Christian Polygamy

[ebia]

Percivale ... can you show were God discourages polygamy? I've not found those verse.

As in explicitly saying ".. is bad - don't do it" you won't find it.
But both the creation stories picture stories tell a story of a man and a woman together as complementary.

And then of course it follows from how jesus uses that in talking about divorce - if divorce + remarriage consistitutes adultery then it necessarily follows that marry a second concurrent wife is also adultery.

 

[HonestTruth]

As in explicitly saying ".. is bad - don't do it" you won't find it.
But both the creation stories picture stories tell a story of a man and a woman together as complementary.

And then of course it follows from how jesus uses that in talking about divorce - if divorce + remarriage consistitutes adultery then it necessarily follows that marry a second concurrent wife is also adultery.

Not so under Levirate marriage or concubinage.

 

[ebia]

Not so under Levirate marriage or concubinage.

So called Levriate marriage is a peculiar special place to continue the line of the dead brother. A way of managing what is, for that culture, a particular problem. It has no relevance for ours, and is the exception that proves the rule.

Concubinage would not be an exception at all it follows from how jesus uses genesis that that would be adultery.

 

[HonestTruth]

So called Levriate marriage is a peculiar special place to continue the line of the dead brother. A way of managing what is, for that culture, a particular problem. It has no relevance for ours, and is the exception that proves the rule.

Concubinage would not be an exception at all it follows from how jesus uses genesis that that would be adultery.

In the New Testament we are told "there is neither Greek nor Jew" but Jesus did not end Levirate marriage which means he was not concerned with old cultural values. Therefore, it is not adultery. Nor is concubinage.

 

[ebia]

In the New Testament we are told "there is neither Greek nor Jew" but Jesus did not end Levirate marriage which means he was not concerned with old cultural values. Therefore, it is not adultery. Nor is concubinage.

Levritical marriage existed for a purpose; that purpose simply doesn't apply.
To keep it going would be like building stables when nobody has a horse, and even to take it as essential practice to somewhere that has never had horses.

Concubinage never was approved, and wasn't significant part of the culture of ordinary people that jesus was addressing, but it follows from what he does say.
The logic of his argument against divorce is simply that remarriage is adultery.
The bit he makes explicit is that divorce does nothing. For the rest of what he has to say to make any sense he must be treating as self evident that marrying another wife is adultery against the original wife.

 

[juvenissun]

Percivale ... can you show were God discourages polygamy? I've not found those verse.

Gen 2.

It is Adam and Eve. It is not Adam, Eve, and Sarah.
Yeah, God does not forbid Sarah to join the party. But she was not a part of the original intention.

 

[WirSindBettler]

Here's some Lutheran theology to liven the discussion:

"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." - Martin Luther

However, this was only in instances, Luther wrote, that a woman could not perform her . . . uh . . . *duty* due to illness or biological reasons. Thus, only polygyny was allowed, and not polyandry.

Then in 1526, Luther seemed to change his views a touch:

"It is my earnest warning and counsel that Christians especially shall have no more than one wife, not only because it is a scandal, which a Christian should avoid most diligently, but also because there is no word of God here to show that God approves it in Christians [...] I must oppose it, especially in Christians, unless there be need, as for instance if the wife be a leper, or be taken away from the husband in some other way." - Martin Luther

However, many Lutheran theologians also supported Philip of Hesse's polygynous relationship, seeing it as valid.

Just some food for thought. I know this is a general theology discussion, yet I still think these can add to the discussion.

 

[dayhiker]

I think one of the reasons people have problems with great men of God having more than one wife is they don't know the Bible's definition of adultery.


Lev.20:10 And the man that commits adultery with another man’s wife, even he that commits adultery with his neighbor’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.


De.22:22 If a man be found lying with a woman married to an husband, then they shall both of them die.


Jer.29:23 Because they have committed villany in Israel, and have committed adultery with their neighbors’ wives, and have spoken lying words in my name, which I have not commanded them; even I know, and am a witness, said the LORD.


Ez.16:38 And I will judge thee, as women that break wedlock.


We see from this that a man with more than one wife isn't committing adultery because he can't take an other man's wife from him or cause her to break her wedding vows because she is his wife not another man's wife.


If polygamy is adultery then Abraham before Issac was born and Jacob before all his 12 sons were born from where comes the tribes of Israel and David before his was king very long should have been killed. Where would Israel and God's plan be if there had been killed for committing adultery

 

[HonestTruth]

Levritical marriage existed for a purpose; that purpose simply doesn't apply.
To keep it going would be like building stables when nobody has a horse, and even to take it as essential practice to somewhere that has never had horses.

Concubinage never was approved, and wasn't significant part of the culture of ordinary people that jesus was addressing, but it follows from what he does say.
The logic of his argument against divorce is simply that remarriage is adultery.
The bit he makes explicit is that divorce does nothing. For the rest of what he has to say to make any sense he must be treating as self evident that marrying another wife is adultery against the original wife.

Levitical marriage remains valid whether you approve or not {op cit}.

Concubinage was approved and was not addressed by Jesus {op cit}.

Divorced was banned because wives are gifts of God {Proverbs 19:14} and mankind cannot separate what God created {Mark 10:9; Matt 19:6}.


You are entitled to your opinion but as you can see, I back up my claims with quotes from the Bible.

 

[ebia]

Levitical marriage remains valid whether you approve or not {op cit}.

Concubinage was approved and was not addressed by Jesus {op cit}.

Divorced was banned because wives are gifts of God {Proverbs 19:14} and mankind cannot separate what God created {Mark 10:9; Matt 19:6}.


You are entitled to your opinion but as you can see, I back up my claims with quotes from the Bible.

You've ignored how jesus addresses divorce. He doesn't say "divorce is wrong" but "marrying again is adultery [because it's taking a second wife]". Which is a nonsensical argument unless:
Divorce doesn't actually happen
AND
taking a second wife is adultery.

And that would apply whether is a primary wife or a secondary, so called concubinage, wife.

Levritical marriage is neither valid nor invalid - the circumstances its for don't exist. It's be like wearing a seatbelt sitting on the sofa.

 

[Cappadocious]

It was Roman that had a law that said a man can only have one wife. Israel when they came under the rule of Roman petitioned Rome and got an exception to the law so that they could continue to have more than one wife.

For expediency's sake, would you please post the relevant citation from Roman Law, as well as the writ of exemption for the Jews?

 

[dayhiker]

There wasn't one Jew in Jesus' day that thought remarrying after divorce as committing adultery including Jesus. To interpret Jesus' words is to show one doesn't know the theological debate that was going on in Jesus' day.
Here is the shortest way I can give this historical contest of the debate that was going on in Jesus' day and how Jesus responded to it.

p { margin-bottom: 0in; direction: ltr; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); text-align: left; widows: 2; orphans: 2; }p.western { font-family: "Times New Roman",serif; font-size: 12pt; }p.cjk { font-family: "Times New Roman",serif; font-size: 12pt; }p.ctl { font-family: "Times New Roman",serif; font-size: 10pt; }a:link { color: rgb(0, 0, 255); } To understand adultery in this passage we must 1st understand what the Jews thought about marriage and divorce. The basic verse that defined the responsibility in marriage in the OT was Ex.21:10-11. The context of this verse is polygamy. A man couldn’t reduce the 1st wife’s portion of food, clothes or conjugal love when he took a 2nd wife. It was the Rabbinical understanding that these three applied to both husband and wife. The neglect of any of these 3 responsibilities were grounds for a divorce by either the man or the woman.


In Jesus’ time there was a big debate going on about divorce. But its wasn’t about Ex.21:10-11. It was about Dt.24:1. If a man marries a woman and she does not please him because he has found something offensive in her, then he may draw up a divorce document, give it to her, and evict her from his house. Rabbi Shammai held the traditional view that the 4th reason for divorce was some gross sexual impropriety. Rabbi Hillel however felt that the wording allowed a divorce for any cause. Thus, ‘Any Cause’ became legal short hand for this argument about the interpretation of Dt.24:1.

The Pharisees come to Jesus and ask Him which school has the right interpretation of Dt.24:1. Jesus goes back to God’s original purpose for marriage in Gen.2. God created men and women. The man is to leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife. The two shall become one flesh. What God has joined together let no one separate. Jesus clearly didn’t go alone with ‘Any Cause’ divorce or even an easy divorce. He wanted to see couples work things out, forgive each other and make a happy life together.


The Pharisees press Jesus further. Asking, what about Moses and his commanding us to write a certificate of dismissal and divorce her. Jesus replied that Moses permitted divorcing your wives in the case of sexual immorality because of the hardness of your hearts. From Genesis it wasn’t intended to be that way.


So Jesus reaffirms Dt.24:1 as a reason for divorce just as all nations in Jesus’ day believe. But it is not a command. It is better to forgive and love. Jesus said nothing to affirm or deny the other 3 reasons for a divorce. Today there are people that are hard hearted just like when Moses wrote the law and Jesus affirm this attitude still exists. So it would seem that the offended partner should still be able to divorce.


Now to the divorce certificate. It read, "Thou art free to marry any man." Some added “any Jewish man.” Clearly, the divorce certificate wouldn’t read this way if remarriage was not allowed or was adultery. Archaeologist have many of these divorce certificates.


Why then did Jesus say they were committing adultery?
A man who divorces his wife except for immorality and marries another commits adultery. The first thing that stands out about this statement is that it’s a statement said to create shock. Preachers often do this. Jesus did it quite a few times himself. Secondly, from what we have seen people believed in Jesus’ day remarriage wasn’t a sin. Every divorce certificate gave permission to remarry. Jesus is saying that the ‘Any Cause’ divorce isn’t legal. That’s why its adultery. The woman the man is marring is technically still married to her previous husband. This is consistent with the definition of adultery and doesn’t fit the polygamy situation as some commentators think.


If Jesus was changing the way all of God’s people looked at divorce, from legal if the spouse was neglected or for adultery, then Jesus would have to give instructions on how to deal with all the people that were in illegal marriages (many with children) and thus committing adultery. This ‘Any Cause’ marriage had been going on for many years. Joseph was going to use this type of divorce when he was going to put Mary away quietly before Jesus’ birth.


So we see Jesus didn't say anything that spoke against poly relationships.

 

[dayhiker]

The information is in this book p { margin-bottom: 0in; direction: ltr; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); text-align: left; widows: 2; orphans: 2; }p.western { font-family: "Times New Roman",serif; font-size: 12pt; }p.cjk { font-family: "Times New Roman",serif; font-size: 12pt; }p.ctl { font-family: "Times New Roman",serif; font-size: 10pt; }a:link { color: rgb(0, 0, 255); } David Instone-Brewer book Divorce and Remarriage in the Church
on page 51.
Paternorter Press, PO Box 1047, Waynesboro, GA 30830-2047. copyright 2003
David did his PHD in 1st century Rabbinic Judaism.

This book isn't a scholarly book with all the documentation that would be his scholarly work. Divorce and Remarriage in the Bible - the social and literary context. (Eerdmans, 2002

For expediency's sake, would you please post the relevant citation from Roman Law, as well as the writ of exemption for the Jews?

 

[Cappadocious]

Well, then I continue my wait.

 

[ValleyGal]

Im Curious About Christian (Non Mormon ) Women Views On Polygamy? Do You Thinks Its Ok Biblically? Would You Be Up To It?

Well, this was good for a giggle.... page four and only men answered! lol

As a Christian woman, I would be insulted, offended, and disgusted if my husband chose to take another wife. It would mean that I am not enough for him, don't measure up, etc. Very damaging to a woman's sense of self. It would cause insecurity and insignificance - both the result of lack of commitment (care and consistency).

Women already have to compete with each other because there are about 4 - 5% more women than there are men, and this is a bigger disparity considering more men are in jail, etc. So a man taking more than one wife would increase the level of competition.

Additionally, it is bad enough that a Christian man's attention is divided from attention for God when he marries only one wife, so how much more divided is his attention when there would be more than one wife.

As one of the men here pointed out, the TWO become ONE flesh... it does not say the three or more become one flesh.

Imo, in the OT, certain people had more than one wife - primarily kings or other men of prominence, and their marriages were more a matter of solidifying relationships with leadership from other countries. They did not marry multiple wives in order to set a precedent for standard Christian families.

If my husband even suggested taking another wife, I would divorce him. To me, it is the equivalent of adultery.

 

[dayhiker]

ValleyGal - Thanks for sharing.

 

[Gunny]

No.

 

[HonestTruth]

You've ignored how jesus addresses divorce. He doesn't say "divorce is wrong" but "marrying again is adultery [because it's taking a second wife]". Which is a nonsensical argument unless:
Divorce doesn't actually happen
AND
taking a second wife is adultery.

And that would apply whether is a primary wife or a secondary, so called concubinage, wife.

Levritical marriage is neither valid nor invalid - the circumstances its for don't exist. It's be like wearing a seatbelt sitting on the sofa.

Correction - divorce and then taking another wife it is adultery because a wife is abandoned and left helpless.

You need to take those times into account - outside of the home, a woman alone was helpless and without means of support. This is what Jesus was trying to prevent. But as with Levirate marriage where a second or third wife is taken, that first wife is not abandoned. That is why Levirate marriage is not adultery and, like Christian polygyny, was practiced (or at least tolerated) by Christians for the next three hundred years.


Let's be candid here - if Levirate marriage was against Christian teaching Jesus or his Apostles would have condemned it but they did not. Just read the New Testament if you don't believe me.

 

[HonestTruth]

For expediency's sake, would you please post the relevant citation from Roman Law, as well as the writ of exemption for the Jews?

Roman law which forbade polygamy:


Cleopatra: A Sphinx Revisited - Google Books




Romans did not impose their marriage laws on Jews:



Choosing a Legal System in First Century Judaism



quote:


''These interactions between different legal systems shows that these groups were aware of each other. Gradually one sees them adopting the best aspects of each other's procedures and laws. There was no formal means by which this would happen. The Roman authorities did not impose marriage laws on the Jews, and they were happy to incorporate or work alongside established legal practices. ''

 

[ebia]

Correction - divorce and then taking another wife it is adultery because a wife is abandoned and left helpless.

Abandonment is not the same thing as adultery. You're manipulating what he said to fit what you want to be the case.