OT Polygymy and NT Chastity

[Merlin]

This discussion is about polygamy or polgyny not homosexuality or abortion. If you wish to defend the homosexuals; then maybe you should visit another thread. A homosexual know he can only have one spouse.

Abortions can legally be performed but with stipulations or conditions. Abortions must be performed in the early stages; not that I support abortion; but abortion and homosexuality both have limitations or boundaries. Homosexuality is not legal in every state; a man with one wife is universal; legal in every state and every nation. Yahweh has set me free; so a man is free to marry "one wife" in any state or any nation.

I was merely pointing out that government acceptance is not a good measure of biblical or God acceptance.

 

[BeforeThereWas]

I was merely pointing out that government acceptance is not a good measure of biblical or God acceptance.

Very true indeed.

BTW

 

[mercy1061]

Ok. I can play your word game. Let's say the marriage license IS permission to do something. It's permission for a couple, who wants it, to acquire legal recognition for their marriage.

Ok?

This is not a word game, license means "permission" from the government! I only used the dictionary to help improve our communication using words; yet you call it a game. Only children without parents dont need permission; this leads to anarchy or chaos. Children need permission from their parents to do something; lest they be called disobedient children who lack discipline or self-control. At the wedding it is customary for the father to give away his daughter to his son-in-law. Let me guess you married your wife without her father's permission. You read and understand scripture like you have no one to answer. A man that refuses to answer to authority or refuses to be accountable to anyone is deceptive and a liar. Yeshua was accountable to the governmental authority. Yes, Yeshua did request for permission:

Jesus asked the Pharisees and experts in the law, “Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath or not?” (Luke 14:3)

The heir is subject to guardians and trustees until the time set by his father. (Gal 4:2)

I hope you understand that every government official has a father.

Now, can you show me where any law exists that demands that all couples MUST acquire legal recognition for their marriage? Hmm? Have you got an answer for that, or are you going to continue side-stepping it?

There is so much proof against polgamy; yet you ask me for more proof! You will do good to follow after Jonah's example and jump off the boat to be swallowed up by a whale. There is no hope for you, just like there was no hope for Jonah. Your gospel may only be accepted by that wicked city of Nineveh; the inhabitants in that city do not know their right hand from their left. Yahweh destined to destroy them in 40 days. Jonah tells them "You have 40 days to live"....

Wait a minute. You prize yourself as being some sort of biblical brainiac, and yet you're trying to intermix two entirely different precepts.

It is you that keep complimenting me; you understand very little; you hear very little. A man can only speak what he know; you know very little.

Gen 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

There are two witesses in Gen 2:24 (mother, father).....

Can you explain to me where you see any requirement in there for witnesses, permissive licenses for a marriage, or anything else you seem to think is required for a marriage to be legitimate in the eyes of the Lord?

There are two witnesses in Gen 2:24 (mother, father).....

What about other areas of scripture? Is there some other, contradictory definition of marriage that adds those requirements you mentioned for a marriage to be legitimate in the eyes of the Lord? The presence or absence of a government has no bearing whatsoever on marriage as defined by the inspiration of the Lord. What alterations have you experienced in your perceptions of our government now that active duty, military personnel are now allowed to engage in not only homosexual conduct, but also beastiality?

So now you wish to point out flaws in government to justify your wicked behavor? You have such futile arguments, you do not read the scriptures to learn from them. The government is not your enemy; the government would follow your wisdom, if your folly was wise.

Marriage is a holy institution under the direct control of God. That's why trying to place it under some corrupt government is hardly going to ever be acceptable in the eyes of God or those who truly follow Him.

Your case is bankrupt.

BTW

You do not wear a "black robe"' therefore you should not judge.

Yahweh made Eve for Adam. Since you reject the creation account displayed by your evil thoughts; government has to teach you.

 

[mercy1061]

I was merely pointing out that government acceptance is not a good measure of biblical or God acceptance.

You are still subject to the government. The government only gives you permission to have only one spouse. You use homosexuality to support your argument; but when you hear that the government legalizing homosexual marriage did not promote your polygamy agenda; you say the government is not a good measure for biblical acceptance. You drop the homosexual argument; and continue in your folly.

 

[Aquila001]

Guys...relax for a second.

First, polygamy wasn't a sin and was permitted in the OT. In fact, God's law required it in the event that a man dies without children to perpetuate his name; his brother was to marry the widow and have children in his deceased brother's name...even if the living brother was already married. Remember, God was dealing with a nation of people, family structures resembled this tribal system.

In the NT Paul speaks of marriage symbolizing Christ and the church. One Groom....one Bride.

As for govt and marriage...there weren't marriage licenses early in US history. Two witnesses, sometimes just family, were needed. Also a document where the wife signed using husband's name. Some states have common law marriages. Marriage licenses were originally used to keep whites and blacks from marrying after emancipation. Some very conservative pastors don't like the government meddling with marriage and think that it should be a private private life choice.

 

[Lionroot]

.

In the NT Paul speaks of marriage symbolizing Christ and the church. One Groom....one Bride.

You mean the church, as in the assembly, the called out ones.

You seem to concede polygyny in the OT, and suggest that it was done away with in subtle symbols. That just doesn't float...God just is not that coy.

Consider circumcision. It starts in the OT and has a definitive end in the new. Likewise with temple rites.

Some have suggested that God must repeat himself to continue his commands in the NT, but that makes for some wacky doctrine. Consider that bestiality and incest are unmentioned in the NT. What then shall we conclude? Knowing that God is unchanging, His Law is perfect, and His Word eternal, we are driven to the conclusion that God need not repeat himself.

From my phone....
Rev 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."

 

[BeforeThereWas]

This is not a word game, license means "permission" from the government! I only used the dictionary to help improve our communication using words; yet you call it a game.

It is a word game because my marriage license says nothing about permission. What my marriage license states is that I now have legal recognition by the state for my marriage to my wife. That licesne also states that the government, by way of that licesne, now has intrusion rights into my marriage, my property and my family.

So, you can subjectively attribute only one aspect of the overall picture as the defining paradigm, but then you're betraying the rest of the picture.

Let's see what else the dictionary says about that word, shall we:

"intentional deviation from rule, convention, or fact"

Since unbelievers refuse to follow after God's definition of marriage, they have the avenue of legalities as a deviation from God's rule.

I'd venture to guess you've never even studied the history behind that marriage licesne, have you? It started as a means by which interracial couples could get around laws against interracial marriages in most states.

You still haven't shown me how the absence of that license introduces a moral violation?

Only children without parents dont need permission; this leads to anarchy or chaos.

That's pure bull. Abraham Lincoln had no license for his marriage, and neither did George Washington, and many others. Nobody before the latter 19th century had licenses for their marriages. Are you going to sit there ant tell me they had nothing but chaos? Marriage licenses are a recent phenomenon, so to assume there was noting but chaos before that piece of paper is to posit what's only absurdly and pattently false.

Children need permission from their parents to do something; lest they be called disobedient children who lack discipline or self-control.

So we're all like a bunch of children who God demanded get permission from the state to get married? What color is the sky in your world?

At the wedding it is customary for the father to give away his daughter to his son-in-law.

Ok. So my father-in-law gave me permission to marry my wife. Why, then, do I need additional permission from the government?

You REALLY need to get a grip on reality. The government doesn't even view the marriage license as permission for people to marry. Talking with the Oklahoma state Attorney General confirmed to me that the marriage license is ONLY for those who want state recognition of their marriage in cases where that license is required in order to obtain medical, dental, and marital proof to the military (should one choose to join) or companies that require such in order to provide coverage for a claimed spouse.

Dude, we don't live in a POLICE STATE (at least, not yet anyway). Government officials understand that marriage existed LONG before the licensing system came into being. You clearly are ignorant of why that license exists. Unfortunately, legal evolution has created a climate where the government now thinks it has the right to intrude into marriages beyond anything God ever allowed. Oh well, that's another discussion entirely...

I can see that you prefer the style of discussion where repeating the same fallacies magically transforms them into truth. Your ship has sunk to the bottom. You're putting forth utter falsehoods as if they're true. I've done my homework well enough to know that you have not one clue as to what you're talking about where our legal system is concerned.

Now, I'll concede you're right in relation to where you live ONLY if you can prove to me that you live in a state where the local government can imprison you for not acquiring legal recognition for your marriage, and where you are required to get permission from the government to marry.

That would mean you live in (so-called) communist North Korea or China.

BTW

 

[now faith]

God never condoned bestiality and incest. What is wacky is aligned in your post. Your creating sinfull circumstances then placing multiple wives concubines etc in same context

 

[now faith]

Trying to make polygamy a sin in the bible is unfounded. What you are doing by making this statement is that God allowed sin and gave power and prosperity to sinners. You are insulting the direct line of Christ. Their is a old saying" you don't read the bible the bible reads you.

 

[dayhiker]

I don't understand what your saying here.

Trying to make polygamy a sin in the bible is unfounded. What you are doing by making this statement is that God allowed sin and gave power and prosperity to sinners. You are insulting the direct line of Christ. Their is a old saying" you don't read the bible the bible reads you.

 

[mercy1061]

It is a word game because my marriage license says nothing about permission. What my marriage license states is that I now have legal recognition by the state for my marriage to my wife. That licesne also states that the government, by way of that licesne, now has intrusion rights into my marriage, my property and my family.

And you say you need no permission from the government? You speak as a fatherless son, who has no man to answer for his actions.

So, you can subjectively attribute only one aspect of the overall picture as the defining paradigm, but then you're betraying the rest of the picture.Let's see what else the dictionary says about that word, shall we:

"intentional deviation from rule, convention, or fact"

So as you should already know, the way a word is used determines it's meaning. Therefore "license" for purposes of our discussion would mean "permission" to be recognized by the governing authority. If a man says that he is feeling "blue" today; does he mean he is is feeling sad?

Since unbelievers refuse to follow after God's definition of marriage, they have the avenue of legalities as a deviation from God's rule.

I guess you are the only one who knows Yah's rules? Yeshua is called the "kings of kings", but you have no king so you should not pay taxes or seek a marriage license for each of your wives. You constantly read and study the scriptures to justify your behavor, never truly "understanding" them? We know Jacob had more than one wife, Abraham and Sarah were buried together with Isaac and Rebekah; according to the scriptures. You will notice that each of the patriarches were buried with one wife; Noah did also enter the "ark of the covenant" before the flood with one wife; Noah three sons each had one wife before they entered the ark. Noah also lead many wild animals into the ark, male and female; each one of the living creatures having only one helpmate. The wild animals in Noah's day who entered the "ark of the covenant" have more wisdom than you; even they knew they could only enter Noah's ark with one wife.
Therefore it is written:

Then he said, “I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.” At this, Moses hid his face, because he was afraid to look at God. (Ex 3:6)

I'd venture to guess you've never even studied the history behind that marriage licesne, have you? It started as a means by which interracial couples could get around laws against interracial marriages in most states.
You still haven't shown me how the absence of that license introduces a moral violation? That's pure bull. Abraham Lincoln had no license for his marriage, and neither did George Washington, and many others. Nobody before the latter 19th century had licenses for their marriages. Are you going to sit there ant tell me they had nothing but chaos? Marriage licenses are a recent phenomenon, so to assume there was noting but chaos before that piece of paper is to posit what's only absurdly and pattently false. So we're all like a bunch of children who God demanded get permission from the state to get married? What color is the sky in your world? Ok. So my father-in-law gave me permission to marry my wife. Why, then, do I need additional permission from the government?

You REALLY need to get a grip on reality. The government doesn't even view the marriage license as permission for people to marry. Talking with the Oklahoma state Attorney General confirmed to me that the marriage license is ONLY for those who want state recognition of their marriage in cases where that license is required in order to obtain medical, dental, and marital proof to the military (should one choose to join) or companies that require such in order to provide coverage for a claimed spouse.

Dude, we don't live in a POLICE STATE (at least, not yet anyway). Government officials understand that marriage existed LONG before the licensing system came into being. You clearly are ignorant of why that license exists. Unfortunately, legal evolution has created a climate where the government now thinks it has the right to intrude into marriages beyond anything God ever allowed. Oh well, that's another discussion entirely...

I can see that you prefer the style of discussion where repeating the same fallacies magically transforms them into truth. Your ship has sunk to the bottom. You're putting forth utter falsehoods as if they're true. I've done my homework well enough to know that you have not one clue as to what you're talking about where our legal system is concerned.

Now, I'll concede you're right in relation to where you live ONLY if you can prove to me that you live in a state where the local government can imprison you for not acquiring legal recognition for your marriage, and where you are required to get permission from the government to marry.

That would mean you live in (so-called) communist North Korea or China.

BTW

Now you wish to mention a whole lot of stuff to prove your point according the scriptures? Jacob had more than one wife, but Jacob was buried with one wife....

Jacob was buried with his fathers, who were buried with one wife. You mention the faithful men taking more than one wife; but you fail to understand how they were buried in their death. Rachel was Jacob's favorite wife, but which wife was Jacob buried with? Like I told you "Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob" could only be buried in their tomb with one wife.

How will you be buried when you die? Will your burial be remembered and recorded in the scriptures?

 

[now faith]

Have you considered the other wife's had not died yet.

 

[mercy1061]

Have you considered the other wife's had not died yet.

Jacob had more than one wife but was only buried with one wife in the sacred place of his fathers.....

Jacob was never buried with the other wife.....

Jacob buried both of his wives, but he himself was buried by his sons in the sacred place of his fathers with one wife........

 

[BeforeThereWas]

And you say you need no permission from the government?

Not even the United States government says we must have its permission to marry. You must live in another country under the totalitarian control of a corrupt regime.

You speak as a fatherless son, who has no man to answer for his actions.

And you speak as someone who enjoys creating out of nothing a false system of requirement to try and lend a false measure of support to your assumptions.

So as you should already know, the way a word is used determines it's meaning. Therefore "license" for purposes of our discussion would mean "permission" to be recognized by the governing authority.

Now THAT I can agree with...to a point. I say that because the history behind that license gives ample understanding to the limits of that definition.

That license ONLY came into existence to keep interracial couples from being imprisoned on the basis of THEN existing laws AGAINST interracial marriage. Its continuance into modern times can only be justified on the basis of pure specualtion since we're dealing with the same systems that allow women to kill their unborn and partially born children under the false pretense of personal rights and freedom.

I guess you are the only one who knows Yah's rules?

The difference is that I've quoted directly from His written word. Where's your quotes that say otherwise?

Yeshua is called the "kings of kings", but you have no king so you should not pay taxes or seek a marriage license for each of your wives.

I'm sure you thoroughly amuse and impress yourself. I do not presume to know you or your personal character traits, but what you're exhibiting here and now doesn't speak well in your favor.

You constantly read and study the scriptures to justify your behavor, never truly "understanding" them?

What behavior are you talking about? Are you yet again assuming something about someone you've never even met?

We know Jacob had more than one wife, Abraham and Sarah were buried together with Isaac and Rebekah; according to the scriptures. You will notice that each of the patriarches were buried with one wife;

That has no bearing upon the fact that they each had plural wives in life, some of which were given to them by God. I haven't yet asked them why they were all supposedly buried with only one, but maybe that's a question we'll need to ask them when the opportunity arises. Are you sure they were ALL buried with only one?

What about Gideon? He had many wives and many children.

Noah did also enter the "ark of the covenant" before the flood with one wife;

Which proves nothing about polygyny...

Noah three sons each had one wife before they entered the ark. Noah also lead many wild animals into the ark, male and female; each one of the living creatures having only one helpmate.

Which, again, proves nothing in relation to polygyny...

I already said that some had plural wives, some did not. Some were given one wife, some were given more than one. That was completely in the hands of the Most High.

The wild animals in Noah's day who entered the "ark of the covenant" have more wisdom than you; even they knew they could only enter Noah's ark with one wife.

So, you think the animal kingdom also has access to God's definition of marriage? Where does the Bible state that?

Jacob was buried with his fathers, who were buried with one wife.

Who was burried with whom was a personal choice made by the people involved, which still does not negate the morality of polygyny.

You mention the faithful men taking more than one wife; but you fail to understand how they were buried in their death.

I fail to see what bearing any of this has upon the morality of polygyny. I can't read your mind, so you'll have to yet again assume something really bad about me personally for that weakness. I never laid claim to being deity, and therefore knowing your thoughts.

How will you be buried when you die? Will your burial be remembered and recorded in the scriptures?

You do seem to have a gnack for impressing yourself with silliness.

Do you suppose ANY man living today will be remembered in scripture?

Perhaps you reinvent scripture from day to day, but I accept what was written long ago, and is therefore not under my personal, subjective control.

BTW

 

[BeforeThereWas]

Jacob had more than one wife but was only buried with one wife in the sacred place of his fathers.....

Jacob was never buried with the other wife.....

Jacob buried both of his wives, but he himself was buried by his sons in the sacred place of his fathers with one wife........

Yeah, but he never threw a boomerang, which means he never had any REAL fun in life...

See? That's about as senseless as what you're trying to ram through as alleged evidence against the morality of polygyny.

What does burial have to do with the morality of polygyny?

I will not be buried in the same place as my wife. As a matter of fact, I will be buried in a place where she's not allowed to be buried because she didn't grow up in the same place where I grew up. Does that mean I don't love her in this life?

Dude, you're scrambling about in desparation, fabricating whatever concoction you can errect from elements that simply won't support your argument structure.

Maybe Jacob, Abraham, and many others drank wine, but I don't drink ANY alcoholic beverages. Does that mean I'm living improperly? Am I living in some sort of fabricated sin in your mind for not doing so?

Come on!

The marriage bond no longer exists at the point of death. So, your air castle has yet again blown off into the winds of indifference....

BTW

 

[Lionroot]

The question it's about authorial intent, not inference.

From my phone....
Rev 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."

 

[BeforeThereWas]

I was merely pointing out that government acceptance is not a good measure of biblical or God acceptance.

Excellent point, Merlin.

That's exactly why I stated that there are many couples who have one of those licesnes from a local government, and yet who are not married in the eyes of God.

Some are living in (dare I say it) marital adultery, even though they have government recognition by way of a marriage license.

I've had churchianity folks look at me in stark disbelief when struck between the eyes by the thought that having a marriage license couldn't possibly FORCE GOD into acceptance of a relationship rooted in adultery.

But, the pseudo-spiritual will always argue that having that piece of paper from City Hall is the only means by which God endorses a marital relationship, even though I have yet to meet anyone who can substantiate that from scripture without pointing at a non-existent law requiring that all married couples acquire one in the U.S.

God's definition of marriage nowhere included government recognition...especially a government that's trying harder and harder to undermine the wishes of the people and endorse homosexual unions as wholesome and acceptable.

BTW

 

[Christopher0121]

Excellent point, Merlin.

That's exactly why I stated that there are many couples who have one of those licesnes from a local government, and yet who are not married in the eyes of God.

Some are living in (dare I say it) marital adultery, even though they have government recognition by way of a marriage license.

I've had churchianity folks look at me in stark disbelief when struck between the eyes by the thought that having a marriage license couldn't possibly FORCE GOD into acceptance of a relationship rooted in adultery.

But, the pseudo-spiritual will always argue that having that piece of paper from City Hall is the only means by which God endorses a marital relationship, even though I have yet to meet anyone who can substantiate that from scripture without pointing at a non-existent law requiring that all married couples acquire one in the U.S.

God's definition of marriage nowhere included government recognition...especially a government that's trying harder and harder to undermine the wishes of the people and endorse homosexual unions as wholesome and acceptable.

BTW

With regards to the subject of "marital adultery" please review the thread: "Divorce and Remarriage (A Different Perspective):"

The subject isn't as cut and dry as one might think.

 

[Christopher0121]

Why all the fuss over polygamy? We know that a brother was required to marry a deceased brother's wife if his deceased brother hadn't had children... even if he were already married. So, at least in this instance a man was forced into polygamy by the Law of Moses.

We also know that the culture was very patriarchal. One's children secured one's future and the agragated family wealth... the more wives one had the more children one had. We know that the Law of Moses set the standard of rights for first wives and subsequent wives. We also know that it acknowledged concubines. We know that the Law of Moses allowed for "War Brides"... even if a man was already married.

It's evident to me that God isn't so hung up on who we marry or why. God is concerned with justice and how we treat one another and our children.

Now, today we value monogamy and ooey-gooey marriage based on "love". Marriage today is very different from most marriages in biblical times. Let's realize that God tolerates a lot from mankind. Let's also realize that ethically and morally... we've come a long way. No need to repeat past mistakes... even those God tolerated.

 

[dayhiker]

Very good post Aquila,
I'm not so sure God is concern with the construct of marriage(number of spouses) or work situation( job, slave). He is concern with are we treating people justly. Just as a master can treat a slave justly, so a woman could treat a few husbands justly!
I just had to evict a tenant because he wasn't paying rent. So I'm giving him a ride home (rained on the court date) and I asked him, did I treat you justly. He said, "Yes."
Some want a 50's style marriage to be legislated when that was only the norm in marriage for 20 years or so. Couples have had to have many different ways of being marriage over the centuries because of their situations. God is with all those differences because He loves them and wants to help them. That's how I see it.