find ways to explain all of this away. And in some sense that’s fine—I don’t have a problem with people arguing that Christians should be monogamous, or finding ways to interpret the bible to support monogamy. I do, however, have a problem with Christians arguing that something is transparently obviously and unquestioningly biblical when it is anything but. Go ahead and form your own interpretation—but please, oh please, don’t claim the Bible is “clear” on an issue when it’s obviously more complicated than that.

Christianity is monogamous not because of anything the Bible says but rather because the Romans were monogamous. Christianity was profoundly influenced by its development within the Roman Empire. Even the Christian concept of heaven and hell comes from the Romans, not the Jews. While Jewish law permitted polygamy, the Romans were fiercely monogamous, and during its early years Christianity moved from being a Jewish sect to being an independent religion within the Roman Empire—a religion adopted primarily by Gentiles (and not Jews) and ultimately made the Roman Empire’s official religion.

Yes, you read that right—the Western idea that marriage is between one man and one woman isn’t biblical, it’s Greek/Roman.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FHII

ScottA

Well-Known Member
Feb 24, 2011
11,747
5,599
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Like the law and the would-be contradictions of the old testament verses the new, which you mention (incorrectly), marriage and monogamy are not justified by those acts of falling short which are written, but by the fulfillment thereof. This is biblical and true, both of the law and of marriage.
 

VictoryinJesus

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2017
9,674
7,926
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Instead, it accommodates it, requiring men who take a second wife not to deprive the first wife of food or clothing, for example.

Does God still provide food and clothing for the Jews (Israel) although God turned His attention to the gentiles?
 

VictoryinJesus

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2017
9,674
7,926
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
God severely punished David for taking Bathsheba as his wife, given that she was originally married to another man and David had him killed to obtain her

Sound familiar?

Romans 7:2-4
[2] For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. [3] So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man. [4] Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.

God punishes David for wanting anothers wife and having the woman's husband put to death.(the Law) Because David wants her. Oddly, or not odd at all, Bathsheba was bathing when he saw her.

Jesus Christ was also punished by the Father, so that we could be free from the Law. Those that are free from the Law and married to Christ...They are Bathsheba. The Lord saw us, wanted us and had our husband(the law) put to death so he could (free) have us as His wife(bride).

1 Corinthians 11:24
[24] And when he had given thanks, he brake it , and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.
 
Last edited:

VictoryinJesus

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2017
9,674
7,926
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
And concubines?

Judges 19:26-29
[26] Then came the woman in the dawning of the day, and fell down at the door of the man's house where her lord was , till it was light. [27] And her lord rose up in the morning, and opened the doors of the house, and went out to go his way: and, behold, the woman his concubine was fallen down at the door of the house, and her hands were upon the threshold. [28] And he said unto her, Up, and let us be going. But none answered. Then the man took her up upon an ass, and the man rose up, and gat him unto his place. [29] And when he was come into his house, he took a knife, and laid hold on his concubine, and divided her, together with her bones, into twelve pieces, and sent her into all the coasts of Israel.

It can't be logically or discerned by the will of man, it has to be Spiritually discerned. Like most of His word...a person can make it say whatever they want it to say if it gives them what their flesh wants.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bbyrd009

evotell

Active Member
Nov 13, 2007
100
26
28
71
Red Deer
www.solutionslifecoaching.ca
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Sex at Dawn is a great book if your interested in viewing the topic outside a fundamentalist perspective.

"He who has ears let him hear" Can you hear? I hope you can. The pharisees couldn't hear Christ message because they were deaf blind and hard hearted. Its always hard to think outside the box. I guess in many ways the modern Church and its congregation is a modern version of the pharisees.
 
Last edited:
B

Butterfly

Guest
The Bible is a collection of 66 books written by 40 authors over a period of hundreds of years. The Old and New Testament are contradictory on a number of points, such as whether God requires his followers to follow the Levitical Law. Evangelicals hold that in the New Testament, Jesus “fulfilled” the law, rendering it null and void. This alone, outside of any other contradictions, suggests that it is incredibly overly simplistic to say something is “biblically based.”

When people say that the idea of marriage being between only two people is biblically based, I have to wonder what part of the Bible they are talking about. Yes, in Genesis God creates Adam and Eve, one man and one woman, and speaks of the two becoming one flesh. But in the same book, God chooses as his follower’s men who almost universally take more than one wife—and the Bible says nothing to suggest these men were operating outside of God’s will in doing so. Jacob takes two wives and two concubines, and yet God treats his twelve sons by these four women as all equally legitimate.

In the Old Testament, God lays down laws for his people. He carefully regulates who men can take as a wife—not a niece or a sister, for instance—but never prohibits polygamy. Instead, it accommodates it, requiring men who take a second wife not to deprive the first wife of food or clothing, for example. Indeed, the entire Old Testament is, to my knowledge, bereft of any suggestion that marriage is only to be between one man and one woman. Instead, polygamy is treated as normal and accepted and, for the wealthy and powerful, even expected.

King David, who is repeatedly described as a man after God’s own heart, took nearly a dozen wives. God severely punished David for taking Bathsheba as his wife, given that she was originally married to another man and David had him killed to obtain her. But God never punished David for taking his other wives.

Polygamy isn’t condemned in the New Testament, either. In Timothy and Titus, church leaders are required to be the “husband of but one wife,” but this is the only time polygamy is referenced in any way. I’ve seen it argued that Jesus is condemning polygamy when he speaks of marriage and says “the two shall become one flesh,” but in that passage he is referencing a Genesis passage that says the same thing—and as we’ve already noted, the Old Testament permits polygamy. The New Testament writers condemn gluttony and prostitution and anger—but not polygamy, despite the fact that polygamy existed in Jewish culture.

Don’t get me wrong, creationists like Ham try to find ways to explain all of this away. And in some sense that’s fine—I don’t have a problem with people arguing that Christians should be monogamous, or finding ways to interpret the bible to support monogamy. I do, however, have a problem with Christians arguing that something is transparently obviously and unquestioningly biblical when it is anything but. Go ahead and form your own interpretation—but please, oh please, don’t claim the Bible is “clear” on an issue when it’s obviously more complicated than that.

Christianity is monogamous not because of anything the Bible says but rather because the Romans were monogamous. Christianity was profoundly influenced by its development within the Roman Empire. Even the Christian concept of heaven and hell comes from the Romans, not the Jews. While Jewish law permitted polygamy, the Romans were fiercely monogamous, and during its early years Christianity moved from being a Jewish sect to being an independent religion within the Roman Empire—a religion adopted primarily by Gentiles (and not Jews) and ultimately made the Roman Empire’s official religion.

Yes, you read that right—the Western idea that marriage is between one man and one woman isn’t biblical, it’s Greek/Roman.
I remembering having the same thoughts when I was studying the whole subject of marriage during my divorce. I often wondered why polygamy was not condoned by God, especially with David.
I drew conclusions about marriage itself, that it is within the context of uniting sexually - if you base marriage on Genesis, there was no ceremony, just a coming together.
I am not sure what conclusions I reached , it all got a bit confusing to try and unravel. I mean you would have had a lot of ' inter marriage ' within families - which we no longer agree with.
Sin is obviously intertwined with all the choices people made after the fall , but also consequences lead to different senarios unfolding.
I must admit I have always found it strange that it seems to have been accepted by God,without any punishment, within his people.
Butterfly
 
  • Like
Reactions: Helen

ScottA

Well-Known Member
Feb 24, 2011
11,747
5,599
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I guess you didn't catch it (or didn't have an ear to hear)...

In the end, after all the infractions, there is only one bride and One groom. That is the only model. Nothing more is justified.
 
B

Butterfly

Guest
I guess you didn't catch it (or didn't have an ear to hear)...

In the end, after all the infractions, there is only one bride and One groom. That is the only model. Nothing more is justified.
That was ten years ago, I am not as deaf as I use to be - but maybe my hearing is still not as good as others
Butterfly
 
B

Butterfly

Guest
That was ten years ago, I am not as deaf as I use to be - but maybe my hearing is still not as good as others
Butterfly
I added a smiley face , but it did not show up, my comment above is slightly tongue in cheek !
 
  • Like
Reactions: bbyrd009

tabletalk

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2017
847
384
63
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The Bible is a collection of 66 books written by 40 authors over a period of hundreds of years. The Old and New Testament are contradictory on a number of points, such as whether God requires his followers to follow the Levitical Law. Evangelicals hold that in the New Testament, Jesus “fulfilled” the law, rendering it null and void. This alone, outside of any other contradictions, suggests that it is incredibly overly simplistic to say something is “biblically based.”

When people say that the idea of marriage being between only two people is biblically based, I have to wonder what part of the Bible they are talking about. Yes, in Genesis God creates Adam and Eve, one man and one woman, and speaks of the two becoming one flesh. But in the same book, God chooses as his follower’s men who almost universally take more than one wife—and the Bible says nothing to suggest these men were operating outside of God’s will in doing so. Jacob takes two wives and two concubines, and yet God treats his twelve sons by these four women as all equally legitimate.

In the Old Testament, God lays down laws for his people. He carefully regulates who men can take as a wife—not a niece or a sister, for instance—but never prohibits polygamy. Instead, it accommodates it, requiring men who take a second wife not to deprive the first wife of food or clothing, for example. Indeed, the entire Old Testament is, to my knowledge, bereft of any suggestion that marriage is only to be between one man and one woman. Instead, polygamy is treated as normal and accepted and, for the wealthy and powerful, even expected.

King David, who is repeatedly described as a man after God’s own heart, took nearly a dozen wives. God severely punished David for taking Bathsheba as his wife, given that she was originally married to another man and David had him killed to obtain her. But God never punished David for taking his other wives.

Polygamy isn’t condemned in the New Testament, either. In Timothy and Titus, church leaders are required to be the “husband of but one wife,” but this is the only time polygamy is referenced in any way. I’ve seen it argued that Jesus is condemning polygamy when he speaks of marriage and says “the two shall become one flesh,” but in that passage he is referencing a Genesis passage that says the same thing—and as we’ve already noted, the Old Testament permits polygamy. The New Testament writers condemn gluttony and prostitution and anger—but not polygamy, despite the fact that polygamy existed in Jewish culture.

Don’t get me wrong, creationists like Ham try to find ways to explain all of this away. And in some sense that’s fine—I don’t have a problem with people arguing that Christians should be monogamous, or finding ways to interpret the bible to support monogamy. I do, however, have a problem with Christians arguing that something is transparently obviously and unquestioningly biblical when it is anything but. Go ahead and form your own interpretation—but please, oh please, don’t claim the Bible is “clear” on an issue when it’s obviously more complicated than that.

Christianity is monogamous not because of anything the Bible says but rather because the Romans were monogamous. Christianity was profoundly influenced by its development within the Roman Empire. Even the Christian concept of heaven and hell comes from the Romans, not the Jews. While Jewish law permitted polygamy, the Romans were fiercely monogamous, and during its early years Christianity moved from being a Jewish sect to being an independent religion within the Roman Empire—a religion adopted primarily by Gentiles (and not Jews) and ultimately made the Roman Empire’s official religion.

Yes, you read that right—the Western idea that marriage is between one man and one woman isn’t biblical, it’s Greek/Roman.


This statement of yours is all Christians need to reject your teaching: "...The Old and New Testament are contradictory on a number of points,..."
And, no, I will not prove it.
However, there are several active posters on these Forums who will love what you teach.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bbyrd009

evotell

Active Member
Nov 13, 2007
100
26
28
71
Red Deer
www.solutionslifecoaching.ca
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
When Martin Luther nailed his thesis to the Brandenburg Church he was deemed a heretic. His insight came in direct conflict with the worlds most powerful institution "The Catholic Church". The understanding we have today of Christ's redeeming work is a direct result of his conviction and courage.

Sadly many within Christendom are unable to hear truth regarding to these topics due their distorted view of Sex/Monogamy/Polyamory and Omnigamy which has blinded them in understanding the scriptures in a cultural context. Creating a set of moral absolutes based on a literal interpretation of scripture viewed through a Greek mindset and 20th century world view is alarming at best.

One would have to be blind to ignore the fact that the church is obsessed with sex and nudity, mostly stemming from shame. Most within the church have NO concept of how sex was introduced as a sin, the history of marriage and how the church fathers used sexuality as a weapon to control and shame people. Sadly the uninformed continue to proclaim monogamy as a Biblical model when in truth they haven't done their own research and are delusional enough to think that because they have a Bible they have some franchise on the truth. Sorry but repeating what we've heard as true doesn't make it true. In reality if folks haven't done their own study and research they are unqualified to argue.

For those interested I would suggest 3 Books:

Sex at Dawn: Christopher Ryan & Cacilda Jetha
Sexual Liberation (historical Facts on marriage & sexuality): Raymond Lawrence
Biblical Literalism (A Gentile Heresy) John Shelby Spong
 

evotell

Active Member
Nov 13, 2007
100
26
28
71
Red Deer
www.solutionslifecoaching.ca
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
And concubines?

Judges 19:26-29
[26] Then came the woman in the dawning of the day, and fell down at the door of the man's house where her lord was , till it was light. [27] And her lord rose up in the morning, and opened the doors of the house, and went out to go his way: and, behold, the woman his concubine was fallen down at the door of the house, and her hands were upon the threshold. [28] And he said unto her, Up, and let us be going. But none answered. Then the man took her up upon an ass, and the man rose up, and gat him unto his place. [29] And when he was come into his house, he took a knife, and laid hold on his concubine, and divided her, together with her bones, into twelve pieces, and sent her into all the coasts of Israel.

It can't be logically or discerned by the will of man, it has to be Spiritually discerned. Like most of His word...a person can make it say whatever they want it to say if it gives them what their flesh wants.

You are quite correct the Bible has to be spiritually discerned but through a Biblical World View. Quoting scripture and taking it literally without understanding the culture context will only lead one into error and a distorted picture of what was going on and why. Can I encourage you to get yourself a copy of: Sexual Liberation by Raymond Lawrence. He is a Biblical Scholar and director of Pastoral Care at Columbia University.

"This book is an account of the ways in which sexual pleasure has been devalued and demonized in the West by the historical forces of Christendom. It tells the story of how sex came to be regarded by societies throughout the ages as perverse, sinful, and wrong, and how the centuries-old motivations of a few have persisted into modern times, coloring our view of sex and sexuality to this day.

Its a good read.
 
Last edited:

VictoryinJesus

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2017
9,674
7,926
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You are quite correct the Bible has to be spiritually discerned but through a Biblical World View. Quoting scripture and taking it literally without understanding the culture context will only lead one into error and a distorted picture of what was going on and why. Can I encourage you to get yourself a copy of: Sexual Liberation by Raymond Lawrence. He is a Biblical Scholar and director of Pastoral Care at Columbia University.

"This book is an account of the ways in which sexual pleasure has been devalued and demonized in the West by the historical forces of Christendom. It tells the story of how sex came to be regarded by societies throughout the ages as perverse, sinful, and wrong, and how the centuries-old motivations of a few have persisted into modern times, coloring our view of sex and sexuality to this day.

Its a good read.

I agree with you that shame surrounding nakedness comes from man's(mankind, not just the gender), own shame. I also agree man has warped intimacy into something dirty; our defintion often to satisfy self rather than our spouse. Song of Solomon are beautiful songs of love and yearning and with great detail. Tell someone the seed of God remains in them and takes root and conceives life. They don't want to hear they have been consummated.

I am concerned that you believe your idea is outside of the box, when your idea is the box.

The passage I shared with you of the concubine divided and sent out to the twelve tribes could be taken as Gods support of dividing your concubine. Considering in the verse after it says:
Judges 20:48 [48] And the men of Israel turned again upon the children of Benjamin, and smote them with the edge of the sword, as well the men of every city, as the beast, and all that came to hand: also they set on fire all the cities that they came to.

But that is not the message at all. The message is more profound when you consider who the concubine is and why she was divided, bones and all. Tortured. Grouped at. Used. Crawling to the threshold where she dies, is put on an ass, divided and sent out.

I agree with ScottA that the ultimate conclusion to God's plan is One wife and One Husband. But all those in the Old Testament are foreshadowing ALL filtering into that conclusion. God works in all. A little here. A little there. Israel and Judah were sister but God takes out of both for a bride. Paul fathered many, Spiritually.

2 Corinthians 11:2
[2] For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.


I am not offended by your thread or what you believe. I realize you speak from only what you know and what the world has shown you. A little back story about me. When I was first told the symptoms were MS I ended up in the basement in the dark, alone. I can't explain to you the deep desperation and complete sadness I felt during those times of talking to God. I felt, literally, as if I was being torn from the emptiness. This is why; I used to read those passages in God's word the same way as you read them. Hearing that I was ill and would always be weak from an illness that would cause me to depend on others even more...I thought, here we go. God wants me out of the way so He can use my strong husband to further the gospel. I am only an hinderance. An obstacle God wants out of the way. I was fully convinced that, this God that prefers men, wanted to just take me out of the way. "Kill me. Get rid of me."

The worst suffering that can be inflicted on a person is to tell them, the Almighty God that created heaven and earth rejects them. Where does a person go from there? What else is there when God rejects you? That is why the hideous gospel of "God chooses me because I am special and Not you. God rejects you." Is wrong. It is not true. The chosen are chosen to be as Christ which is to suffer for the sake of others...to declare God's glory...to who? That is the model.

Why does all that matter reguarding your thread. If you are saying women are cattle to be collected...then you have missed the message.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: bbyrd009

evotell

Active Member
Nov 13, 2007
100
26
28
71
Red Deer
www.solutionslifecoaching.ca
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Why does all that matter reguarding your thread. If you are saying women are cattle to be collected...then you have missed the message.

WOW. You have no idea who I am, the value I place upon women or my work in missions or Couples Coaching. You are blinded by your own commitment to a fundamental belief in Monogamy as Gods plan when there is NO evidence in the Bible to suggest this position.
 

VictoryinJesus

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2017
9,674
7,926
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
WOW. You have no idea who I am, the value I place upon women or my work in missions or Couples Coaching. You are blinded by your own commitment to a fundamental belief in Monogamy as Gods plan when there is NO evidence in the Bible to suggest this position.

Then what is your message?
 

evotell

Active Member
Nov 13, 2007
100
26
28
71
Red Deer
www.solutionslifecoaching.ca
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
If your genuinely interested in an answer to your question I suggest you get yourself a copy of both the books listed below, do your own study, then and only then will we be able to have a conversation that discuses the facts instead of a literal/fundamentalist belief in a text that was never intended to be understood literally. As I previously said viewing the scriptures through a Greek World View will only led you down the wrong road.

Biblical Literalism (A Gentile Heresy) by John Shelby Spong
Sexual Liberation (The Scandal of Christendom) Raymond Lawrance