A discussion on the morality of polygamy

[Buzz Dixon]

seebs, Jacob was tricked into polygamy; he wanted to marry the younger sister but his father-in-law pulled the old switcheroo on him and fobbed off the older one, forcing him to work an additional seven years in order to marry the one he wanted.

Now, I'm sure there are lots of guys today who wouldn't mind being tricked into polygamy by their fathers-in-law...

 

[Buzz Dixon]

mmomof7 --

I think Moses did have a second wife, or at the very least a cocubine from Ethiopia. Her presence caused quite a bit of dissension in Moses and Aaron's family groups during the exodus.

 

[seebs]

I don't think it matters whether he was tricked or not; it was never condemned!

 

[Buzz Dixon]

Okay, I can see the logic of polygamy in a nomadic society, even an agrarian society: Two wives can produce children twice as fast to help with the herding/farming, one can tend to the chores while the other is giving birth, etc., etc.

I see the logic behind kings and rich men wanting additional wives and concubines as an ostentatious display of power.

What reason would anybody have today in 21st century America for polygamy other than personal satisfaction?

 

[seebs]

Well, let's see. When I was last in a polygamous relationship, it was because a very good friend of mine had married another very good friend of mine, and the three of us were happier as a unit than as a couple and a friend outside the family. It didn't work out, but then, none of us really knew much about being married. I think if we'd been a couple of years more mature, with a better handle on marriage, we'd still be together.

There is some chance that I may be polygamous again in the future. I have no interest in seeking out another partner, and I don't think my wife does either... But that doesn't mean that we might not find outselves close enough to a friend to consider the possibility.

In short, I think of this much like any other possible relationship; if you find yourself closely tied to someone, it may be that the best possible expression of your feelings, and the most satisfying relationship for all involved, would be polygamy. I think that's pretty rare. For instance, if I really liked another woman, but my wife didn't like her as much, that wouldn't be a good basis for a relationship.

You can, of course, dismiss this as "personal satisfaction". But then, what reason do people ever get married for other than personal satisfaction? The thing you need to do to make it be bad is make that personal satisfaction be primarily sexual. If there are other aspects to marriage, that's different.

So, say, if my wife and I and one of our gaming buddies get to be really, really, close, there might come a time when we decided it would be easier on all of us to have shared finances, to live together, to commit to preserving this state as long as we live... In other words, to marry. And if that happens, we'll probably do it.

See? Sex is not the issue here.

 

[truthnluv]

Just show us where God blessed them and encouraged them seebs.

In Psalms 45:9 David's wives(princesses) are refered to as honorable women. So, why would God refer to multiple wives as honorable women if He did not approve of them? Isn't being married to an honorable woman a blessing? Wouldn't two honorable women be even more of a blessing?

I would like to see responses backed up by scripture that is in context and no eisogesis please.

truthnluv

 

[seebs]

I think that there are plenty of other laws which could be used to address, for instance, marrying children.

But on the other hand, I think there are, and always have been, occasional triads and quartets out there, and giving them legal rights seems only reasonable.

 

[truthnluv]

In suggesting that because and Elder is to be husband of one wife, we all should be monogamous, you essentially suggest that no one should be a woman either. Polygynous men are disqualified from the office of Elder, women are disqualified. Finally, this qualification of monogamy for Elders virtually proves that many men were not monogamous. It's like saying, "No Elder Shall Wear Old Spice After Shave." Why bother? There was no Old Spice After Shave. Likewise why prohibit polygynous men from being an Elder, unless there were polgynous men in the churches.

Hugh McBryde

Excellent point, Hugh. Historically, it is well known that polygamy was common among the wealthy Jews of Paul's day. The early Church was comprised of mostly Jews, some of which were wealthy. Even under Roman rule, the Jews were allowed to have multiple wives.

Elders and deacons are limited to one wife for practical purposes. They had a job to do and they needed to be able to focus on it without distractions. Why? Because it was a human position assigned by humans. There is no "gift" involved(cf. pastor/teacher, apostle, evangelist, or prophet), so it is necessary to "stack the deck" towards a suitable person for the job. Their qualities are also meant to engender respect among unruly Christians for the purpose of enacting discipline and correction. Contrarily, apostles, pastors, and evangelist are moved by a gift. Their function is to teach not to enact discipline, so this command to have one wife is not directed towards them. Nor is this command directed towards the general assembly.

Also, elders are old men by their very definition. Is it more spiritual to be an old man. No, but they have less distractions in their life. His children are adults. Do you become more spiritual when your children become adults? No, but you have less distractions. Also, their children had to be saved. Does that have anything to do with their spirituality? No, it does not. So, the qualification of an elder or deacon are not about spirituality, but rather, they are the qualifications for a job.. just like the text says.

truthnluv

 

[Eph. 3:20]

All very good objections, but I think you’re reading a lot into the passages that’s not there and these overstatements directly conflict with some scripture as I will show. It seems the case as a whole is built upon statements that aren’t there (not directed at you, these are the general objections). One thing that is great about the God we serve is He wrote down for us what might keep us from His blessing, what He allowed and what He doesn’t allow and those things don’t change until He speaks a change to it.

You assume because God protected the first wife that he approved of the polygamy . That is not well founded.

(Ex. 21:10) “If he takes for himself another woman...”Let’s stop right here. Why go any further with this text if this is something that God doesn’t allow? He protects the first wife because God is in the protection business. He protects the first or the 82nd wife...it doesn’t matter. But one must ask, why would make rules of conduct for a conduct He forbids? What a perfect place to tell us that He at least somehow displeased by this practice....It’s because He doesn’t forbid it and it in no way displeased Him. If that is the case it will have to be proven in another verse, this one says nothing to that effect.

But the truth is, once David repented his sin, he sent away his other wives and was a husband to only Bethsheba. See that is the difference.
The punishment that came as a result of David's lust is seen in the offspring

See II Samuel 12:9-12. "Now therefore," said God (Verse 10), "the sword shall never depart from thine house; BECAUSE THOU HAST DESPISED ME, and hast taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be thy wife." Notice, David despised GOD -- not merely the commandment of God, as in Verse 9, but also the very PERSON of God! He did it by taking this woman as his wife. Therefore the sword was never to depart from his house.

Yes this is correct. But notice, there are two offenses. He has taken the wife of Uriah (offense #1), “you have struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword.

"Thus saith the Eternal, Behold, I will raise up evil against thee out of THINE OWN HOUSE ...." His own house included his wives and children. WHAT evil? God has just said the SWORD will now come upon his house his family. God continues: ".... and I will take thy wives before thine eyes and give them unto thy neighbor, and he shall lie with thy wives in the sight of this sun."

The evil was his two offenses that were mentioned in the passage.

".... and I will take thy wives before thine eyes and give them unto thy neighbor, and he shall lie with thy wives in the sight of this sun."

This is in direct connection to David taking the wife of another. God lets another man take his wives, and he let’s the man lay with them in broad daylight as humiliation for his crime so all would know.

“The sword shall never depart from your house, because you have taken his wife to be your wife and have killed him with the sword of the sons of Ammon.”

The sword not departing in David’s house is in direct connection to the sword that struck down Uriah. It was a exact exchange for the violations David had committed. There are no other sins mentioned.

After that David was away from Jerusalem. But, returning there were ten concubines (his former harem). Here is what David did with them: "And David came to his house at Jerusalem; and the king took the ten women his concubines, WHOM HE HAD LEFT TO KEEP THE HOUSE, and put them in ward, and fed them, but WENT NOT IN UNTO THEM. So they were shut up unto the day of their death, living in widowhood" (II Sam. 20:3).

This was Levitical law that a man could not take back his wife/concubines a second time after they had been with another man.

so he put away his other wives (II Sam. 19:6)

This scripture doesn't say that

BECAUSE THEY TOO HAD BEEN DEFILED by a neighbor (II Sam. 12).

The same Levitical Law.

David had truly repented. He practiced polygamy NO MORE! When David was becoming old, he went "fully after the Eternal" (I Kings 11:6). He was "a man after God's own heart," because his heart was right. He did repent. He had been a warrior. In his younger life he went after many women. He had sown his wild oats. BUT HE REPENTED!

Then David said to nathan, “I have sinned against the Lord.” (2 Sam. 12:13)
This was in direct relation to the sin that was just placed at David’s feet. The sin of murder and the sin of adultery. There is no mention of his multiple wives as being sin by God or Nathan and no admission of such by David.

The above interpretation is true because it is confirmed by this passage:

“David did what was right in the sight of the Lord, and had not turned aside from anything He commanded him all the days of his life, except in the case of Uriah the Hittite.(1 Kings 15:5)

It is beyond argument here, that in all David’s marrying and concubinage, he never breached God’s commandment. If David was right in God’s sight in everything God commanded, then obviously marrying many women and having sex with many concubines does not violate God’s commandment against adultery and fornication.

No the line of Jesus was through Solomon, the son of a SINGLE wife. He was not polygamous at the time of Solomon's birth .

Solomon’s birth is recorded at 2 Sam. 12:24. This verse can be found 7 chapters later at 2 Sam 19:5, “Today you have covered with shame the faces of your servants, who today have saved your life and the lives of your wives and the lives of your concubines.

God gave this absolute COMMAND regarding future kings of Israel -- telling them they must not do as the pagan nations around them (whose kings had their harems): "NEITHER SHALL HE MULTIPLY WIVES TO HIMSELF!" Saul, Israel's first king, DISOBEYED that command. He let demons take hold of him.
That sin brought David to the throne

This command was more about greed then it is about anything. If we take this as a command against polygamy, then it is sinful to own multiple horse or to be wealthy. We know that is not the case, but we do know that greed is sinful.

God deposed him, and put David in his place. David started out in polygamy, but God punished him. HE REPENTED thoroughly, and he finished his reign with his ONLY living wife. Solomon finished his life in polygamy and idolatry -- and God, in punishment, rended the KINGDOM away from his son, Rehoboam.

Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines (1 Kg. 11:3). God promised to bless Solomon if he walks in all God’s laws. But not a syllable of censure about his extreme polygamy and concubinage. The only censure is his marrying pagan women against God’s commands, (11:2 4,5), and that he turned his heart away from the Lord, (11:4,9,10,11,33, 9:4, 6) And what sense does it make to think that God was incensed about Solomon’s marriages to pagan wives and thus rebuke him for it, yet He never rebukes him for marrying multiple Israelite wives?

GOD DID NOT CONDONE POLYGAMY! He PUNISHED those who practiced it! It was ALWAYS SIN! It is SIN today!

To condone something is to:
To overlook, forgive, or disregard (an offense) without protest or censure.(The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition)

God did indeed condone this practice. He never punished those for practicing it. If He did, it should be easy enough to produce a passage that demonstrates God condemning this practice and the ensuing punishment because of it. It was not sin then and it is not sin today. You must have Biblical proof to justify this claim.

However, He never, ever, ever condoned actual sin.
.

Mat 19:8
He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. It was because of the hardness of their hearts not his approval .

The subject of this passage is clearly divorce. The illegal practice of men ditching their wives to get a new one. This passage aligns itself with Malachi 2:14. The question itself clearly spells out the context of the passage,”Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any cause at all?” (vs. 3) This has nothing to do with adding more wives. It has everything to do with honoring the covenant relationship “till death do us part.”

Incidentally, the belief that a lot of people a plurality of wives in the Old Testament is not reality . It was very uncommon to have many wives . Look at Noah, he had only had one wife. Adam had one wife. Abraham had one wife. It is true that he bore Ishmael by a concubine,but clearly as we read the scripture we see the fruit of that sin.

The majority of the people in the OT economy couldn’t afford additional wives. That’s why they were ditching the “old wife” to get a new one. This was a careless disregard for the lifetime commitment the a marriage is to include. To have many wives was seen as a sign of power and wealth, which most OT early Israel was not. There are 23 OT men mentioned within scripture that had multiple wives, yet no single word of rebuke or censure for any of them.

Isaac had one wife. Jacob had only one wife after his conversion .
Moses had one wife. Some of the kings began to have harems. They followed in the footsteps of the heathen kings.

Isaac had one wife.

Jacob’s wives both came after his conversion. “Then Jacob made a vow saying If God will be with me and keep me on this journey...then the Lord will be my God.” (Gen. 28:20) “And this stone will I set up as a pillar, will be God’s house, and of all that thou dost give me;I will give a tenth.’ (Gen. 28:22)

Jacob takes his wife Leah in Gen. 29:25, and Rachel in Gen. 29:28.

Moses had two wives.

But ordinarily in the Old Testament there was one wife. There are some exceptions, but they are really rare, as compared with the usual. We see that there was division and sin as the result of polygamy not blessings as one receives when they are in the will of God.

Strife happened in the most monogamous marriages; Adam and Eve’s troubles with Cain for one. It is just human nature, fallen human nature. The more people you have involved in anything, the more problems you will encounter.

Matthew 19:4 it says, "Have you not read that He who made them from the beginning made them male and female? For this reason a man (a man, not men) shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh" (not the three shall become one, or the four shall become one, or the five shall become one, because there is more than one wife or more than one husband). "The two shall become one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man put asunder." That is the Biblical rule. One husband and one wife, and they become one flesh.

Are we to say that it is possible for two to become one flesh, but impossible for three? If so then Jacob and Leah were one flesh because she was his first wife. Doesn’t the Trinity claim three as one? Can we see the absurdity?

May I ask if you are a member of that Liberated "Christian " group that advocates polygamy and or spouse swapping?
You position seems similar to theirs

I have viewed their site. I don’t agree with everything they teach, but some of it I do agree with. I don’t think they have a “membership.”

Hope this helps.
Eph. 3:20

 

[seebs]

FWIW, while I think Eph and others have done a great job of showing that there is no Biblical prohibition on polygamy, I wouldn't say that I "advocate it". I would not recommend polygamy as a practice to pursue for its own sake, nor would I recommend that most people try it just because it sounds neat. It is often impractical, and I think it should be viewed as an exceptional circumstance.

 

[k]

This seems to be an issue in which we often confuse and convolute morality and civil rights. If adults choose to have a polygamous lifestyle, then they should be allowed to follow their desire without punishment from the Pat Robertsons of the world. It is amazing how many people will more easily accept a man with 4 wives before they will accept two men as being married.

Everyone is entitled to civil rights, but this does not mean we all have to agree on the relationships we carry out in our personal lives.

Peace

 

[rnmomof7]

All very good objections, but I think you’re reading a lot into the passages that’s not there and these overstatements directly conflict with some scripture as I will show. It seems the case as a whole is built upon statements that aren’t there (not directed at you, these are the general objections). One thing that is great about the God we serve is He wrote down for us what might keep us from His blessing, what He allowed and what He doesn’t allow and those things don’t change until He speaks a change to it.




(Ex. 21:10) “If he takes for himself another woman...”Let’s stop right here. Why go any further with this text if this is something that God doesn’t allow? He protects the first wife because God is in the protection business. He protects the first or the 82nd wife...it doesn’t matter. But one must ask, why would make rules of conduct for a conduct He forbids? What a perfect place to tell us that He at least somehow displeased by this practice....It’s because He doesn’t forbid it and it in no way displeased Him. If that is the case it will have to be proven in another verse, this one says nothing to that effect.

There were CIVIL laws , not spiritual.They were the laws of Moses .
They were laws to have an orderly society .

There is a problem when you confuse civil law with Gods law.
Civil laws regulate the sinful behavior of men to protect the innocent or the victims.

It was not a moral but a political or civil one for the good ordering of the state. Among such laws were those of tolerance or permission, which did not approve of the evil things concerned, but only suffered them for the prevention of greater evil--as when the sea makes a breach into the land, if it cannot possibly be stopped, the best course is to make it as narrow as possible..........These laws tolerated what God condemned, and that for the purpose of preventing greater evils.



Just as divorce for uncleanness was purely a "concession" that was necessary at that time because of Israel's "hardness of heart" and the "chaotic conditions" that resulted from their attitude. God "allowed" easy divorce and polygamy (even though both were really adultery and a violation of the Seventh Commandment) but He did not "legitimate" it.

How do you deal with Deuteronomy 17:17, God specifically gave a command for the future kings of the nation of Israel: not to multiply wives to himself... This is an explicit command from God against polygamy.

********* David sinned every time he took an additional wife - Deut 17:17


********* David sinned when he committed adultery with Bathsheba - God still loved him


********* David sinned when he had Uriah killed - God still loved David


********* David sinned when he took Bathsheba as still another wife - but God still loved him....


Why didn't God punish David for these sins immediately ? You can not assume because there was no immediate punishment that God ordained or approved of Polygamy !

God allowed many sins, , he was long suffering and patient. Because he tolerated the sin of men then or now, does not mean he approves of it or condones it.

Yes this is correct. But notice, there are two offenses. He has taken the wife of Uriah (offense #1), “you have struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword.

The evil was his two offenses that were mentioned in the passage.

".... and I will take thy wives before thine eyes and give them unto thy neighbor, and he shall lie with thy wives in the sight of this sun."

This is in direct connection to David taking the wife of another. God lets another man take his wives, and he let’s the man lay with them in broad daylight as humiliation for his crime so all would know.

“The sword shall never depart from your house, because you have taken his wife to be your wife and have killed him with the sword of the sons of Ammon.”

The sword not departing in David’s house is in direct connection to the sword that struck down Uriah. It was a exact exchange for the violations David had committed. There are no other sins mentioned.

There was a direct connection between the lust of David having many wives and his desire for Bethsheba

This was Levitical law that a man could not take back his wife/concubines a second time after they had been with another man.

Is there any record that after He had repented that he took one more wife , or that he replaced his concubines?
Is there any record that God told David to take these wives?

Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines (1 Kg. 11:3). God promised to bless Solomon if he walks in all God’s laws. But not a syllable of censure about his extreme polygamy and concubinage. The only censure is his marrying pagan women against God’s commands, (11:2 4,5), and that he turned his heart away from the Lord, (11:4,9,10,11,33, 9:4, 6) And what sense does it make to think that God was incensed about Solomon’s marriages to pagan wives and thus rebuke him for it, yet He never rebukes him for marrying multiple Israelite wives?

Could you tell me the name of his Israelite wives?


In Solomon’s day wives were currency. For example, a lesser king would seal a treaty with a greater king by offering up his daughter to be the wife of his victorious opponent. Solomon, being the aggressive king that he was, acquired many wives through this process. The offerings of daughters became tokens of friendship between the Solomon and other kings. Solomon became intoxicated from this and fell into some ill fate. In these times there was a strong religion current.


Could you tell me how God blessed this polygamy? What was the fruit of it?

To condone something is to:
To overlook, forgive, or disregard (an offense) without protest or censure.(The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition)

God did indeed condone this practice. He never punished those for practicing it. If He did, it should be easy enough to produce a passage that demonstrates God condemning this practice and the ensuing punishment because of it. It was not sin then and it is not sin today. You must have Biblical proof to justify this claim.

However, He never, ever, ever condoned actual sin.

God tolerated many many sins in the OT (just as he does today )

All of us came as sinners, God was long suffering and he tolerated our sin and rebellion .

If you can not see the fruit of polygamy you just choose not to see it.

Look at the problems with the off springs of these relationships.

There was hatred and jealousy in the off spring of the woman of David.

We see the same kind of jealousy in the children of Jacob.

We see plots to kill have siblings by the mother of another.

God is not the author of confusion. If this was a blessed practice , the result would not have been as hateful and violent .

The subject of this passage is clearly divorce. The illegal practice of men ditching their wives to get a new one. This passage aligns itself with Malachi 2:14. The question itself clearly spells out the context of the passage,”Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any cause at all?” (vs. 3) This has nothing to do with adding more wives. It has everything to do with honoring the covenant relationship “till death do us part.”

God regulated divorce in the civil OT law, just as he did polygamy.
You can not have it both ways.
Jesus points out that God allowed for the sin of men in the OT

The majority of the people in the OT economy couldn’t afford additional wives. That’s why they were ditching the “old wife” to get a new one. This was a careless disregard for the lifetime commitment the a marriage is to include. To have many wives was seen as a sign of power and wealth, which most OT early Israel was not. There are 23 OT men mentioned within scripture that had multiple wives, yet no single word of rebuke or censure for any of them.

Lamech practiced polygyny (Genesis 4:19). Nahor, Abraham's brother, had both a wife and a concubine (Genesis 11:29; 22:20-24). Jacob was tricked into polygamy (Genesis 29:20-30),. Esau took on a third wife hoping it might please his father Isaac (Genesis 28:6-9). Ashur the father of Tekoa had two wives (1 Chronicles 4:5). Michael, Obadiah, Joel, Ishiah, and those with them "had many wives" (1 Chronicles 7:3-4). Shaharaim had at least four wives, two of which he "sent away" (1 Chronicles 8:8-11). Caleb had two wives (1 Chronicles 2:18) and two concubines (1 Chronicles 2:46, 48). Gideon had many wives (Judges 8:30). Elkanah is recorded as having two wives, one of which was the godly woman Hannah (1 Samuel 1:1-2, 8-2:10). David, had 8 wives and 10 concubines (1 Chronicles 1:1-9; 2 Samuel 6:23; 20:3). Solomon, had 700 wives and 300 concubines (1 Kings 11:1-6). Rehoboam had eighteen wives and sixty concubines (2 Chronicles 11:21), and sought many wives for his sons (1 Chronicles 11:23). Abijah had fourteen wives (2 Chronicles 13:21). Ahab had more than one wife (1 Kings 20:7). Jehoram had wives who were taken captive (2 Chronicles 21:17). Jehoiada the priest gave king Joash two wives (2 Chronicles 24:1-3), and Jehoiachin had more than one wife (2 Kings 24:15).

Tell me how god blessed these polygamous relationships.

Please notice the first man that practiced this...

Isaac had one wife.

Jacob’s wives both came after his conversion. “Then Jacob made a vow saying If God will be with me and keep me on this journey...then the Lord will be my God.” (Gen. 28:20) “And this stone will I set up as a pillar, will be God’s house, and of all that thou dost give me;I will give a tenth.’ (Gen. 28:22)

Nope not so .

This is not a conversion, it is "lets make a deal" . Theses are not the words of conversion.

Gen 28:20
And Jacob vowed a vow, saying, If God will be with me, and will keep me in this way that I go, and will give me bread to eat, and raiment to put on,

Gen 28:21
So that I come again to my father's house in peace; then shall the LORD be my God:

It is a bargain , not a conversion


Gen 32:9 And Jacob said, O God of my father Abraham, and God of my father Isaac, the LORD which saidst unto me, Return unto thy country, and to thy kindred, and I will deal well with thee:

Not his God yet , he is still the God of his fathers

Here is where Jacob was converted and God became HIS God.

Gen 32:23
And he took them, and sent them over the brook, and sent over that he had.
Gen 32:24
And Jacob was left alone; and there wrestled a man with him until the breaking of the day.
Gen 32:25
And when he saw that he prevailed not against him, he touched the hollow of his thigh; and the hollow of Jacob's thigh was out of joint, as he wrestled with him.
Gen 32:26
And he said, Let me go, for the day breaketh. And he said, I will not let thee go, except thou bless me.
Gen 32:27
And he said unto him, What [is] thy name? And he said, Jacob.

Gen 32:28
And he said, Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel: for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed.
Gen 32:29
And Jacob asked [him], and said, Tell [me], I pray thee, thy name. And he said, Wherefore [is] it [that] thou dost ask after my name? And he blessed him there.
Gen 32:30
And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.


It was from this time on that God spoke to him and led him. From then on God was the God of Jacob (Israel )

Moses had two wives.

No he did not.

Present any citation that says Moses had 2 wives at the same time.
He is never listed with the polygamists because there is no scripture to support that .

Strife happened in the most monogamous marriages; Adam and Eve’s troubles with Cain for one. It is just human nature, fallen human nature. The more people you have involved in anything, the more problems you will encounter.

Exactly so why would God ordain that additional strife in a home or family?

I would point out that if polygamy was indeed Gods plan or desire that the need to populate the earth would have been the logical time to introduce polygamy, yet God did not .

He created one man and one woman. Only after sin entered the world did men's lust lead to a perversion of Gods original plan.

Then when the world required re population , did God send a family of polygamists? Or did he send men and their ONE wives

Are we to say that it is possible for two to become one flesh, but impossible for three? If so then Jacob and Leah were one flesh because she was his first wife. Doesn’t the Trinity claim three as one? Can we see the absurdity?

How do 3 become one flesh? Excuse my bluntness but how does a woman become one with her "sister wife"
So we then to presume that a man becomes one with one and then with another and another. Other wives are not one flesh with the other wives.

It is blasphemy to compare the lust of men with the Trinity.
The trinity is unique in that they always were and always will be one..they did not have to "become one"

I have viewed their site. I don’t agree with everything they teach, but some of it I do agree with. I don’t think they have a “membership.”

Are you a "christian polygamist"? (a contradiction in terms to me ).

What is your churches position on this?

Hope this helps.
Eph. 3:20

I am not the one in need of help actually

You like to quote Corinthians to imply that there is no sin as long as something is done in love .
That is a misuse of scripture I will not go into that now.
But I think we have to look at the totality of Paul to the Corinthians

1Cr 7:1
Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: [It is] good for a man not to touch a woman.
1Cr 7:2
Nevertheless, [to avoid] fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.




1Cr 7:3
Let the husband render unto the wife
due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband.




1Cr 7:4
The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.Eph 5:28
So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.

Eph 5:33
Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife [see] that she reverence [her] husband.

The church was surrounded with pagan and godless people. They were surrounded by a hebrew culture that still had remnants of polygamy and concubines .
But over and over the NT reinforces the correctness of monogamy in their teachings and in their laws for leadership.

The church is the bride of Christ. He is not a polygamist

 

[seebs]

There's an awful lot of eisegesis and question-begging here. When a polygamous man desires another man's wife, you say it's connected to his lust; when monogamous men do the same thing, you don't attribute it to polygamy -- but it happens just as often.

You're begging the question. You're assuming your conclusion, and drawing a huge number of inferences based on that assumption.

 

[rnmomof7]

In Psalms 45:9 David's wives(princesses) are refered to as honorable women. So, why would God refer to multiple wives as honorable women if He did not approve of them?

Women are the victims of polygamy . The lust of the husband does not make them dishonorable

However you are misusing that scripture It speaks of the Kings daughters

Psa 45:9
Kings' daughters [were] among thy honourable women: upon thy right hand did stand the queen in gold of Ophir.

Psa 45:10
Hearken, O daughter, and consider, and incline thine ear; forget also thine own people, and thy father's house;

Isn't being married to an honorable woman a blessing? Wouldn't two honorable women be even more of a blessing?

Ohh men certainly think they are 'blessed" if they have a bed full... but the question is who is doing the "blessing" huh :>)

I would like to see responses backed up by scripture that is in context and no eisogesis please.

truthnluv

Like the one you just posted?
My are in context , it might be good for you to go back and look at them again (in context)

 

[rnmomof7]

That's arguing from silence right there! You're drawing a conclusion from silence!

But, in fact, as pointed out elsewhere, the discussion with David makes it clear that God blesses polygamy in some cases; similarly, we see that God encourages it in some cases; for instance, when an older brother's wife dies, the younger brother is encouraged, and quite strongly so, to become polygamous.

Deu 25:5
If brethren dwell together, and one of them die, and have no child, the wife of the dead shall not marry without unto a stranger: her husband's brother shall go in unto her, and take her to him to wife, and perform the duty of an husband's brother unto her.



Deu 25:6
And it shall be, [that] the firstborn which she beareth shall succeed in the name of his brother [which is] dead, that his name be not put out of Israel.

This was a civil law and not a spiritual law. It was related to having heirs and having widows cared for.
But it is drawn within very narrow parameters. Notice it would be those that dwell together, it was the younger brothers (single) that were to assume the role of husband .
If you have a scripture that indicates any polygamous marriages out of it i would be interested to see it.

From one commentary by ROBERT JAMIESON


the wife of the dead shall not marry without unto a stranger: her husband's brother .*.*. shall take her to him to wife--This usage existed before the age of Moses ( Gen 38:8 ). But the Mosaic law rendered the custom obligatory ( Mat 22:25 ) on younger brothers, or the nearest kinsman, to marry the widow ( Rth 4:4 ), by associating the natural desire of perpetuating a brother's name with the preservation of property in the Hebrew families and tribes.
The fact that at no time does God bless the polygamist speaks for itself.
you say that because god did not strike them dead, that he must have approved of it.

But not all desire is lust!

Really? What he be desiring , a better cook? another baby sitter?

Not so! That would be true if all desire were lust, but if that were the case, even desiring your own wife would be adultery. Indeed, lust is always wrong; there is no acceptable context for lust, any more than there can be an acceptable context for hatred. Lust is not mere desire.

Lust within a marriage is acceptable .

The greek word for lust has the following meaning.

1) to turn upon a thing

2) to have a desire for, long for, to desire

3) to lust after, covet

a) of those who seek things forbidden

A married man does not sin when he desires his wife..
but a man that desires a woman when he is already married, commits adultery on his wife.



Mat 5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

 

[rnmomof7]

I don't think it matters whether he was tricked or not; it was never condemned!

God closed her womb for many years and


God removed her from the life of jacob after he was converted.

I would not say that was a ringing approval would you?

 

[rnmomof7]

Well, let's see. When I was last in a polygamous relationship, it was because a very good friend of mine had married another very good friend of mine, and the three of us were happier as a unit than as a couple and a friend outside the family. It didn't work out, but then, none of us really knew much about being married. I think if we'd been a couple of years more mature, with a better handle on marriage, we'd still be together.

There is some chance that I may be polygamous again in the future. I have no interest in seeking out another partner, and I don't think my wife does either... But that doesn't mean that we might not find outselves close enough to a friend to consider the possibility.

In short, I think of this much like any other possible relationship; if you find yourself closely tied to someone, it may be that the best possible expression of your feelings, and the most satisfying relationship for all involved, would be polygamy. I think that's pretty rare. For instance, if I really liked another woman, but my wife didn't like her as much, that wouldn't be a good basis for a relationship.

You can, of course, dismiss this as "personal satisfaction". But then, what reason do people ever get married for other than personal satisfaction? The thing you need to do to make it be bad is make that personal satisfaction be primarily sexual. If there are other aspects to marriage, that's different.

So, say, if my wife and I and one of our gaming buddies get to be really, really, close, there might come a time when we decided it would be easier on all of us to have shared finances, to live together, to commit to preserving this state as long as we live... In other words, to marry. And if that happens, we'll probably do it.

See? Sex is not the issue here.

If sex is not the issue, they why have it??

The reason?
lusting after someone other than your spouse

 

[rnmomof7]

mmomof7 --

I think Moses did have a second wife, or at the very least a cocubine from Ethiopia. Her presence caused quite a bit of dissension in Moses and Aaron's family groups during the exodus.

Wanna show mr the scripture that says he had two wives at the same time , or even implies it?

 

[SimplyMe]

If a man converts to Christianity already having multiple wives, I'm curious how those who think God does not allow polygamy would remedy the situation. Is the man required to divorce all but the first wife or is he allowed to keep them?

 

[seebs]

Really? What he be desiring , a better cook? another baby sitter?

No, not all sexual desire is lust.

It's a term of art, like "pride". Being glad of your child's accomplishment is pride, but it is not the sin of Pride.

Sexual desire is not necessarily Lust.

Lust within a marriage is acceptable.

Not once we're talking about the sin of lust.