Monogamy

[Chie]

Well then we're all rather damned from the start, aren't we? Because we can never know the truth, only our PERCEPTION of the truth

Man's PERCEPTION will cause him not to see or understand the truth. So for that man his . PERCEPTION is stronger than the truth.
The Word tells us, "there is a way that seemth right to a man". and the Word tells us " not to lean on our own understanding". And no , not all of us are damned, if we abide in him and he abide in us.

 

[dayhiker]

- but if you're thinking polygamy and other types of sexual issues are fine, then who's to say this man you met with is so wrong in his diagnosis?
Who wants to go back to someone that doesn't tell us what we want to hear about the spiritual condition we believe we have??

Nobody here can say anything either way - but I don't discount his 'counseling' (that he's a legalist) just becuz you disagree with him - and I can't know the situation nor do I need to.

Follow God's word, it's very clear.

Amen ... love God's word.

Hi Nadiine,
I have quite a few Christian freinds, including pastors who know what I believe. They disagree with me, but we still are freinds. They know I'm being honest and not trying to justify sin. I get together with them to share our livee with each other.
There are issue after issue that Christians disagree one. Issues such as freewill vs God's soveignty; views of the rapture and the future; what books are to be included in the offical list of scirptures; the relationship of law and grace; fundametalism and reformed views of history. Then there are other things that I've seen change in my own life, things like is it a sin to eat food in resturant that served alcahol and many others...

I read writtings and listen to preachers that put down Christians who hold one more of the views above. Clearly all these views aren't true. I have my views on many of the issues. But there are believers on each of those issues that know more than I do, that love God and have served God in effectiently than I have. Jesus will not allow me to question their love for for God. So I have and will fellowship with them. I expect to see them in heaven continuing to love God. I don't question the Jesus they worship, like that man did mine.

Now if a person believed Adam and Eve's sin didn't bring sin upon all mankind. Nor that Jesus is the eternal Son of God, born of a virgin, lived in obedience to God all his life and died for us being resurrected 3 days later, I'd question their knowing Jesus.

That's how I look at the Body of Christ.
dayhiker

 

[Sojourner<><]

Amen ... love God's word.

Hi Nadiine,
I have quite a few Christian freinds, including pastors who know what I believe. They disagree with me, but we still are freinds. They know I'm being honest and not trying to justify sin. I get together with them to share our livee with each other.
There are issue after issue that Christians disagree one. Issues such as freewill vs God's soveignty; views of the rapture and the future; what books are to be included in the offical list of scirptures; the relationship of law and grace; fundametalism and reformed views of history. Then there are other things that I've seen change in my own life, things like is it a sin to eat food in resturant that served alcahol and many others...

I read writtings and listen to preachers that put down Christians who hold one more of the views above. Clearly all these views aren't true. I have my views on many of the issues. But there are believers on each of those issues that know more than I do, that love God and have served God in effectiently than I have. Jesus will not allow me to question their love for for God. So I have and will fellowship with them. I expect to see them in heaven continuing to love God. I don't question the Jesus they worship, like that man did mine.

Now if a person believed Adam and Eve's sin didn't bring sin upon all mankind. Nor that Jesus is the eternal Son of God, born of a virgin, lived in obedience to God all his life and died for us being resurrected 3 days later, I'd question their knowing Jesus.

That's how I look at the Body of Christ.
dayhiker

to that. It's the Truth that unites us and error that separates.

 

[livingword26]

When you say "obvious clear meaning" you should say "obvious clear meaning TO ME". And to assign negative motives to someone who understands the word differently than you do is judgemental and, frankly, shows ignorance, pride, and closed-mindedness. If you're not willing to consider a different understanding of the Word than what is currently "obvious and clear to you", that's ok, just state such, but don't accuse others of negative motives.

If one takes "husband of one wife" literally then in order to be a leader in a local church one must be a man and married. Furthermore because it also says in v.4 that he must have "children in subjection with all reverence", not only must a leader be a man and married, but he must also have children (as in more than two). That's the "obvious and clear meaning" isn't it. Thus women, singles, widowers, and even a married man with no children cannot be elders. Only married men who have children can be elders. -- Of course, I'm being sarcastic. This is the kind of foolishness that one arrives at if one is focused on what is literally said, as opposed to trying to understand what the author meant by what he wrote.

You are kind of proving my point for me. Thank you. There are obviously times when the bible is prophetic, and or symbolic, and obvious times when it is literal, and or instructional. These verse are instructions on how to structure a church. To try to take them any other way than literal would be an attempt to fit a doctrine.

 

[Nadiine]

I have quite a few Christian freinds, including pastors who know what I believe. They disagree with me, but we still are freinds. They know I'm being honest and not trying to justify sin. I get together with them to share our livee with each other.
There are issue after issue that Christians disagree one. Issues such as freewill vs God's soveignty; views of the rapture and the future; what books are to be included in the offical list of scirptures; the relationship of law and grace; fundametalism and reformed views of history. Then there are other things that I've seen change in my own life, things like is it a sin to eat food in resturant that served alcahol and many others...

I read writtings and listen to preachers that put down Christians who hold one more of the views above. Clearly all these views aren't true. I have my views on many of the issues. But there are believers on each of those issues that know more than I do, that love God and have served God in effectiently than I have. Jesus will not allow me to question their love for for God. So I have and will fellowship with them. I expect to see them in heaven continuing to love God. I don't question the Jesus they worship, like that man did mine.

Now if a person believed Adam and Eve's sin didn't bring sin upon all mankind. Nor that Jesus is the eternal Son of God, born of a virgin, lived in obedience to God all his life and died for us being resurrected 3 days later, I'd question their knowing Jesus.

That's how I look at the Body of Christ.
dayhiker

Well... yes.... but we still have demons who believe in God and tremble - it doesn't make one saved. Satan believes too.
Actually, I've seen many views from so many different people who claim to be born again believers (Christians) - and I don't accept that everyone is just becuz they say they are.
Fruit shows a lot & what they accept & deny as truth shows a lot. I'm not here to assess anyone's salvation - nor could I with CF's rules, but God knows who are His.

Mat 7:21-23 shows us that many who think they know Him actually do not.
We're told to work out our salvation w/ fear & trembling, and that if the righteous scarcely enter in, what will become of the ungodly and the sinner?
That's sobering stuff to me - I do know that while it's not my job to sit around assessing everyone's salvation, there are many I will not 'unite' with just becuz they claim they believe in God becuz they're doctrines or beliefs are contrary to important doctrines.

I do use discernment & assess fruit as the Lord tells me to and I think it would be healthy if we all did that.

 

[Nadiine]

One has to consider the possibility of bias in making such a judgement.

Well, first off, Bias can be present on BOTH sides of any argument or issue.

One can be biased yet be fair in the process.

Bias isn't always bad. Being biased to the truth you do have is [spiritually] good (and helps protect us from false teachings)

We all have biases

 

[Nadiine]

True, but as the male/female roles in procreation are physically different, the male/female roles in relationships may also be different.

I don't know specifically what you mean by this - maybe you can show me a biblical example of how love operates one way for the male/husband and another way for the female/wife?
Ie. "Love" means one thing for one sex and something else the other?

Even still, I don't see how that upholds polygamy as God's design for a marriage with the verses & grammar used in context surrounding it.

 

[Sojourner<><]

Well, first off, Bias can be present on BOTH sides of any argument or issue.

One can be biased yet be fair in the process.

Bias isn't always bad. Being biased to the truth you do have is [spiritually] good (and helps protect us from false teachings)

We all have biases

Ah but Truth is absolute and is therefor objective.

 

[Nadiine]

Nadiine, just because someone understands the Word differently than you doesn't mean that they "study the Bible to a literal death of it's pure meaning."

I didn't say understands a passage or doctrine like me - I'm specifically speaking of people picking up a lexicon, finding 1 word (that often carries up to 5 different meanings) and forming their belief around that 1 word the way they THINK it meant in the passage.

Errgo, the biased homosexual will gravitate to anything they can that speaks to "temple prostitution" or "spiritual ritual worship" meanings so that the verse no longer means what it seems to upon first read.
THAT is studying to a literal DEATH of a passage's meaning.
Yanking out 1 word in word searches, not knowing any Greek/Hebrew Grammar rules or customs & making new doctrine up as they go along (usually doctrines that suit their preconcieved or biased preferences).

Claiming someone else has bad motives only shows a lack of respect for yourself and for others. The truth is we all have a mixture of good and bad motives and we need to walk in grace towards eachother.

People DO often have bad motives - it's a fact that shouldn't be left out or ignored. I made no accusations about anyone here tho nor could I.

Concerning "higher education", I hope that everyone at least uses a concordance! Various study Bibles are good. Commentaries are helpful. etc. There is a wealth of information available to those willing to invest their time and money to access it.

Yes I agree. But laypeople can use them to RUIN meanings and even believe wrong meanings. It's equally important to seek educated teachers (who God says He has appointed teach His word 1 Cor 12-14) to find out something as well before we grasp at error in our ignorance.

Concerning the examples that you demanded of polygamy being promoted in the NT, there are none. As I explained before, if one understands the cultural context, Jesus use of the word "two" indicates that He endorsed monogamy. The apostles would have understood that and would certainly have said nothing to contradict it.

"indicates" that He endorsed.... He gave the model of the marital unit - 1 man and 1 woman - He not only endorsed it, HE PREACHED IT as truth; directly ruling out homosexuality, bestiality and polygamy in one passage.

The rest of the NT verses only support Jesus' statement in using SINGULAR grammar for NT Christian marriages.

However, though Jesus endorsed monogamy, He did not legislate monogamy or forbid polygamy.

If you give the guideline for what is proper, it doesn't PROMOTE anything else. In fact, once you give the Model/Prototype, THAT RULES OUT ALL ELSE by definition.
Saying that Jesus didn't forbid it specifically doesn't float when He taught what is RIGHT & what God accepts (namely in the NT). If something is morally RIGHT, its counterparts are then "wrong" or "NOT desired" or intended by God specifically by default aren't they? Just like Divorce.
If you know God's MODEL for marriage is 1 man and 1 woman and instead go for 2+ women, aren't you in essense promoting YOUR personal appetite over God's intended and lawful intention for marriage?
I'd say yes & I'd go further to say, there's a spiritual issue [flesh] at the very heart of such a desire to seek something contrary to His original will and intention in design.

Would you go as far as to say, POLYGAMY IS GOD'S WILL? (knowing the NT doesn't promote polygamy anywhere and offers ZERO examples of any Godly polygamists in the churches?)

But I've already explained that, and to repeat the argument here would be beating a dead horse. But of course, I don't mean beating a dead horse (an idiomatic phrase), what I mean is it would be a useless waist of time and effort. It would almost be as useless as writing a post full of proof texts and then copying and posting that post again.

Yes, I'm aware of what beating a dead horse means as well as "you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink" (which is also what I see often in religious debate).

 

[Nadiine]

*I'd like to add another note here to my previous post in reply to Sherman --
Can somebody find me one law against child molestation / pedophilia or porn? Or even over-spanking/beating (not sure on that one)

I don't recall those laws being the bible; promoted or discouraged specifically... I think the laws of LOVE cover that by themselves.
Or Eph 6 for a parent not to exhasperate their children. - but it's not in there specifically that I know of.

So I think in some things, like polygamy, something doesn't have to be specifically condemned to be wrong - namely when God gives His guideline on what His will is.

 

[mcart909]

If something is morally RIGHT, its counterparts are then "wrong" or "NOT desired" or intended by God specifically by default aren't they?

Not really. After all, Paul said that he who marries is all right but he who doesn't marry does one better.

 

[Nadiine]

[/size][/font]

Not really. After all, Paul said that he who marries is all right but he who doesn't marry does one better.

Neither is "wrong" tho. There's no standard set as to marriage; not Everyone is designed to marry and not everyone is designed to stay single and both are lawful with God.

Paul was merely clarifying that to serve God wholly, it's better to stay single and not be split in your devotion where you have to keep a steady job to provide for your family - you're "tied down" and limited.
But it wasn't a guideline that it's RIGHT NOT TO MARRY.
As if he set an emphatic standard or guideline on marriage.

Obviously, God WANTS marriage, otherwise there would be no more human species since procreation is only allowable within the boundaries of marriage.

 

[mcart909]

Let's say:

-I have two wives.
-The three of us live together; hence, both wives receive constant attention and affection.
-My two wives are friends; best friends, in fact.

What's wrong with this scenario? Is it possible?

Anyone?

 

[ShermanN]

Sherman, do you think my argument about the letter to the Hebrews and Mat 25 is valid? Granted, the NT doesn't outright endorse polygamy, but it seems to infer that it is honorable as marriage in general is honorable.

The Hebrews argument is positive, very strong, marriage should be considered honorable and the bed kept undefiled whether it's a monogamous, polygamous, or polyandrous marriage. That is likely how the primary audience would have heard and understood the passage, especially considering they were Semetic with polygamy as a viable part of their culture. Very good, solid point!

Culture has far more influence on us than we realize. We understand everything (including the Bible) through the lens of our culture. To see things apart from one's personal cultural lens takes a conscious deliberate decision and focused effort. It takes a recognition that my culture has its own unique problems and is not necessarily the best culture; in fact, it's a mess just like every other culture.

Concerning the American/European view of marriage, much of it is based upon Greco-Roman thought and not the Bible. When we read the Bible, we understand it through lens' that are formed by Greco-Roman thought and philosophy. People who think they understand the Bible or anything else apart from their cultural prejudices are naive. Your original question/comment concerning culture and how we view polygamy is valid.

The Mt.25 argument is weak though, imo. It's a weak argument because metaphors/parables are used to illustrate or explain typically one central truth; in the process they might also illustrate or explain a couple of other non-central truths. It's difficult to use the metaphor/parable to either support or oppose a side issue that the parable is not directly addressing. It does give one food for thought though.

Blessings,
Sherman

 

[Chie]

The Hebrews argument is positive, very strong, marriage should be considered honorable and the bed kept undefiled whether it's a monogamous, polygamous, or polyandrous marriage. That is likely how the primary audience would have heard and understood the passage, especially considering they were Semetic with polygamy as a viable part of their culture. Very good, solid point!

Culture has far more influence on us than we realize. We understand everything (including the Bible) through the lens of our culture. To see things apart from one's personal cultural lens takes a conscious deliberate decision and focused effort. It takes a recognition that my culture has its own unique problems and is not necessarily the best culture; in fact, it's a mess just like every other culture.

Concerning the American/European view of marriage, much of it is based upon Greco-Roman thought and not the Bible. When we read the Bible, we understand it through lens' that are formed by Greco-Roman thought and philosophy. People who think they understand the Bible or anything else apart from their cultural prejudices are naive. Your original question/comment concerning culture and how we view polygamy is valid.

The Mt.25 argument is weak though, imo. It's a weak argument because metaphors/parables are used to illustrate or explain typically one central truth; in the process they might also illustrate or explain a couple of other non-central truths. It's difficult to use the metaphor/parable to either support or oppose a side issue that the parable is not directly addressing. It does give one food for thought though.

Blessings,
Sherman

We are to follow God rather than the traditions of men.

 

[Nadiine]

Culture has far more influence on us than we realize. We understand everything (including the Bible) through the lens of our culture. To see things apart from one's personal cultural lens takes a conscious deliberate decision and focused effort. It takes a recognition that my culture has its own unique problems and is not necessarily the best culture; in fact, it's a mess just like every other culture.

James 4:17 Therefore, to one who knows the right thing to do and does not do it, to him it is sin.

 

[mcart909]

Neither is "wrong" tho. There's no standard set as to marriage; not Everyone is designed to marry and not everyone is designed to stay single and both are lawful with God.

Nadiine, you are begging the question; you are assuming that which you must prove.

According to Paul, it is good to marry, and it is good to stay single; but it it is better to stay single than to marry. Similarly, perhaps it is good to take one wife and good to take two wives; but it is better to take one wife only. (Or, perhaps it's equally good to be monogamous or polygamous).

I don't think it is permissible to make a blanket statement like "polygamy is wrong" when there is a clear Biblical standard of Godly men practising it without condemnation or chastisement from God. It is not for everyone, but most things aren't. When it come to issues such as this, I believe it is up to the individual to look at his/her own situation and consider what God would want in his/her life.

 

[Nadiine]

Let's say:

-I have two wives.
-The three of us live together; hence, both wives receive constant attention and affection.
-My two wives are friends; best friends, in fact.

What's wrong with this scenario? Is it possible?

Anyone?

I hear people use this same argument to condone Porn, fornication, lying, stealing.
Just becuz you think something "works" well, doesn't mean it in fact DOES work, or doesn't harm you or those involved... or that it doesn't affect all those around you.

Stop & think about it - in a culture where monogamy is law, you have 2 wives (illegal) which is a bad witness.
Even the secular would find you perverted or immoral by it.

Other than that, God's ways & understanding are higher than yours, if HE designs 2 as ONE unit, why are you pushing 3+ as if that's better?
Imo, more than 1 wife is more of a hinderance anyways; not only financially, but one woman is more than enough to handle - most men look at it in the SEXUAL aspects (which is FLESH SPEAKING), but having 2 is alot harder to deal with and more time consuming...

Long story short, it's NOT EASY. The mormon documentary I saw on it proved that clearly! And even women who are FOR polygamy still admitted they had jealousy issues and struggled with having his undivided attn. for their emotional needs.
No woman who intimately loves her husband is "OK" with hearing him in the next room, carrying on with the other woman in a sexual session! If they sincerely aren't bothered by something like that, I'd question the level of love or their possible lack of spirituality or something.

 

[Chie]

[/SIZE][/FONT]

Nadiine, you are begging the question; you are assuming that which you must prove.

According to Paul, it is good to marry, and it is good to stay single; but it it is better to stay single than to marry. Similarly, perhaps it is good to take one wife and good to take two wives; but it is better to take one wife only. (Or, perhaps it's equally good to be monogamous or polygamous).

I don't think it is permissible to make a blanket statement like "polygamy is wrong" when there is a clear Biblical standard of Godly men practising it without condemnation or chastisement from God. It is not for everyone, but most things aren't. When it come to issues such as this, I believe it is up to the individual to look at his/her own situation and consider what God would want in his/her life.

The instructions to the Church on marriage doesn't include "wives" to one man. But does make it clear one man and one woman, one husband and one wife.

 

[mcart909]

I hear people use this same argument to condone Porn, fornication, lying, stealing.
Just becuz you think something "works" well, doesn't mean it in fact DOES work, or doesn't harm you or those involved... or that it doesn't affect all those around you.

Stop & think about it - in a culture where monogamy is law, you have 2 wives (illegal) which is a bad witness.
Even the secular would find you perverted or immoral by it.

Other than that, God's ways & understanding are higher than yours, if HE designs 2 as ONE unit, why are you pushing 3+ as if that's better?
Imo, more than 1 wife is more of a hinderance anyways; not only financially, but one woman is more than enough to handle - most men look at it in the SEXUAL aspects (which is FLESH SPEAKING), but having 2 is alot harder to deal with and more time consuming...

Long story short, it's NOT EASY. The mormon documentary I saw on it proved that clearly! And even women who are FOR polygamy still admitted they had jealousy issues and struggled with having his undivided attn. for their emotional needs.
No woman who intimately loves her husband is "OK" with hearing him in the next room, carrying on with the other woman in a sexual session! If they sincerely aren't bothered by something like that, I'd question the level of love or their possible lack of spirituality or something.

Stop & think about it - in a culture where monogamy is law, you have 2 wives (illegal) which is a bad witness.
Even the secular would find you perverted or immoral by it.

1) The laws of God transcend the laws of man. The State has no right to stick its nose in the Divine Institutution of Marriage. Marriage is between the bethrothed and God. (What if the State decided that Communion can no longer be practised? Would it be sinful to take Communion then?)

2) If I decided to take two wives (I wouldn't consider taking any more), I would probably move to another country.

Other than that, God's ways & understanding are higher than yours, if HE designs 2 as ONE unit, why are you pushing 3+ as if that's better?

1) My first wife and I would be one unit, and my second wife and I would be one unit also.

2) It has not been established that monogamy is God's unequivocal plan.

3) I can think of at least one situation in which polygamy would be preferable to monogamy, all things considered. Let's say my first wife fought cancer for a period of several years. This could be an extremely taxing experience, and the moral support of a second wife during this time would be a Godsend.