Is Polygyny A Sin?

[duelingbanjos]

I have a question that I would like to hear some responses regarding. Is polygyny, as practiced by the patriarchs of the Old Testament, a sin?

Blessings

Dueling Banjos

 

[Gregory Thompson]

I have a question that I would like to hear some responses regarding. Is polygyny, as practiced by the patriarchs of the Old Testament, a sin?

Blessings

Dueling Banjos

well in the prophetic discourses Judah is accused of being like lusty stallions neighing after each other man's wives, Pharisees looking for a loophole asked if it was okay to divorce like cheap condoms? and Jesus said .. no it wasn't like that in the beginning so get real, and Paul while writing to Corinth known for its orgies in that a term in greek incorporating the city name meant "to do it like a corinthian" the first letter to corinth Paul said "since sexual immorality is so widespread amongst you may each man have his wife" and talks about them "belonging to one another" in a similar way the church belongs to Christ .. and the members of the body belong to one another .

i think God is communicating consistently through different people lifelong commitment to one person from the context that comes to mind .

 

[Builder_Bob]

I have a question that I would like to hear some responses regarding. Is polygyny, as practiced by the patriarchs of the Old Testament, a sin?

Blessings

Dueling Banjos

In regards to the question jokingly, Why how many wives and children do you have? LOL

 

[Tlaloc]

Michael,

Surely you know that polygyny is quite the opposite of either adultery or divorce. Polygyny is forging a commitment while the other two are breaking it in different ways. Those comments are pretty much off topic.

You can't lump something with amoral acts until that thing is established to be amoral. Your post is entirely prejudicial. As is what you think God is communicating.

Either way its evading the question Banjo posed. The question is straightforward enough to warrant a yes or no response along with whatever reasoning is tied to it.

I would say no, of course, there is no reason to suspect it was.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Michael,

Surely you know that polygyny is quite the opposite of either adultery or divorce. Polygyny is forging a commitment while the other two are breaking it in different ways. Those comments are pretty much off topic.

You can't lump something with amoral acts until that thing is established to be amoral. Your post is entirely prejudicial. As is what you think God is communicating.

Either way its evading the question Banjo posed. The question is straightforward enough to warrant a yes or no response along with whatever reasoning is tied to it.

I would say no, of course, there is no reason to suspect it was.

I think it is important if he asked the question i give opportunity for people to think about it .

i mean if everyone said just simply yes . or no . it would be a boring thread . this is a discussion board isn't it?

prejudicial you say . provide some opposing references please . i don't mind believing five things all parallel to one another so long as there is some basis in the truth for each one .

but in response to your mean spirited accusation:

the verses i alluded to spoke of one belonging to another . no concession was added to include others in the relationship (but such is provided in the church where we all belong to one another and are one by the same principle, just different) . divorce verses are relevant because God has always been a monogamous God . so knowing this, divorce was seen by the pharisees as a loophole to marry more people .

so it is related . but in your last post you were just lacking the capacity to give me the benefit of the doubt .

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Deuteronomy 24

1 If a man marries a woman who becomes displeasing to him because he finds something indecent about her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house, 2 and if after she leaves his house she becomes the wife of another man, 3 and her second husband dislikes her and writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house, or if he dies, 4 then her first husband, who divorced her, is not allowed to marry her again after she has been defiled. That would be detestable in the eyes of the LORD. Do not bring sin upon the land the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance.

Why doesn't God say, marry both?

the bible doesn't illustrate Polygamy that works . He even commanded the kings to not take a lot of wives . but the first two of the Davidic line did anyway . and look at how disasterous it was for that house .

I'd say God speaks against it .

 

[duelingbanjos]

Michael,

I don't see in this passage anything about polygyny, just divorce. Could you elaborate?

Thanks

 

[Cribstyl]

With all due respects guys. This dialog would be better debated in General Theology section of CF.
If you donot have a Pentecostal or Assemblies of God Icon you probably wont get the responses that you're looking for here.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Michael,

I don't see in this passage anything about polygyny, just divorce. Could you elaborate?

Thanks

since the bible doesn't say much about it . i was just looking at the pattern . since simultaneous marriages are not to be expected in the pattern i looked at people's attitudes toward one-at-a-time unions in the pharisees case .

hope that helps .

if i happen upon that passage where God commands kings to not marry a lot i might post that too . but since the bible only talks about one option then you only get circumstantial evidence such as ..

Lamech was married to two wives . it is possible polygamy was a common practice before the flood . the families chosen for the ark seemed to be monogamous unions . but it is circumstantial .

like with the animal thing Solomon mentions that's alluded to in Genesis when the word for living creature used for animal and living soul used for humans are actually the same two words in the hebrew . he goes against common assumption that humans aren't animals . apparently we aren't all that different according to his dissertation in ecclesiastes .

my point is . i have found perhaps a silence culture around the issue . just because divine selection has promoted it . there is an odd chance that such logically drawn conclusions from what was and circumstances surrounding . may still be different from what God thinks even if the beginning (Adam and Eve) and the end of time (Christ and Bride) result in a monogamous union .

so the pattern seems to lean toward one conclusion minus an "out of the box" verse thus far .

reasoning it out was fun . thanks for asking the question .

 

[Gregory Thompson]

With all due respects guys. This dialog would be better debated in General Theology section of CF.
If you donot have a Pentecostal or Assemblies of God Icon you probably wont get the responses that you're looking for here.

thanks

 

[Gregory Thompson]

If its all the same to you DuellingBanjos . i'd say post this question in the ethics and morality forum .

or maybe a mod could move this thread there .

 

[Cribstyl]

thanks

May
God bless your humble spirit Michael.

 

[lilmissmontana]

If its all the same to you DuellingBanjos . i'd say post this question in the ethics and morality forum .

or maybe a mod could move this thread there .

God bless

 

[Tlaloc]

Well my home church is Baptist the primary outreach I work with is ACOP Canada. It's winter, so right now I'm a baptist, and I don't see that the site support two or more denomination icons. I'm not non-denominational but that doesn't mean I'm singularly affiliated.

I don't know why Banjo put this here, he probably wants the views of people from a specific denomination. It probably would be best if he explained his reason for posting here in particular.


Michael,

I never said people should only say yes or no, I said they should at least say yes or no. I said that they should provide a yes or no answer along with their reasoning.

Having one belong to you does not preclude having another, nor does having one house belong to you preclude the ability to have another house. That is so obvious I can't see how any concession would be needed.

Since when has God been a monogamous God? One God, many people all unified but distinct. God did not balk as being referred too as a polygynist in Jeremiah 3. That verse is quite enough for me to safely say that how God sees himself is not how you see him. It goes very well to show that what you believe God is communicating is prejudiced by culture and not what the Bible has to say on the mater.

Being social and temporal and finite we should expect ourselves to be both bias and prejudice on most topic in general. We lack perfect knowledge and therefore lack objectivity. In this case you would only see those verses you posted as pertaining to polygamy if you assumed monogamy was the only way and polygyny equated to divorce and adultery. What you have added only re-enforces my opinion that you see polygyny as something that equates to divorce or adultery. That equation is of course what I am saying is prejudicial. Pointing that out is not at all mean spirited on my part, though attempting to victimize yourself by assuming it was is a little childish, no?


As for Deuteronomy 24, your point would be polyandry not polygyny, Banjo used a specific term and your reference doesn't apply to it.

Now, the bible tells Kings not to multiply horses or treasure either, was it there limiting them to one horse or one gold peice?

The Bible illustrates very little marriage that works at all, Job's wife wasn't that great with the whole 'curse God and die' line, and in the little we hear of Issac's later marriage deals them having different favorite kids. The Bible simply isn't a diary of happy days spent together but it is a work of important events, most of which are conflicts.

Its more than a little crass to speak of the golden age of Isreal as disastrous events. But Solomon did cross a line, and that was the line of religion. The bible is clear that Solomon problem was pagan wives, not many wives.

I'm still unclear as to weather you have answered Banjo's question, it doesn't appear to me that you actually have. Are you trying to say it is a sin without having to rationalize away its blatant acceptability in Banjo's context?

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Well my home church is Baptist the primary outreach I work with is ACOP Canada. It's winter, so right now I'm a baptist, and I don't see that the site support two or more denomination icons. I'm not non-denominational but that doesn't mean I'm singularly affiliated.

I don't know why Banjo put this here, he probably wants the views of people from a specific denomination. It probably would be best if he explained his reason for posting here in particular.


Michael,

I never said people should only say yes or no, I said they should at least say yes or no. I said that they should provide a yes or no answer along with their reasoning.

Having one belong to you does not preclude having another, nor does having one house belong to you preclude the ability to have another house. That is so obvious I can't see how any concession would be needed.

Since when has God been a monogamous God? One God, many people all unified but distinct. God did not balk as being referred too as a polygynist in Jeremiah 3. That verse is quite enough for me to safely say that how God sees himself is not how you see him. It goes very well to show that what you believe God is communicating is prejudiced by culture and not what the Bible has to say on the mater.

Being social and temporal and finite we should expect ourselves to be both bias and prejudice on most topic in general. We lack perfect knowledge and therefore lack objectivity. In this case you would only see those verses you posted as pertaining to polygamy if you assumed monogamy was the only way and polygyny equated to divorce and adultery. What you have added only re-enforces my opinion that you see polygyny as something that equates to divorce or adultery. That equation is of course what I am saying is prejudicial. Pointing that out is not at all mean spirited on my part, though attempting to victimize yourself by assuming it was is a little childish, no?


As for Deuteronomy 24, your point would be polyandry not polygyny, Banjo used a specific term and your reference doesn't apply to it.

Now, the bible tells Kings not to multiply horses or treasure either, was it there limiting them to one horse or one gold peice?

The Bible illustrates very little marriage that works at all, Job's wife wasn't that great with the whole 'curse God and die' line, and in the little we hear of Issac's later marriage deals them having different favorite kids. The Bible simply isn't a diary of happy days spent together but it is a work of important events, most of which are conflicts.

Its more than a little crass to speak of the golden age of Isreal as disastrous events. But Solomon did cross a line, and that was the line of religion. The bible is clear that Solomon problem was pagan wives, not many wives.

I'm still unclear as to weather you have answered Banjo's question, it doesn't appear to me that you actually have. Are you trying to say it is a sin without having to rationalize away its blatant acceptability in Banjo's context?

I believe the answer to Banjo's question is in Banjo . so i gave him food for thought . however, talking about this topic outside of the ethics and morality forums is not permitted . i am thankful the moderators have given us leeway thus far . but i would not like to push my luck . if you do happen to move the convo over there let me know . i believe Jeremiah 3 proves my point even further . but just kidding . i may speak with a certain forcefulness but that aspect grew in me only out of necessity of my surroundings in the past . i'm just providing food for thought . as are you .

thank you for the food for thought Tlaloc . i am thankful this conversation wasn't so one sided . (especially for Banjo's sake)

i just meant your posting method seemed hostile sounding/ aggressive . that's all .

perhaps you spend time in other parts of the forum that i am as yet unacquainted with

blest

 

[Tlaloc]

Thank you for a good discussion as well, if Banjo gets it moved I'll look it up and we can continue. God bless you, bye.

 

[SwordoftheLord]

since the bible doesn't say much about it . i was just looking at the pattern . since simultaneous marriages are not to be expected in the pattern i looked at people's attitudes toward one-at-a-time unions in the pharisees case .

hope that helps .

if i happen upon that passage where God commands kings to not marry a lot i might post that too . but since the bible only talks about one option then you only get circumstantial evidence such as ..

Lamech was married to two wives . it is possible polygamy was a common practice before the flood . the families chosen for the ark seemed to be monogamous unions . but it is circumstantial .

like with the animal thing Solomon mentions that's alluded to in Genesis when the word for living creature used for animal and living soul used for humans are actually the same two words in the hebrew . he goes against common assumption that humans aren't animals . apparently we aren't all that different according to his dissertation in ecclesiastes .

my point is . i have found perhaps a silence culture around the issue . just because divine selection has promoted it . there is an odd chance that such logically drawn conclusions from what was and circumstances surrounding . may still be different from what God thinks even if the beginning (Adam and Eve) and the end of time (Christ and Bride) result in a monogamous union .

so the pattern seems to lean toward one conclusion minus an "out of the box" verse thus far .

reasoning it out was fun . thanks for asking the question .

You said the bible doesnt mention alot about polygamy?
I think it does..Heres a list...

Abdon
Judge of Israel
Perhaps the same as 'Bedan' Uncertain Judges 12:14
Abijah
King of Judah
Son & successor of Rehoboam 14 2 Chronicles 13:21
Abraham
Faithful friend of God
Father of the Hebrew nation
"Father of the faithful" 3
Sarah, Hagar, and Keturah Genesis 16:1
Genesis 16:3
Genesis 25:1
Ahab
King of Israel Wives 1 Kings 20:3
Ahasuerus
King of Persia
Assumed to be Xerxes Women Vashti, Esther Esther 1:9 Ashur 2
Helah and Naarah 1 Chronicles 4:5
Belshazzar
Secondary King of Babylon
To whom Daniel interpreted the writing on the wall Wives Daniel 5:2
Benhadad
The king of Syria Uncertain 1 Kings 20:3 Caleb 5
Azubah, Jerioth, Ephrath, Ephah, Maachah 1 Chronicles 2:18-19
1 Chronicles 2:46
1 Chronicles 2:48

David
Youngest son of Jesse
Second king of Israel
"after God's own heart" Wives & Concubines
Abigail, Ahinoam, Michal, Maacah, Rizpah, Bathsheba 1 Samuel 25:39
1 Samuel 25:43
1 Samuel 25:44
2 Samuel 3:3
2 Samuel 3:7
2 Samuel 5:13, 1 Chronicles 14:3
2 Samuel 12:7-8
2 Samuel 12:24


Eliphaz 2
Timna Genesis 36:11-12
Elkanah 2
Hannah, Peninnah 1 Samuel 1:2 Esau 3
Judith, Bashemath, Mahalath Genesis 26:34
Genesis 28:9 Ezra 2
Jehudijah 1 Chronicles 4:17-18 Gideon
Fifth judge of Israel
Led the Israelites against the Midianites Wives
Drumah, Shechem Judges 8:30 Heman Uncertain 1 Chronicles 25:4 Herod the Great 10
Elpide, Phedra, Mariamne, Doris, Malthace the Samaritan, Cleopatra, Pallas, Elpis Josephus, Ant. 17, 19f.; War 1,562
Flavius Josephus The Jewish War 1.473 (Whiston) Hezron 3
Abiah 1 Chronicles 2:9
1 Chronicles 2:21
1 Chronicles 2:24 Hosea 2
Gomer Hosea 1:3
Hosea 3:1 Ibzan Uncertain Judges 12:9 Tribe of Issachar Wives 1 Chronicles 7:4 Jacob
Father of the twelve tribes of Israel
"the prince of God" 4
Leah, Rachel, Bilhah, Zilpah Genesis 29:23
Genesis 29:28
Genesis 30:4
Genesis 30:9 Jair Uncertain Judges 10:4 Jerahmeel 2
Atarah 1 Chronicles 2:26 Jehoiachin
King of Judah Wives 2 Kings 24:15 Jehoram Wives 2 Chronicles 21:14 Jeroboam 14
Michaiah Flavius Josephus Jewish Antiquities 8.282 (Whiston) Jerubbaall Uncertain Judges 9:5 Joash 2 2 Chronicles 24:3 Joseph Uncertain George Lamsa, in Gospel Light, Harper & Row, p. 5-7, his commentary. Judah 2
Tamar, Daughther of Shua the Canaanitess 1 Chronicles 2:3-4 Lamech 2
Adah, Zillah Genesis 4:19 Machir 2
Maachah, Zelophehad 1 Chronicles 7:15-16 Manasseh 2
The Aramitess 1 Chronicles 7:14 Mered 4
Jehudijah, Bithiah, Hodiah 1 Chronicles 4:17-19 Moses 2
Zipporah, Ethiopian Woman Exodus 2:21
Numbers 12:1 Nahor 2
Milcah, Reumah Genesis 22:20-24 Rehoboam 78
Mahalath, Abihail, Maachah 2 Chronicles 11:18-23 Saul 2
Ahinoam, Rizpah 1 Samuel 14:50
2 Samuel 3:7 Shaharaim 2
Hushim, Baara 1 Chronicles 8:8 Shimei Uncertain 1 Chronicles 4:27 Simeon 2
Canaanitish Woman Genesis 46:10, Exodus 6:15 Solomon 1,000
Sidontans, Tyrians, Ammonites, Edomites 1 Kings 11:3 Terah 2 Genesis 20:12 Zedekiah Wives Jeremiah 38:23 Ziba Uncertain 2 Samuel 9:10 Unnamed Uncertain 1 Corinthians 5:1






I am not a polygamist, and wont speak on whether I believe it is a sin...But it is spoken of in the bible

 

[Gregory Thompson]

So is rape and ethnic cleansing . and mass murder . just because it is "in" the bible . .. doesn't prove all that much . context is what matters since the events recorded were so long ago . (Just to clarify .) i recall meaning "promoted" in the bible . alas the flaw of online communication .

but bring this up in the ethics and morality forum and PM me and i'll join in . it'll be fun .

 

[SwordoftheLord]

So is rape and ethnic cleansing . and mass murder . just because it is "in" the bible . .. doesn't prove all that much . context is what matters since the events recorded were so long ago . (Just to clarify .) i recall meaning "promoted" in the bible . alas the flaw of online communication .

but bring this up in the ethics and morality forum and PM me and i'll join in . it'll be fun .

I did not say it was moral nor am I promoting it..I am not a polygamist....

You said "THE BIBLE DOESNT SAY ALOT ABOUT IT" but it does..

Why did God allow multiple wives in the OT, but not now thats the question.You said the moral forum? i think this should be moved to a theological debate forum myself...

 

[Gregory Thompson]

I did not say it was moral nor am I promoting it..I am not a polygamist....

You said "THE BIBLE DOESNT SAY ALOT ABOUT IT" but it does..

Why did God allow multiple wives in the OT, but not now thats the question.You said the moral forum? i think this should be moved to a theological debate forum myself...

you misunderstand what i meant . but nothing short of talking about it directly would clear up the misconception(s) . so it will have to wait .

I'd agree . but according to the forum rules . controversial topics . and this one is listed . can only be discussed in the ethics and morality forum .

i just remembered this mid thread and looked it up .