Polygamy
- Thread starter Groundzero
- 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 dont know of anyone in the bible being punished by God for having more than one wife,Alot of married men in modern society commit adultery with their mistresses,They would be better off if they married the other woman.I believe the divorce rate in America is close to 60%,If we lived our lives the Biblical way things would be much better.
The mormans practise polygamy and im sure their divorce rate is much lower than the rest of the country.
The mormans practise polygamy and im sure their divorce rate is much lower than the rest of the country.
I have also read of natives being told that they MUST worship the way the missionaries culture did. They have to build the buildings the way they did, they have to sing the songs the way they did. As far as I'm concerned, if a heathen is polygamous, and he comes to God willingly, by NO MEANS, should we be forcing him to divorce any of his wives. Christianity is about bringing Christ to the world, not bringing our own preferences. The moment we put extra stigmas on Christianity, we start to become like the Pharisees who turned the law of Moses into the law of men.
If you really consider it, abortion is simply a special term given to the taking of an unborn child's life. Murder is taking someone's life. Abortion is simply a subcategory. Abortion is quite easily classified with murder.
Looking at a tv/computer screen? I think that could quite easily be classified under Jesus' principle that what one thinks, is equivalent to him doing. It would also probably fit into fornication.
I believe I've already stated, that WHATEVER is done outside of God's will for your life, becomes a sin. So no, you can't do whatever you like, including marriage. No, I don't believe polygamy was God's original idea, but if such a circumstance ever arises, there is nothing wrong with it. Yes, like anything else, it can be abused, but that doesn't mean it is wrong.
Brother James
Active Member
The Mormons do not practice polygamy. Their church outlawed it in the 1800's. There are break-away splinter groups that do practice polygamy, but they are considered heretical by the official Mormon church.
I don't understand saying "I don't believe polygamy was God's original idea" and "there is nothing wrong with it" in the same sentence. Let me ask this last question. Can you point to a single case in the Bible where polygamy led a person to a closer relationship with God, or where it enhanced any man's life for the better, or even where it did not result in a negative consequence? Lamech is the first known polygamist in the Bible. How did things turn out for him? Abraham, Jacob, David, and Solomon all had multiple wives. Were any of their lives enhanced by polygamy? Abraham had a terrible time with it. It caused David to commit murder. Solomon was drawn away from God by it. These are horrible outcomes. There is no case in the Bible where polygamy is presented in a positive light. God tells us the story of men, what they did, and the consequences of their actions. Why does He give us these stories? To learn perhaps? Just because the Bible records polygamous relationships does not mean that God approves of such things
In 1 Timothy 3:2 and 12 and Titus 1:6, we are told that leaders of the church must be the “husband of one wife.” Why? In the OT, kings were not to have multiple wives. Why? the Bible makes it clear that God intends marriage to be between one man and one woman as it was “from the beginning” (Matthew 19:8; Mark 10:6). It is clear to me anyway that polygamy stands in opposition to God’s plan for His creation. That's enough to make is a sin to me.
I already posted the scripture about what Christ taught on the mater. If you would like to attend the gathering in the Kingdom of Heaven it is imperative that you understand it and accept it. Otherwise do as you please, like Solomon did, and you will not be included in the Kingdom of Heaven.
Here are the scriptures again.
Galatians 5
16 I say then: Walk in the Spirit, and you shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh.
Luke 20
35 But those who are counted worthy to attain that age, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage;
Matthew 19
11 But He said to them, "All cannot accept this saying, but only those to whom it has been given:
12 For there are eunuchs who were born thus from their mother's womb, and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He who is able to accept it, let him accept it."
Ok. That was my bad. Such a statement is not correct. The correct statement if this: Nowhere in Scripture is there evidence that God tolerated polygamy, but was not part of his plan. Because God would've seen into the future anyhow, and if it was outside his plan, it would definitely be a sin.
So you're asking the question, how were their lives enhanced? But you should also be asking how they were not? Let me use David, since he is probably our best example.
David, the man after God's heart. But did he make some mistakes! And he was sure disciplined by God for them! When he lied, he found himself eventually cornered by them. Only by God's grace he escaped. When he counted the people, thousands of Israel would die because of his mistake. And how about committing adultery with Bathsheba? That mistake would have repercussions for years! But do we ever see God correct him for polygamy? NO! If God was going to point out a simple error of not reading the law before acting, don't you think he would've let David know about his sin in polygamy? God didn't because polygamy is NOT sin in God's eyes and neither should it be in ours.
Did you know that God symbolically present himself as having two wives, Aholah and Aholibah? And in another place, Israel & Judah? If polygamy was a sin, would God be using it in a positive sense?! I think not!
You keep talking about men in the Bible who were polygamous and all the trouble it cost them. So now I lay down a challenge for you: show me how that polygamy was a sin for them? And don't forget to take into account my refutations that follow:
Abraham: Abraham's mistake was NOT polygamy. He rushed God's timing and attempted to have the promised child through Hagar. The strife that followed had NOTHING to do with polygamy. I'm sure that Abraham, the father of God's chosen people, had a much closer relationship with God than most of us. I'm sure God would have told him if such practice was sinful.
David: cough, sorry, but I have to cough. You seem to be mixing up polygamy with adultery. Totally different. Research their definitions before you push David forth anymore.
Oh, and here's something I found:
2Sa 12:8 And I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things.
God is saying here, that if the wives (among other things) David had were not enough, God would have given him more! Do we need to go into it more?
Solomon: His wives may have led him away, but I'm more than sure that ONE woman can do it to. So what's the point here? Be careful who it is you marry. Not 'polygamy is a sin'.
As for those 'one wife' passages, there are two main points I will bring up here:
Firstly, if it really is talking about polygamy, then it's evident that it was practiced, and is being regulated. This regulation applies specifically to the church leadership, but NOT for those aspiring to ministry.
Secondly, there are alternative explanations which make perfect sense. To be brief, I'll give one: ministry must be stable and committed. Ministry must not put away the wife of their youth. They cannot be divorcees. They must have marital stability. There is far more on this topic, but I couldn't really be bothered typing it all as I'm a bit busy
.A closing thought: if this really is declaring polygamy a sin, then why do we find such awkward silence everywhere else? The Scriptures have covered everything else, so why not polygamy? When Jesus came to earth, he had the chance to correct polygamy. But he didn't. He expressed his fierce disapproval on divorce, but never mentioned polygamy.
God sees three married statuses: celibate, monogamy, or polygamy.
Brother James
Active Member
I have given numerous examples of things we consider sin but which are not explicitly taught as sin in the Bible. But let me focus on just one of them, abortion. That is because you expressed a belief that abortion is obviously murder and therefore sin. However, nowhere in the bible does it say that for a woman to remove a fetus from her womb is a sin. Killing another person is not said to be sin. Self-defense, war, etc. were all acceptable circumstances for taking the life of another. Justifiable killing is all through the OT. So there is only certain killings that are murder, not all. So where does it say that taking the life of a fetus is the wrong kind of killing? That is not explicitly stated anywhere in Scriptures. It is a position one has to derive from the other things that are explicitly stated. What we do is take a body of Scriptures, analyze the lesson they are teaching us, and them come to a conclusion as to whether something is right are wrong. There are many things that exist in our modern world that did not even exist during the times when the Bible was written. Yet we find Scriptural guidance nevertheless. Is it a sin to get information from by brother-in-law about his company and then buy their stock before the big merger? Well, that's a violation of our securities laws, isn't it? Is it a sin? Why or why not? Nothing in the Bible says anything about insider trading of stocks. Most Christians would call it sin because it is a violation of the law. Well, polygamy is also against the law. But there are many more scriptural principles that can be applied to it than that.
What does the Bible teach about use of tobacco? Yes, we use the "temple of the Holy Spirit" to make a convincing case that smoking tobacco is wrong, but the Bible doesn't actually say it is wrong. Is it wrong for adults to go skinny dipping together? That's not in the Bible. The Bible speaks against drunkenness, but what about the use of stimulants like cocaine? Is that okay since it doesn't make a person drunk (drunkenness is a state of central nervous system depression/suppression) but cocaine actually makes a person hyper-awake? There are so many things the Bible does not name specifically, but indicates are wrong by the fullness of what it does teach. It is not a checklist. There is no checklist. And God's model for marriage is abundantly clear from what is stated about it. The three do not become one flesh.
What does the Bible teach about use of tobacco? Yes, we use the "temple of the Holy Spirit" to make a convincing case that smoking tobacco is wrong, but the Bible doesn't actually say it is wrong. Is it wrong for adults to go skinny dipping together? That's not in the Bible. The Bible speaks against drunkenness, but what about the use of stimulants like cocaine? Is that okay since it doesn't make a person drunk (drunkenness is a state of central nervous system depression/suppression) but cocaine actually makes a person hyper-awake? There are so many things the Bible does not name specifically, but indicates are wrong by the fullness of what it does teach. It is not a checklist. There is no checklist. And God's model for marriage is abundantly clear from what is stated about it. The three do not become one flesh.
Really can't believe that you will still pick at abortion? Seriously? Is a baby a human being or not? Can it defend itself at all? Did it even get a chance? What the heck!? How do we know abortion is the wrong kind of killing?! Are you kidding me? No, it ain't killing, it's just a blob, in fact, it doesn't actually become a human being till it's about 1 year old!? Yeah right! If there's any crime more heinous, I would think it's the murder of those who cannot speak or do anything for themself yet. If that doesn't fit your definition of murder, I would hate to think what will.
Polygamy has been around since Abraham's time! And God NEVER mentioned anything negative about it, in fact he used it himself as an illustration! What do you say to that? Or is that an unanswerable difficulty?
Smoking tobacco is wrong? You know, before you go any deeper, stop and think! You decide to back up your faltering argument with lots of other faltering arguments?! You might use the temple of the Holy Spirit to prove smoking is sinful, I don't. Because that is not sufficient. Ummm, as for addictive drugs, such as cocaine, how many times do I need to tell you, that it doesn't matter WHAT IT IS, if it controls us, it becomes a sin for us, because our god should be Jesus, not some drug, entertainment, or food.
If this thing is so clear-cut, how is it that I find myself setting Biblical facts straight, such as this one: David murdered someone because of polygamy? I beg your pardon? Time and time again I am reading that polygamy being a sin is SO clear-cut, yet I cannot get any examples which actually make sense. Instead I hear all this stuff about 'new' things. According to Scripture, there is NO new thing. What has will be. There is nothing new under the sun. If polygamy was a sin, I am sure the Holy Spirit would have moved the holy men of God who wrote the script to write such. The best you can draw is an assumption with no backbone. I am curious to know, why God would have symbolically placed himself in a polygamous relationship if it was a sin?
Hi Groundzero,
In regards to your last post, sin for one person may not be a sin for another. If I am convicted to not smoke, if I do, it is a sin for me.
God created Adam and Eve, two should become one flesh.
On the other hand, the 12 heads of the 12 tribes came from a polygamous marriage.
Sorry if this has already been addressed, I haven't read all the posts.
In regards to your last post, sin for one person may not be a sin for another. If I am convicted to not smoke, if I do, it is a sin for me.
God created Adam and Eve, two should become one flesh.
On the other hand, the 12 heads of the 12 tribes came from a polygamous marriage.
Sorry if this has already been addressed, I haven't read all the posts.
Brother James
Active Member
You set the rules yourself when you said that the only sins you would recognize are those explicitly stated in the Bible. What I have pointed out is how you are being inconsistent. No, I am not kidding you, and yes, I am serious. You have no scripture that says it is a sin to rip a baby from its mother's womb and kill it. You have to construct that position from what scripture does teach. And the same thing applies to polygamy. You see it is a problem when you use one set of rules for one circumstance and then you change the rules for another circumstance. We don't get to make up the rules any way we see fit. Being consistent is important. Otherwise, we are merely making up our own rules according to what we want the outcome to be. Using your logic there is nothing wrong with practicing canibalism. After all, people have done that through history and the bible is silent about it.
So, I was not arguing that abortion is okay. I was arguing that the way we know abortion is wrong is exactly the same way we know polygamy is wrong. I am striving for consistency, rather than making up different rules for different things. I hope that makes my argument a little more clear.
I have presented my argument fully and completely. You seem to be getting overly emotional because I do not agree with you. It is explicitly clear to me that God implmented a single model as the right way to view marriage, and that model is repeated over and over including by Jesus Christ Himself as well as Paul in the scriptures he wrote. I read the bible and I believe it could not be more clear what God expects of us. I also believe that God expects us to obey the laws of our society. Therefore, I argue that practicing polygamy is a sin. I don't know why that seems to make you so angry. If you believe it is okay to practice polygamy, I have no intention of telling you what to do. I will not answer to anyone for the life you live, only the one I live. But in answering the question, I have to answer it with the understanding God gives me, and I've pretty much presented all I have to say on the subject. You call my arguments "faltering" and yet they represent the views of the vast majority of the people on earth. Most countries have even placed it in their laws. When all of society disagrees with the position you are arguing, how is it that my arguments are faltering? Your posts to me are becoming more and more emotional, and borderline insulting, so I'll break it off and let you and others have the last words.
There is something in the book of Enoch concerning abortion,The book of enoch is rejected by most churches,but the church in Ethiopia accepts it.
"And the fifth was named Kasdeja:this is he who showed the children of men all the wicked smitings of spirits and demons,and the smittings of the embryo in the womb,and that it may pass away ...
Kasdeja is the demon who taught man how to perform abortions.
"And the fifth was named Kasdeja:this is he who showed the children of men all the wicked smitings of spirits and demons,and the smittings of the embryo in the womb,and that it may pass away ...
Kasdeja is the demon who taught man how to perform abortions.
Sin is whatever God does not approve of. In order to know what God does not approve of you must have His Spirit. Then He will show you in relationship what is not of HIM. What is not of HIM is sin. Those who are not in relationship with God can only guess what sin is. Yes, there are obvious things spoken about in the Law. But, until one comes into relationship with God via Jesus Christ, the Word is not working in their hearts to divide asunder "soul and spirit" and "joints and marrow" and judges the intents and motives of their hearts. This is where you get down to the nitty-gritty and find out what pleases God and what does not please God. Like Brother James says, you won't find it in a book. The Bible is not a moral guidebook. If it was, we would not need the Holy Spirit.
When you don't have God's Spirit all your determination of "sin" is purely external (outward). And I might add, all of your "righteousness" is purely external.
Heb 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
The Pharisee walked solely based on outward appearance and Jesus said, He knew their hearts that they did not have the love of God in them.
Mat 23:27 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.
Mat 23:28 Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.
Hi Pelaides,
That's interesting about Kasdeja. I've not read the Book of Enoch yet, but I understand it has some merit.
Hi Brother James,
I've really appreciated your thoughtful posts and how much you've thought about what is and is not in scripture. Very edifying.
Hi Groundzero,
In an earier post, I showed how polygamy is covered in the law. What I didn't even vaguely suggest (and am not now, either) is that this was God's idea of a great relationship. The fact is, that despite circumcision, some men wanted more than one wife. I don't understand it personally, and if you read about the pain that Leah went through with it, or, if you ever come to understand the differences between men and women, and how a woman needs the same man to love her, just as he needs his wife's respect, you'll realise polygamy is a solution to human relationships which goes way against what God in Christ has modeled for us.
Aholah and Aholibah as examples are necessitated because of the split kingdom. The meanings of the two words - His tabernacle, and, His tabernacle in her (the latter with regard to Jerusalem), show God is still talking about being in close and exclusive relationship with His people under one banner. He wants them to set aside all other loves for Him alone. One of the earliest names He gives Himself in scripture is Jealous. Exo 34:14. I hope you see this from reading Jeremiah closely, and that the general call of God is to the whole house of Israel, (not Judah only - whom I don't think He ever describes as His wife - nor, Israel (the ten tribes) only, Samaria).
So, in the New Covenant, it is even more exclusive, because now, the picture is of the Father seeking a bride for His Son, as Abraham sent the servant to find a bride for his son. Eleazar came back with only one woman for the task, and this is the picture which is brought out again in Revelation - that the bride, singular, has made herself ready.
All the polygamy in between, before victory over sin had been obtained for us, cannot be justified since the cross. Jesus made it very plain that man was to have eyes only for his own one wife. To look on another woman and lust after her, now constitutes adultery.
Clearly, polygamy was a stop-gap, when the power of sin was still untamed in men (and women). Moses allowed divorce 'for any cause', rather than the strict stipulations of the law as received at Sinai, to prevent women being beaten up or killed (I have read... It was a humane solution to the fecklessness of the men they had married, who wanted to change wives on a whim - although it was expected that a woman who had been put out of a marriage would remarry.) This is another reason Jesus spoke precisely to the matter of infidelity as the only legitimate cause for divorce.
Do you see, that if it didn't matter to God how many wives a man had, he could never be accused of infidelity to the first one?
That's interesting about Kasdeja. I've not read the Book of Enoch yet, but I understand it has some merit.
Hi Brother James,
I've really appreciated your thoughtful posts and how much you've thought about what is and is not in scripture. Very edifying.
Hi Groundzero,
In an earier post, I showed how polygamy is covered in the law. What I didn't even vaguely suggest (and am not now, either) is that this was God's idea of a great relationship. The fact is, that despite circumcision, some men wanted more than one wife. I don't understand it personally, and if you read about the pain that Leah went through with it, or, if you ever come to understand the differences between men and women, and how a woman needs the same man to love her, just as he needs his wife's respect, you'll realise polygamy is a solution to human relationships which goes way against what God in Christ has modeled for us.
Aholah and Aholibah as examples are necessitated because of the split kingdom. The meanings of the two words - His tabernacle, and, His tabernacle in her (the latter with regard to Jerusalem), show God is still talking about being in close and exclusive relationship with His people under one banner. He wants them to set aside all other loves for Him alone. One of the earliest names He gives Himself in scripture is Jealous. Exo 34:14. I hope you see this from reading Jeremiah closely, and that the general call of God is to the whole house of Israel, (not Judah only - whom I don't think He ever describes as His wife - nor, Israel (the ten tribes) only, Samaria).
So, in the New Covenant, it is even more exclusive, because now, the picture is of the Father seeking a bride for His Son, as Abraham sent the servant to find a bride for his son. Eleazar came back with only one woman for the task, and this is the picture which is brought out again in Revelation - that the bride, singular, has made herself ready.
All the polygamy in between, before victory over sin had been obtained for us, cannot be justified since the cross. Jesus made it very plain that man was to have eyes only for his own one wife. To look on another woman and lust after her, now constitutes adultery.
Clearly, polygamy was a stop-gap, when the power of sin was still untamed in men (and women). Moses allowed divorce 'for any cause', rather than the strict stipulations of the law as received at Sinai, to prevent women being beaten up or killed (I have read... It was a humane solution to the fecklessness of the men they had married, who wanted to change wives on a whim - although it was expected that a woman who had been put out of a marriage would remarry.) This is another reason Jesus spoke precisely to the matter of infidelity as the only legitimate cause for divorce.
Do you see, that if it didn't matter to God how many wives a man had, he could never be accused of infidelity to the first one?
That was an excellent post. Very well laid out, dragonfly! We are to have a "single eye", now. We are to come to Jesus with our WHOLE HEART and have no other idols in our heart. This of course is a work of the Holy Spirit, but we must yield to His work in us.
Axehead
Ummm, I don't remember stating that the sins must be EXPLICITLY mentioned. I do remember stating something to the effect that there must be a Scriptural backing for calling something a sin. As I have previously stated, sin can become whatever takes control of you instead of Jesus. But when it comes to specific actions, such as adultery, homosexuality, pride, etc, there is no condition, they are sin however you like to take them. Polygamy could fit into the previous bracket where it goes AGAINST God's will for you, but polygamy itself is not a sin, or like everything else, it would have been mentioned.
Lol. Majority doesn't always mean right. Let me give you the most glaring example: you made a reference to David's committing adultery in relation to polygamy? There is absolutely no base for such an assumption. And neither have you addressed it.
ok, adultery, if I recall . . . . adultery is to have sexual relations with another man's wife? Jesus wasn't referring to polygamy, but rather to men looking on a woman, particularly a married woman, and lusting after her.
Doesn't it strike you as odd that while Jesus corrected the divorce practices of his day, he never addressed polygamy?
While the Bible never speaks of polygamy in actual terms, but rather monogamy, there are sufficient examples of polygamy that should be enough to show that God approves of it. If he didn't, there would be an evident trail, not assumptions.
Thanx for ur input JohnnyB.
Hi Groundzero,
Let me put it another way.
Under the law, if a man married to one wife looked lustfully at another woman, as long as she was not already married, he could take her to be his wife, no questions asked, not stoning.
Now, (biblically) when a man married to one wife, looks lustfully at another woman - according to Jesus - he is committing adultery with her in his heart.
That was and is, Jesus addressing polygamy.
Let me put it another way.
Under the law, if a man married to one wife looked lustfully at another woman, as long as she was not already married, he could take her to be his wife, no questions asked, not stoning.
Now, (biblically) when a man married to one wife, looks lustfully at another woman - according to Jesus - he is committing adultery with her in his heart.
That was and is, Jesus addressing polygamy.
Isa 4:1 ¶ And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: only let us be called by thy name, to take away our reproach.
Isa 4:2 ¶ In that day shall the branch of the LORD be beautiful and glorious, and the fruit of the earth [shall be] excellent and comely for them that are escaped of Israel.
Kind of speaks for itself, doesn't it?
Isa 4:2 ¶ In that day shall the branch of the LORD be beautiful and glorious, and the fruit of the earth [shall be] excellent and comely for them that are escaped of Israel.
Kind of speaks for itself, doesn't it?
Hi Josy
Isn't there also some place that says ten men (gentiles) will take a hold of the hem of the jacket of one Jew and follow him into (the new) Jerusalem ... ?? l'm sure l read that somewhere.
This is a case study of how people like to cherry pick the old and new testement,if there is something in the old testament they like,which in this case is lot's of women then its ok...if its something they don't like then they claim the new testament did away with it...gotta love it.....next up....stoning....who's for it ?
Jesus NT teaching affirms God created then male and female, it was for this reason a man shall ...be united with his wife.
Matt 19, Mark 10, Eph 5. See also 1 Cor 7.
end of story.
Should be interesting debate amongst the liberals though, on the one hand they have been talking about monogamous homosexual relations, but if people love each other the liberals usually support it.
Matt 19, Mark 10, Eph 5. See also 1 Cor 7.
end of story.
Should be interesting debate amongst the liberals though, on the one hand they have been talking about monogamous homosexual relations, but if people love each other the liberals usually support it.
Similar threads
