Monogamy

[helenofbritain]

That is a very good point. I'm sorry but what do you mean by 'MDR'?

MDR = Marriage, Divorce, Remarriage

 

[Piedpiper123]

I think one wife or husband is more than enough!

Not long ago I was talking about polygamy with some of my Nigerian friends. This small group all agreed that there were ususally problems back home in polygamous families with jealousy being one of the big issues.

One is enough!

 

[ShermanN]

This passage does not support monogamy any more than the commandment "Love thy neighbour" means we should love one neighbour only.

When a man takes a wife, the two become one flesh. And if he takes another wife, the man and the second wife also become one flesh. What Jesus said here does not fly in the face of polygamy.

Most scholars agree that Matthew's primary audience were the Jews and thus he included much information that meant little to non-Jews but meant a lot to the Jews. So if one does a little research you'll find that there was a debate going on between Jewish Rabbis during the time of Christ. As mentioned in my previous post, Rabbis that supported monogamy quoted Gen.2 "and the two shall become one flesh" from the Septuagint, like Jesus did. Thus understanding Mat.19 based on the Jewish cultural context, one can say that Jesus endorsed monogamy as an element of the divine ideal of marriage -- what God meant for mankind in the Garden of Eden.

This does not mean that God does not recognize polygamous marriages, but that monogamy was and is part of God's ideal for marriage.

Concerning the phrase "one flesh", sadly many interpret this phrase not knowing it's cultural idiomatic meaning. "One Flesh" in ancient near-eastern cultures simply meant to become "family", it did not mean that the two become like one person in any way. Thus you are correct when you say that polygamous marriages are "one flesh". They are a family, legally and biblically.

Concerning the subject of MDR, I highly recommend Dr. David Instone-Brewer's book, "Divorce and Remarrige in the Bible; The Social and Literary Context". It's a very solid scholarly work. My book, "God Is A Divorce' Too!" references much of the information in Dr. Instone-Brewer's book. His book focuses on the literary and cultural ancient near-eastern context or MDR; whereas my book examines and refutes much of the traditional doctrine of MDR, and builds a very strong biblical doctrine that is practicle and applicable in all cultures.

Blessings,
Sherman Nobles

P.S. I agree that "one is enough" in most situations, but one must question should the civil government legislate monogamy or leave it more under domestic, personal authority. There are some situations where polygamy might be very beneficial, especially considering cases where one's spouse becomes completely incapacitated, a vegetable but alive.

 

[DanielRB]

Peace, all

It's refreshing to see a controversial thread without flames!

I, too, do not see any clear biblical mandate against polygamy per se. For myself, my beautiful wife is all I need. But I can't see a specific condemnation against polygamy anywhere in the Scriptures.

That said, what about having multiple husbands? Culturally, we're even further removed from that--and I don't think there are any biblical examples of a woman having multiple husbands living at the same time.

In Christ,

Daniel

 

[Sojourner<><]

Peace, all

It's refreshing to see a controversial thread without flames!

I, too, do not see any clear biblical mandate against polygamy per se. For myself, my beautiful wife is all I need. But I can't see a specific condemnation against polygamy anywhere in the Scriptures.

That said, what about having multiple husbands? Culturally, we're even further removed from that--and I don't think there are any biblical examples of a woman having multiple husbands living at the same time.

In Christ,

Daniel

Here is my opinion, which is entirely politically incorrect by the way (I prefer to keep politics and faith separate anyways):

The scriptures clearly don't treat men and women the same in this matter, which definately contradicts our society's idealistic model of the "equality" of the sexes. Instead, I think they reflect a natural order between men and women. In other words, there is no such thing as "equality" since there are distinct natural differences between male and female; but that is not to say that men and women are "unequal", just different. So basically this is why I think that the polyandrous model (one woman, many husbands) of marriage would definately work against that natural order as created by God, whereas the polygynous model (one man, multiple wives) might have actually served a beneficial purpose.

 

[Simonline]

Greetings

For those of you who live in America, you probably know all too well that the definition of marriage is a current hot topic of debate. In an effort to solidify my understanding of its Biblical definition, I've been studying and searching for the passages that provide black and white definitions of the different aspects of marriage. The male + female aspect of marriage is clearly covered without question. However, the one man one woman aspect seems a little foggy since the Bible seems to support polygamy, at least in part.

After reading up on some extrabiblical sources on the history of the spread of monogamy, it seems that the popular opinion is that its spread was contiguous with the spread of Christianity. If this is true, then its foundation must somehow lie within the Christian faith. But where is it? Are there some doctrines held by the older churches that I'm not aware of?

One other opinion I've heard is that monogamy was a Roman cultural standard that predated Christianity. In this case, it would have been adopted by and promoted by Christianity. Could there be any truth behind this scenario?

Help would be much appreciated

I highly recommend a brilliant (though extremely controversial) book entitled Leadership Is Male by David Pawson available online (in the USA) from www.Goodseed.org or from your local Christian bookstore or public lending library.

I personally have learned so much as a result of this man's teaching (especially in this book) that, years later, I am still feeding off it spiritually. It has opened my understanding so much. It is also very deep and very misunderstood as a result.

Don't be put off by the title, if you truly understand the teaching then you will understand why polygamy is wrong and you will also understand why the book could not have had any other title. Trust me the book is definitely not a treatise on mysogynism.

Simonline.

 

[Sojourner<><]

I highly recommend a brilliant (though extremely controversial) book entitled Leadership Is Male by David Pawson available online (in the USA) from www.Goodseed.org or from your local Christian bookstore or public lending library.

I personally have learned so much as a result of this man's teaching (especially in this book) that, years later, I am still feeding off it spiritually. It has opened my understanding so much. It is also very deep and very misunderstood as a result.

Don't be put off by the title, if you truly understand the teaching then you will understand why polygamy is wrong and you will also understand why the book could not have had any other title. Trust me the book is definitely not a treatise on mysogynism.

Simonline.

Is there any chance that you could summarize the general argument for us?

 

[DanielRB]

Peace, All

One more thought: in 1 Tim 3:2, 12, bishops and deacons are to be "husbands of one wife." This would indicate that churh leaders cannot be polygamous.

In Christ,

Daniel

 

[Simonline]

Is there any chance that you could summarize the general argument for us?

And do David Pawson a great dis-service, sorry, I don't think so. If you're serious about your quest then you'll get the book and read it, if you're not, then it doesn't matter.

If you're open to the truth then you will receive great blessing from it and you will definitely consider it well worth the effort to track it down and read it.

Simonline.

 

[Simonline]

Peace, All

One more thought: in 1 Tim 3:2, 12, bishops and deacons are to be "husbands of one wife." This would indicate that churh leaders cannot be polygamous.

In Christ,

Daniel

Or that they were not to be divorcees who had remarried?

Simonline.

 

[DanielRB]

Peace, Simonline

Or that they were not to be divorcees who had remarried?

Simonline.

Technically, it could even mean widowed and remarried being prohibited.

In Christ,

Daniel

 

[Prawnik]

The fact that monogamy was held as the standard for Church leadership should tell us something.

 

[Sojourner<><]

The fact that monogamy was held as the standard for Church leadership should tell us something.

Right, well that was the original purpose of this thread. As it was held as a standard, what doctrine, verse or tradition was this based upon?

 

[Itani]

(Sorry, I don't have the chapter+verses on hand atm for this)

What I don't understand is David can have many wives, but the new testament is against this practice. For married people cannot remarry if they already have a wife. But at the same time, it says David followed the Law and God with all his heart.

Hmmm...having many wives though........

 

[ShermanN]

Peace, All
One more thought: in 1 Tim 3:2, 12, bishops and deacons are to be "husbands of one wife." This would indicate that churh leaders cannot be polygamous.

Or that they were not to be divorcees who had remarried?

As you likely know, the meaning of the phrase "husband of one wife" is widely debated in Christian circles. Some take it to imply monogomy; others think it's a prohibition against remarried divorce's or widower's. And yet others take it to mean that a single man cannot be a pastor or elder.

All of these fail to take into consideration the literary context, especially the similar phrase "wife of one man" in Eph.5.9. Considering polygany, one wife multiple husbands, was not practiced in the Ancient Middle East, it's unlikely that "husband of one wife" is a prohibition against polygamy. Similar reasoning precludes one from understanding "husband of one wife" as refering to either a divorce' or a widower who remarries. And if one takes into consideration Paul's endorsement of celibacy as a good way to serve the Lord and be free from the entaglements of marriage and family, then it's unlikely that "husband of one wife" means a leader must be married.

Also, one must remember that Paul is not building a list of qualifications or reasons to cross someone off the list of possible leaders for a church; but Paul is sharing with his son in the faith, Timothy, about character qualities to look for in seeking leaders for local churches.

Having said all of that, the phrase "husband of one wife" likely means either a "one woman kind of man" or a "faithful man, faithful especially if he's married."

Blessings,
Sherman

 

[Piedpiper123]

Having said all of that, the phrase "husband of one wife" likely means either a "one woman kind of man" or a "faithful man, faithful especially if he's married."

Out of interest:

The Greek literally says "one woman man" (&#956;&#953;&#945;&#962; &#947;&#965;&#957;&#945;&#953;&#954;&#959;&#962; &#945;&#957;&#948;&#961;&#945

And of the widows in 1 Tim 5:9 they are to be a "one man woman" (&#949;&#957;&#959;&#962; &#945;&#957;&#948;&#961;&#945;&#962; &#947;&#965;&#957;&#951

 

[Rut]

The Bible reflects many things about the society of its day. Such as slavery and polygamy. Saying that this reflection is support is taking a wild and unsupported leap. No prophet speaking as the mouthpiece of God says "Thou shalt get thee as many wives as thy can." No apostle in the NT talks about having many wives. In OT times, polygamy was practiced in many cultures. That is reflected in the scriptures, not supported.

I agree with this.
I know that was many male that married with more women then wife.Then we must know why.
Jakob was decieved to married two women Genesis 29: 15 - 30
A good example that broke Gods law about to only marry one women was Salomo Deuteronomy 17:17 In 1 Kings 11:1 - 9 we can read what happen because of that

 

[Romanseight2005]

Prov 5:15-20

15 Drink waters out of thine own cistern, and running waters out of thine own well.

16 Let thy fountains be dispersed abroad, and rivers of waters in the streets.

17 Let them be only thine own, and not strangers' with thee.

18 Let thy fountain be blessed: and rejoice with the wife of thy youth.

19 Let her be as the loving hind and pleasant roe; let her breasts satisfy thee at all times; and be thou ravished always with her love.

20 And why wilt thou, my son, be ravished with a strange woman, and embrace the bosom of a stranger?
KJV
Mark 10:11

11 And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her.
KJV
Now, pro polys will say this only refers to divorce, and not the sexual relations with another. However, if this were the case, then why does it say, "Adultery against her," instead of dealt treacherously, or the like?

Mal 2:14-15

14 Yet ye say, Wherefore? Because the LORD hath been witness between thee and the wife of thy youth, against whom thou hast dealt treacherously: yet is she thy companion, and the wife of thy covenant.

15 And did not he make one? Yet had he the residue of the spirit. And wherefore one? That he might seek a godly seed. Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let none deal treacherously against the wife of his youth.
KJV
Here we see the term, "Dealt treacherously,"
This means that God recognizes this woman as his wife, not one of his wives.

I can find you many other passages as well, but what you really need to do is to ask God to show you the truth clearly. That is what I did. Right after I did, He brought to my mind Genesis 3:16
Gen 3:16

16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
KJV
He made it clear to me that polygamy was part of the curse. It set up the perfect scenario for her to desire her husband, and for him to rule over her. If you notice, the only clear references to polygamy in the Bible, are all in the Old Testament. All references to marriage in the New Testament are to one man and one wife.

1 Cor 7:3-5
The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 The wife's body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband's body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife. 5 Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.
NIV
How does this work with polygamy? How can I own my husband's body if I share him with other wives? How can I not be defrauded or denied? In polygamy it would be rule over, without any concern for my sexual desires, let alone rights. The very idea that the wife has rights here is completely in opposition to polygamy.



Matt 19:4-6
Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,

5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh ?

6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh . What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
KJV

What is interesting about this statement, is that Jesus brings them back to the very beginning. He is clearly showing that God's design for marriage is how He set it up in the beginning. If you are truly seeking God's perfect will, and not seeking to get away with what you can, then you can only conclude that he set it up correctly. He stated it was not good for man to be alone. After Eve was created, He said it was good. If it would have been better to have more wives, He would have started that way but He didn't.

Lastly I will challenge you to look clearly at every example of polygamy in scripture. Can you find any where it turned out to be a good thing? Are there any examples of closeness with each wife, or where there children weren't fighting, etc?

 

[dcnsf4eva]

well guys, I think that this is a subject to look into. def.something worth researching. but I think that the whole multi wife thing may be able to fall under adultery somewhere....maybe. cause you aren't with just your wife.... but then again I don't know. like I said worth looking into.

 

[ShermanN]

Romanseight2005,

I agree fully that monogamy is the best and part of God's ideal for marriage. In fact, I believe that in a previous post I mentioned that Jesus' words, "and the two shall become one flesh," show that Jesus fully endorsed monogamy.

Not only that, but if anyone looks at cultures where polygamy is practiced, women are typically treated badly and not as God would have them treated. And as you mentioned, even in biblical polygamous relationships there are no healthy examples of such. And I'm thankful that in America monogamy is the law.

My previous posts might sound like I'm pro-polygamy, but that's not the case at all; I'm happily married to the wife of my youth and certainly desire no other. I'm a one-woman kinda man, one could say. However, when studying scripture it's important to understand what it said to the original audience as much as possible before we try to apply it to our lives today. Unfortunately, when it comes to scripture and concepts concerning marriage, divorce, and remarriage we often misunderstand them because we understand them through the lens of being both Gentiles and Christians. If we were Arabs coming in as new Christians we would understand things differently. I'll write more later as I can.

Blessings,
Sherman