Where does it say that? The Sister in law becomes his wife for life. And if he is already married, she becomes the 2nd wife.
They admit to being polygamists and believing in multiple wives so wouldn't they be Mormon? The Book of Mormon allows for multiple wives and they believe that they will all be married and together in heaven, which is anti-biblical.
So the difference is actually that when a woman sleeps with more than one man it's called infidelity and it's bad but when a man does it's called polygamy and it's acceptable? I don't think I'd be the first or last to say SEXIST.
Maybe until they get someone pregnant. Then they can enjoy child support to the tune of 21%-23% of their GROSS income. Happens all the time.
There is no such thing as "naturally monogamous." The difference has been caused by social upheaval (which is a good thing.) I could make a long list of the things that have freed up women, including contraception, easier divorce, full access to education and careers .. make your own list .. and this combination of factors have changed our lives, giving us similar (but not the same) freedom as men. For instance, a woman who cheated on her husband 100 years ago, could have been turned out with no money and lost all access to her kids. She would have been a complete outcast. This kept, I'm sure, the vast majority of women in line. The stigma has now gone, women can now keep their kids, and if she has a good career, she can fully support herself and her kids.
I have been married for a long time, and have been utterly faithful to my husband. I would be devastated if he broke his vows. Of course I do not advocate for infidelity. I was stating facts of how things have changed while remaining non-judgmental. You might try it some time yourself.
No Titus is Not speaking just of pastors. Also the people that it is speaking about are to be the most Godly men in the church that are called to be setting the example for others in the church. That is how we also know that the Apostles taught against domestic violence, it is clearly against the description of what an ELDER in the church should look like/behave like. Elders are pastors, bishops, deacons, elders of all sort are given authority and responsibilities for the care of the laity.
Not in any "Latin" people that I know.
Marriage "as an institution" does not and never will trump fidelity, trust and decency. Such an institution is worthless. Staying with a cheating spouse "because institution" is a nauseating concept which I hope that nobody falls for anymore.
Yeah, but it's okay when I do it.
Really? Then why did the nearest kinsman in Ruth said he couldn't redeem after learning he had to give Ruth a child? (he first agreed to redeem the land)Of course Boaz was happy about this as he wanted to marry Ruth.
Along with being expensive............
Judah. He had a liaison with his daughter in law Tamar after refusing to give her his youngest son. While the scriptures give no details, given the social norms of the day, it meant he had to take her as his own wife. Gen 38
Wow. The replies to my OP just confirms that some people will believe anything. As to the post I'm replying to it seems apparent that the poster must have failed to read the article if at all. The author of the article states that polygamy is against the law in all 50 states so the poster's assumption has no foundation. I'm not sure what the poster means by "spiritual marriage" but the Bible doesn't mention anything of the kind. This sounds like a nice little rhetorical device just to get around any biblical prohibition.
Judah admit he was wrong. Genesis 38:26 "And Judah acknowledged them and said, She hath been more righteous than I; because that I gave her not Shelah my son . And he knew her again no more."
