Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Does it bother anyone that the monogamy limitation is called "traditional marriage"? Why not "Biblical marriage"?
Is this a reflection of the love we have for tradition, and the disregard for Holy Scripture?
Just curious what you guys think...
Rev 5:5
5 And one of the elders said to me, "Weep no more; behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has conquered, so that he can open the scroll and its seven seals."
? ESV
Hello Again everyone!
Concerning Hebrews 11
Just so you know... I have never once considered Abraham, Moses, David etc as examples for me to follow when it comes to relationships. I have read about their lives, and unfortunately found a lot of the things they did with woman wanting.
Why? because they followed the views regarding woman of their time (for example, woman treated like property etc). It is no longer then, it is now, and woman are treated in a completely different manner, the culture is completely different.
When it comes to faith however, (which in context Hebrews 11 is talking about) I agree with the author in saying they are truly Godly men, and should be considered as such. I do try to show as much faith as they did.
I've come to the place were much of this talk about the difference between my money and God's money with the idea of stewardship is mostly semitics.Concerning the reasoning behind my views of Deuteronomy 17:17, I have always believed a king should only keep what he needs to survive, and then the rest should be given to further the kingdom (not his own coffers). What is to multiply or have many, but to have more than you need? to build up for the sake of having? As such Deuteronomy reads to me 'a king should only keep what he needs'
Does a king need more than 1 horse (or car)? you tell me, you know you're own circumstance.
Does a king need more than one wife? (the only times I can think off is when it is a necessity, such as to finalize a politically needed treaty, even then I see it as a last resort)
Does a king need more than one dollar? (well, do you trust God to meet you're needs? and can any money you receive from God truly be called yours? in fact as a king you cannot truly call taxpayer money yours)
Concerning money. I have never considered what is in my wallet as belonging to me, instead it is God's to use. (with this logic, i can actually quite happily say that I do not even keep a dollar of my own money in my wallet)
However this is extremely hard to live out, and I have been a bad Stewart with his money. I have on many occasions spent it on things I have neither asked him for permission to buy, and nor do I need it.
The phrase people like to use marriage is one man to one woman for life. That would be the minimalist view again. But this isn't phraseology from the Bible. If that was indeed God's plan from the beginning and so many of God's men had more than one wife why didn't God have his prophets speaking these words back then?
Generally, silence equals consent.
I wonder if someone will have the moral fortitude to confess their error, or if they have rather covered their ears and reached for stones.
Christ's NT teaching affirms only faithful man/woman union or celibacy/ the rest is calls sexual immorality. There is no silence. Christians dont look for some specific condemnation of something that has been excluded from what is countenanced. Disciples of Christ seek to follow Jesus NT teaching, not create straw men and look for loopholes.God's silence in condemning polygyny
I would like to apologize for several things
1. Entering into a subject I knew a lot less than I thought I knew.
2. Failing to completely defend my position. I just cannot find satisfactory answers to your questions.
3. Refusing to compromise my believes. I guess I have 'hardened my heart' to the thought that polygny may be Godly.
If you can give me an example of a current day polygamy where they entered into it while following Matthew 22:37-40, than I guess I will have no choice but believe it to be possible.
I would like to apologize for several things
1. Entering into a subject I knew a lot less than I thought I knew.
2. Failing to completely defend my position. I just cannot find satisfactory answers to your questions.
3. Refusing to compromise my believes. I guess I have 'hardened my heart' to the thought that polygny may be Godly.
If you can give me an example of a current day polygamy where they entered into it while following Matthew 22:37-40, than I guess I will have no choice but believe it to be possible.
BeforeThereWas,
Christ's NT teaching affirms only faithful man/woman union or celibacy/ the rest is calls sexual immorality.
There is no silence.
Christians dont look for some specific condemnation of something that has been excluded from what is countenanced.
Disciples of Christ seek to follow Jesus NT teaching, not create straw men and look for loopholes.
Archaenfel said:It is not a sin, nor is it holy.
From what little I know of it, polygamy is not condemned.
Neither is it uniquely blessed, as some particularly radical divisions believe that it would be.
It is entirely possible that many traditions seek to consider it a sin to spare people the conflict which often ( though not inevitably ) occurs when one seeks to share love among many.
Jealousy in affection is common; by forming a tradition which avoids that conflict.
Jealousy in affection is common; by forming a tradition which avoids that conflict.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?