What should he do with his 4 wives

[Moonshiner]

My cousin went out to win some souls with his friends.
They preached to a guy who is in one of those religions and he's married to 4 women and has kids with all of them.
He wants to be a Christian as he thinks he's being lied to in his own religion.
He seems to think that Christians want monogamy while he has a bit on his plate.What he's scared of however is what will happen to all his wives if he chooses to be a Christian?Will a church accept him with his situation and will they let him sit in church with his loved ones?

Does anyone know?

 

[Nilloc]

Find a church that allows polygamy. They're out there. The mainline churches may allow polygamy, but I'm not sure.

 

[Blank123]

Put him in touch with a pastor for counselling. Chances are that 3 marriages will not be recognized or encouraged to continue, however he would be encouraged to care for his children from all unions.

seems to me that the first wife would be recognized and all others after that would be seen as extra-marital relationships.

 

[MehGuy]

Keep one, eat the other three.

 

[gods prophetess]

there are countrys still that do alllow these kin

ds of marriages but ill jsut be praying

 

[explodingboy]

Personally, it seems only fair that he keep all of 4 in good stead, even if legally not all can be recognized, it is only fair on the children that he keep all.

To pick and choose only 1 wife to keep, would be setting a terrible example, and though polygamy is bad, it's better to keep it to a good conclusion than try to wipe the slate clean and pretend 3 of them didn't happen.

 

[gods prophetess]

i think no church should keep him away from any of his wifes

 

[Rhamiel]

this is interesting, i know that some ancient nobles in what is now france and germany had more then one wife when christianity was starting to spread, not middle ages stuff, more like like antiquity
will have to study how this issue was resolved
also i know muslims are allowed to have more then one wife
must be some kind of precident for this kinda thing allready
maybe he should abstain from relations with his wives? I dunno, never really heard of this situation before

 

[gods prophetess]

no im not sure about how to answer you on this ok

 

[Keri]

My cousin went out to win some souls with his friends.
They preached to a guy who is in one of those religions and he's married to 4 women and has kids with all of them.
He wants to be a Christian as he thinks he's being lied to in his own religion.
He seems to think that Christians want monogamy while he has a bit on his plate.What he's scared of however is what will happen to all his wives if he chooses to be a Christian?Will a church accept him with his situation and will they let him sit in church with his loved ones?

Does anyone know?

Screw what the church (some churches) thinks. I had this conversation with my 1&2 Samuel teacher. I stated that there's nothing in the Bible that forbids polygamy and it shouldn't be taught as if it is forbidden. It took my teacher a week to get back to me and he finally agreed that it's not forbidden, but it's not "recommended." *rolls eyes*

This guy should find a church/community that accepts it. I know of a community in northern California that the majority of the families live in plural marriages.

 

[Sketcher]

Screw what the church (some churches) thinks. I had this conversation with my 1&2 Samuel teacher. I stated that there's nothing in the Bible that forbids polygamy and it shouldn't be taught as if it is forbidden. It took my teacher a week to get back to me and he finally agreed that it's not forbidden, but it's not "recommended." *rolls eyes*

This guy should find a church/community that accepts it. I know of a community in northern California that the majority of the families live in plural marriages.

"Wife" in Genesis 2:24 is singular, not plural. This therefore indicates that God's design for marriage is one man and one woman, not one man and multiple women or vice versa.

 

[Nilloc]

"Wife" in Genesis 2:24 is singular, not plural. This therefore indicates that God's design for marriage is one man and one woman, not one man and multiple women or vice versa.

Which is why He never condemned polygamy one time and gave David multiple wives (2 Sam. 12:8). You'd think with all of the polygamous pagans converting to Christianity at least one of the New Testament authors may have addressed the issue, but they evidently didn't have a problem with it.

Genesis 2 is not a definition of marriage (the Bible never gives one), it's merely the first (from the author's perspective) marriage to take place. Jesus uses it as an argument against the Pharisees on divorce, but doesn't say that's only how marriage can be defined.

The first converts to Christianity were male, so does that only men can be Christians? See what that kind of reasoning can lead to? I know why conservative Christians do it, but it just doesn't make sense.

 

[Sketcher]

Which is why He never condemned polygamy one time and gave David multiple wives (2 Sam. 12:8). You'd think with all of the polygamous pagans converting to Christianity at least one of the New Testament authors may have addressed the issue, but they evidently didn't have a problem with it.

If you had multiple wives, you could not be a deacon or an elder. That constitutes a problem with it.

Genesis 2 is not a definition of marriage (the Bible never gives one), it's merely the first (from the author's perspective) marriage to take place. Jesus uses it as an argument against the Pharisees on divorce, but doesn't say that's only how marriage can be defined.

This is where you are wrong. Genesis 2:24 is God's design and therefore definition for marriage, and has been interpreted to be so by both Jewish and Christian scholars. If it is not God's definition, then it would not make sense for Jesus to use that in the case he made against the Pharisees concerning divorce, since if it is not a definition it is nothing for him or anyone else to build a case on.

The first converts to Christianity were male, so does that only men can be Christians?

I remember reading something about women not finding him at the tomb. Your argument is invalid.

 

[r035198x]

Many churches' constitutions would accept him. If it had happened while he was within the church he may have been 'disciplined' (say by removing him from authority) but since he's a new convert most churches would not impose that he divorces them before he joins them.
What would likely happen though is that the conservative and judgmental people in the church would shun him.
The realistic pastors in the church would constantly point out to him that it is difficult to take care of four families but they would not have any reasonable options to offer him as long as both wives are happy to stay in the marriage(s?).

 

[Keri]

If you had multiple wives, you could not be a deacon or an elder. That constitutes a problem with it.

A "problem" with it is not the same as something being forbidden. I stated that it wasn't recommended, but no where in the Bible is it forbidden.

Basically my 1 & 2 Samuel teacher decided to approach it this way. It's not recommened because for those in authority (kings, deacons, elders... the only time it is really mentioned) it was a heart issue. Having multiple wives would cause those in authority to be even more distracted. It's hard enough having one spouse. Having multiple wives would cause even more distraction and as a leader, you needed your attention focused on more important matters.

Please don't try to teach something as forbidden when it is clearly not.

 

[Keri]

Which is why He never condemned polygamy one time and gave David multiple wives (2 Sam. 12:8). You'd think with all of the polygamous pagans converting to Christianity at least one of the New Testament authors may have addressed the issue, but they evidently didn't have a problem with it.

Genesis 2 is not a definition of marriage (the Bible never gives one), it's merely the first (from the author's perspective) marriage to take place. Jesus uses it as an argument against the Pharisees on divorce, but doesn't say that's only how marriage can be defined.

The first converts to Christianity were male, so does that only men can be Christians? See what that kind of reasoning can lead to? I know why conservative Christians do it, but it just doesn't make sense.

Oh, and this.

 

[Nilloc]

If you had multiple wives, you could not be a deacon or an elder. That constitutes a problem with it.

The author of 1 Timothy never gives a reason for his idea on why elders should only have one wife. I think he gave it because having to take care of multiple wives would distract form church duties, thus the one wife limit. He's giving qualifications for church positions, not all Christians. The fact that he even has to say it indicates there were Christians who were in polygamous marriages.

To say that his comments indicate a 'problem' with polygamy cuts both ways: it would then indicate there was something wrong with being single and I'm sure we all know what Paul thought about that.

This is where you are wrong. Genesis 2:24 is God's design and therefore definition for marriage,

That doesn't mean its the only definition. Since we see other forms of marriage that God never gives any condemnation of. There's also 2 Sam. 12:8, which you didn't address and Exodus 21:10, which gives some rules for polygamous marriage. If it really was a 'problem' why didn't God just condemn it right there?

and has been interpreted to be so by both Jewish and Christian scholars.

Usually conservative scholars who set out to justify previously held beliefs.

If it is not God's definition, then it would not make sense for Jesus to use that in the case he made against the Pharisees concerning divorce, since if it is not a definition it is nothing for him or anyone else to build a case on.

You can say that its one definition, but you can't say that its the only one given the Bible recognizes polygamous marriages as valid. Gen. 2 also describes the wife as the husband's helper, which, going by your logic, should be the only role a wife plays in marriage.

I remember reading something about women not finding him at the tomb. Your argument is invalid.

I was talking about the first disciples that Jesus called, who were male, not the resurrection witnesses.

 

[Keri]

Many churches' constitutions would accept him. If it had happened while he was within the church he may have been 'disciplined' (say by removing him from authority) but since he's a new convert most churches would not impose that he divorces them before he joins them.
What would likely happen though is that the conservative and judgmental people in the church would shun him.
The realistic pastors in the church would constantly point out to him that it is difficult to take care of four families but they would not have any reasonable options to offer him as long as both wives are happy to stay in the marriage(s?).

That's the biggest part of this. People not fully understanding the Word. And then judging others.

 

[Going Merry]

I looked into polygamy before and it's not forbidden.
God never changes.
People had many wives.
However no mention of a wife having many husbands.

On the other hand the natural law of the land should be taken into consideration.
You shouldn't practice it if it breaks the law.

 

[Keri]

On the other hand the natural law of the land should be taken into consideration.
You shouldn't practice it if it breaks the law.

This logic doesn't really hold fast though. When do you draw the line?

In a communist country where it is illegal to hold bible studies, own a bible or be a Christian, should they hold to the law of the land and not do any these things, just to appease the law creators?

No.