Polygamy & Christendom

[Mary Meg]

lol

This would literally be a nightmare of a situation for more conservatively minded Christians.

And it wouldn't be for the unmarried twin in your scenario?

 

[Sketcher]

Why can't they marry another set of conjoined joins?

Still doesn't always work.

 

[Tetra]

And it wouldn't be for the unmarried twin in your scenario?

Touche! lol

 

[Mary Meg]

1 set of reproductive organs

Wow.

 

[Sketcher]

Wow.

Yep. I don't see how marrying one wouldn't be marrying the other. I do want them to live happy and productive lives, holding to good faith. I'm not sure how they would work out a marriage, but if they can, God bless them.

 

[Tree of Life]

This is generally is a very poor argument. You could also make the argument that God intended us to be vegans, and to eat meat is a perversion of His original design. I've talked about why this is an irrelevant argument here:
The "Original Design / Plan" Argument & Why It's Irrelevant

I'm not going to spend time reading your other thread, but I don't think it's a poor argument. I do believe that God originally intended for us to be vegetarians. Meat isn't given for food until after the flood.

Not proof polygamy is a sin.

Maybe not. But "very bad idea" resembles sin more than it resembles something that God is ambivalent toward.

A fallacious argument, you're making the presupposition monogamy is the "ethical standard" over polygamy. Sorry, this isn't proof.

Since monogamy is given in the context of a list of ethical standards, I don't think that the conclusion is very far fetched. My argument would be:

1. Paul gives ethical standards for church officers.
2. Ethical standards for church officers are not different than ethical standards for church members.
3. Therefore the standards Paul gives in 1 Timothy 3 apply to church members as well.

Where is the fallacy?

False analogy.

I don't think so. You say that something is not a sin if the Bible doesn't explicitly say so. But this proves too much, since the Bible does not explicitly say that slavery is a sin. Simply saying "false analogy" is not going to solve this issue for you. You'll have to argue why your principle is true for polygamy but not true for slavery.

 

[archer75]

"I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."
Mt 19:9

Marrying another woman, while the original marriage is still valid, is adultery.

Technically speaking, that verse says the divorce is required to make it adultery.

 

[Sketcher]

Technically speaking, that verse says the divorce is required to make it adultery.

So that would make the affair the husband would have established before divorcing his wife not adultery?

 

[Jonaitis]

Luther Said: Polygamy Is Permissible
"I confess that I cannot forbid a person to marry several wives, for it does not contradict the Scripture. If a man wishes to marry more than one wife he should be asked whether he is satisfied in his conscience that he may do so in accordance with the word of God. In such a case the civil authority has nothing to do in the matter." (De Wette II, 459, ibid., pp. 329-330.)

You might think who was Martin Luther to say such a thing?? If you have to ask that, time to read up on church history. Regardless, there is a truth to what Luther is saying here, and that is the Bible never explicitly says polygamy is a sin. In this, there is no debate.

Here is what we know to be the case:

• The Bible never explicitly states polygamy is a sin
• Some significant figures who had more than one wife were, Abraham, Jacob, Solomon, and David.
• Some had concubines, Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines (Not a wife, rather, an additional women to have sex with) Link
• In the NT we see that church leaders should be a husband of one wife (1Timothy 3:2, 1Timothy 3:12 and Titus 1:6) but say nothing regarding the general congregation.

This leaves all other arguments as forms of implicit arguments most of which I find are based in conjecture, and not sufficient to conclude something is, in fact, a sin. Personally, I try not to make statements where God has not.

What are your thoughts CF?
Tetra

NOTE: For the record, I am not in any way attacking monogamy here. I myself am in a monogamous relationship and have been for 16 years.

My answer is that, just as divorce was permitted by Moses because of the hardness of their hearts (Matt. 19:8), God permitted polygamous marriage for a long period of time, but like my Lord Jesus said, "...from the beginning it was not so." If you look at Gen. 2:24, you see that a man and woman become one flesh in marriage. The male and female counterpart create this fabric of a relationship that complements each other in the home, and I've seen it to be a defiling of that marriage bed to enter into many more marriages with other women besides your own wife (let alone going into concubines). It would lose the meaning of that joining, that uniting, of the two partners in one life equally enjoyed and shared with each other in God. If the wife isn't enjoying the full privileges of her marriage with her husband, dividing it with others, she is no longer in a perfect union with him in my opinion.

However, God did permitted it for a time to further human flourishing and offspring, but as we see in the Old Testament that it was detrimental to the family structure in different ways. It is the same with slavery, "...from the beginning it was not so" (Matt. 19:8), but it was permitted for a time in that ancient culture.

 

[FireDragon76]

Why can't they marry another set of conjoined joins?

Our church would likely tolerate that sort of a union but we might not be willing to bless it, it would ultimately be left to the congregation, I suspect.

 

[Mary Meg]

Our church would likely tolerate that sort of a union but we might not be willing to bless it, it would ultimately be left to the congregation, I suspect.

Well in my thinking it would have been a completely monogamous union, you'd just match corresponding sides!

But as Skecher said, that wouldn't always work.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Luther Said: Polygamy Is Permissible
"I confess that I cannot forbid a person to marry several wives, for it does not contradict the Scripture. If a man wishes to marry more than one wife he should be asked whether he is satisfied in his conscience that he may do so in accordance with the word of God. In such a case the civil authority has nothing to do in the matter." (De Wette II, 459, ibid., pp. 329-330.)

You might think who was Martin Luther to say such a thing?? If you have to ask that, time to read up on church history. Regardless, there is a truth to what Luther is saying here, and that is the Bible never explicitly says polygamy is a sin. In this, there is no debate.

Here is what we know to be the case:

• The Bible never explicitly states polygamy is a sin
• Some significant figures who had more than one wife were, Abraham, Jacob, Solomon, and David.
• Some had concubines, Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines (Not a wife, rather, an additional women to have sex with) Link
• In the NT we see that church leaders should be a husband of one wife (1Timothy 3:2, 1Timothy 3:12 and Titus 1:6) but say nothing regarding the general congregation.

This leaves all other arguments as forms of implicit arguments most of which I find are based in conjecture, and not sufficient to conclude something is, in fact, a sin. Personally, I try not to make statements where God has not.

What are your thoughts CF?
Tetra

NOTE: For the record, I am not in any way attacking monogamy here. I myself am in a monogamous relationship and have been for 16 years.

This is one more reason not to follow Luther or Protestantism. This makes me to rejoice in following the truth (the Bible alone).

 

[Tetra]

I'm not going to spend time reading your other thread, but I don't think it's a poor argument. I do believe that God originally intended for us to be vegetarians. Meat isn't given for food until after the flood.

It doesn't change the fact it is a poor argument. Things changed after the fall which allowed for certain things to be permissible. Do you also think I should work towards being naked since God intended us to be that way? It seems Christians only apply this argument when it's convenient for them... in their minds God intended us to be monogamous, but everything else God intended, forget that.

Maybe not. But "very bad idea" resembles sin more than it resembles something that God is ambivalent toward.

Resembling sin doesn't make it sin.

Since monogamy is given in the context of a list of ethical standards, I don't think that the conclusion is very far fetched. My argument would be:

1. Paul gives ethical standards for church officers.
2. Ethical standards for church officers are not different than ethical standards for church members.
3. Therefore the standards Paul gives in 1 Timothy 3 apply to church members as well.

Where is the fallacy?

Just because a conclusion is inferred doesn't make the conclusion valid. Ultimately your conclusion is still based on your interpretation of Scripture and you're inferring it's the case when it may not be so. This simply doesn't prove polygamy is a sin.

I don't think so. You say that something is not a sin if the Bible doesn't explicitly say so. But this proves too much, since the Bible does not explicitly say that slavery is a sin. Simply saying "false analogy" is not going to solve this issue for you. You'll have to argue why your principle is true for polygamy but not true for slavery.

I don't want to go down this rabbit hole but it would depend if you maintain the slavery practiced in the Bible was actually indentured servitude. The argument here would be, polygamy was practiced while the slavery your referring to was not.

 

[Dave-W]

Also, if polygamy is a morally legitimate choice for Christians, we have to ask what the standard Jesus set for adultery, including adultery of the heart is all about (Matthew 5:27-32, Matthew 19:4-9). These restrictions don't make sense if polygamy is acceptable. "It's not cheating, I just want another wife."

No. Matt 5 is about wanting a woman who is already married to someone else.

 

[Sketcher]

No. Matt 5 is about wanting a woman who is already married to someone else.

So, a husband can have a girlfriend if the girlfriend is single?

 

[Dave-W]

And it wouldn't be for the unmarried twin in your scenario?

An even bigger nightmare, IMO

 

[Dave-W]

So, a husband can have a girlfriend if the girlfriend is single?

In bible times, yes.

But we also have to follow the law of the land. And that says NO.

 

[devin553344]

Luther Said: Polygamy Is Permissible
"I confess that I cannot forbid a person to marry several wives, for it does not contradict the Scripture. If a man wishes to marry more than one wife he should be asked whether he is satisfied in his conscience that he may do so in accordance with the word of God. In such a case the civil authority has nothing to do in the matter." (De Wette II, 459, ibid., pp. 329-330.)

You might think who was Martin Luther to say such a thing?? If you have to ask that, time to read up on church history. Regardless, there is a truth to what Luther is saying here, and that is the Bible never explicitly says polygamy is a sin. In this, there is no debate.

Here is what we know to be the case:

• The Bible never explicitly states polygamy is a sin
• Some significant figures who had more than one wife were, Abraham, Jacob, Solomon, and David.
• Some had concubines, Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines (Not a wife, rather, an additional women to have sex with) Link
• In the NT we see that church leaders should be a husband of one wife (1Timothy 3:2, 1Timothy 3:12 and Titus 1:6) but say nothing regarding the general congregation.

This leaves all other arguments as forms of implicit arguments most of which I find are based in conjecture, and not sufficient to conclude something is, in fact, a sin. Personally, I try not to make statements where God has not.

What are your thoughts CF?
Tetra

NOTE: For the record, I am not in any way attacking monogamy here. I myself am in a monogamous relationship and have been for 16 years.

Interesting to quote old testament as support for the position of accepting polygamy. The old testament kills sinners (stones them to death) including homosexuals. Has slaves, and gives out sentencing for legal disputes.

None of the old testament in those instances are OK anymore. Jesus clearly disregarded it openly, and so did the disciples of Jesus.

Therefore I could suggest that polygamy is not following Jesus the Christ, but rather is following the Jews that didn't accept Jesus as their savior? Probably

And what about this section and the Lord's prayer where it says "thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven", Matthew 22:24-30

 

[TuxAme]

What is marriage to us? Is it not a reflection of the Lord's marriage to Israel and the Church (the New Israel)? Would we then accuse God Himself of polygamy? Surely not, because He has not made covenants with pagans, or Muslims, or Buddhists, or anyone else who is not faithful to Him. All who want to "wed themselves" to the Most High, must convert themselves and be faithful to Him and Him alone, just as He is always faithful to us.

Why would we then go against God as those such as Solomon did? God doesn't make covenants with those He will be unfaithful to (as He cannot be unfaithful), so why should we?

 

[Sketcher]

In bible times, yes.

But we also have to follow the law of the land. And that says NO.

Unless you live in New Hampshire, Colorado, or West Virginia?

An Overview of Adultery Laws in the United States

Are you also saying that Jesus didn't have a stricter view of adultery than the Roman Empire?