Anything more than one can be considered "many". No, answer me this, truthfully why did Jacob ask his uncle after he laid with Leah "why have you caused me to sin against God...?" Being that in his heart he desired Rachael. If he could have them both without the notion of sin, why pose this question...?
Source please!
Deuteronomy 14-17 EVS states: when you come to the land that the Lord your God is giving you, and you possess it and dwell in it and then say, 'I will set a king over me, like all nations that are around me,' you may indeed set a king over you whom the Lord your God will choose. One from among your brothers you shall set as king over you. You may not put a foreigner over you, who is not your brother. Only he must not acquire many horses for himself or cause the people to return to Egypt in order to acquire many horses, since the Lord has said to you, 'you shall never return that way again.' And he shall not acquire many wife's for himself, lest his heart turn away, nor shall he acquire for himself excessive silver and gold.
God bless.
Where did God ordain playing Wii? It doesn't matter. Was the practice prohibited? Clearly there were polygamists in the OT. Why did God give them the Law? So they wouldn't be ignorant of their sin. If polygamy were a sin then God would have prohibited it in his law. He prohibited having sex with animals for crying out loud! Which do you think was more common?I would be delighted to have you list all the places in the Bible where God ordained polygamy as an acceptable form of marriage.
No confusion here. I think you're confused on the purposed of God's Law.One thing I think you're confused on is, yes, there are accounts of polygamy in the Bible. Did God ordain it or was it just listed as happening because it happened.
God clearly lists murder as a sin. In addition, it is a clear violation of "love your neighbor". Not the case with polygamy.If it was the former, then God has ordained murder too because the Bible lists times where men committed murder (i.e. Cain, Moses, David). If polygamy is the latter and just put in the Bible as part of the story no matter how unbecoming it was of Godly men, then we must recognize it as such.
This is the reply of someone who can't admit they are wrong.Scriptural Twister anyone? Right elbow to green. Left knee to yellow.
A wife was the possession of the husband in the OT...he paid for her. OT adultery is a special type of theft.Thou shalt not commit adultery. Thou shalt not steal. Two very different commands. Both of them made God's Top Ten List. How can you say they say the same thing? Should it be called the Nine Commandments?
Polygamists aren't sinning. God blessed David up until the day he sinned. His sin wasn't polygamy or having concubines. His sin was CLEARLY adultery with Bathsheba...While true that perfect love casts out fear, it is good to realize that He is still God and He has not given us this grace so that we may continue in our sin.
Anything more than one can be considered "many". No, answer me this, truthfully why did Jacob ask his uncle after he laid with Leah "why have you caused me to sin against God...?" Being that in his heart he desired Rachael. If he could have them both without the notion of sin, why pose this question...?
I am sorry I misread the text and mixed up Joseph and Jacob...the Scripture I misquoted was Gen 29:23-25...I will admit I was wrong on this...it appears after reading this that God was ok with Jacob having more than one wife but I don't know for sure. For now, I will stick to my one lady and abide by the law of the land...
I am honestly stumped by this maybe it is true that multiple wives are permitted but how many is one too many?
The fact that there is 25+ page thread about whether premarital sex is wrong on a Christian Theology forum tells a tale about the time we live in.
We can disect the term "sexual immorality" all we want, but whatever "sexual immorality" is, is no question a sin. So what is sexual immorality? If sexual immorality is not premarital sex, than what is it exactly? Especially when adultery is grounds for divorce, paul's reference that people should get married if they cannot control themselves, and Jesus himself said that if you look at a woman with lust in your heart you have sinned, to assume that sexual immorality is anything other than premarital sex is almost laughable or lamentable im not sure which. It reminds me of Bill Clinton's famous quote "It depends on what the meaning of the words 'is' is" Using semantics to try and wiggle one's way around an obviously addressed issue is never a good thing.
All this to say, disagree if you like, but answer my one question. If the term "sexual immorality" is not referring to premarital sex, what is it referring to exactly? If one can say it does not mean premarital sex, then the burden is on them to say what it does mean exactly, if a legitimate scripturally backed claim on what it could mean other than that is presented, I may contemplate the subject further.
If you want to indulge a serious study of Biblical sexual ethics then start with this:
Amazon.com: Divine Sex: Liberating Sex from Religious Tradition (9781553954002): Philo Thelos: Books
CC
To be honest, this is not an issue that I think needs studying, its is very clear to me what the Bible means about sexual immorality in regards to premarital sex. That's why my question was for someone to provide a working definition of what sexual immorality would mean other than premarital sex and why to assume it does not mean premarital sex. Until then I see no reason to embark on research about the issue since I see no discrepancy in my belief. (My tone always comes across as formal or gruff, that's just how I type, my apologies). Also there are alot of books out there with twisted theology, you can interpret the Bible to say about most anything if you want to. That is the problem with highschool and college english professors, if you do not interpret the story the way they do then you are incorrect. The point should be what the author meant, not the way it can be interpreted to fit the readers needsIf you want to indulge a serious study of Biblical sexual ethics then start with this:
CC
To be honest, this is not an issue that I think needs studying, its is very clear to me what the Bible means about sexual immorality in regards to premarital sex. That's why my question was for someone to provide a working definition of what sexual immorality would mean other than premarital sex and why to assume it does not mean premarital sex. Until then I see no reason to embark on research about the issue since I see no discrepancy in my belief. (My tone always comes across as formal or gruff, that's just how I type, my apologies). Also there are alot of books out there with twisted theology, you can interpret the Bible to say about most anything if you want to. That is the problem with highschool and college english professors, if you do not interpret the story the way they do then you are incorrect. The point should be what the author meant, not the way it can be interpreted to fit the readers needs
Also, to mention, if adultery is wrong (which Biblically it is), then let's analyze why it is wrong. It is wrong because it is breaking the bond a man and a woman have to each other through sex. But if premarital sex is not wrong, then why would adultery be wrong? Because you pledged through marriage to never have sex with another woman? Well if premarital sex is not wrong then what is the significance of that pledge, it is of no meaning since sex with other woman is not of moral significance anyway. (following the logic presented on premarital sex). In my opinion, Premarital sex being okay but adultery not being ok is a conflict of ideas. Either they are both ok or both not ok.
Is this a trap somehow?So if all sex outside of marriage is immoral, then why is prostitution OK?
I think the issue is more with monogomy than with pre marital sex, "marriage" is just a piece of paper and people get divorced all the time. The real issue is the monogomy, commitment and what your intentions are in your heart, not if you got a piece of paper signed by a clerk in a state office.
I believe that if you are out sleeping around that is wrong but if your having sex with your "fiance" whom you are commited to, the church is playing with fire if they say one word to you because it is a gray area when you start talking about wedding cerimoy requirements since its not in the bible.
Notice He said if a man lust after a woman he has already committed adultery in his heart.
To be honest, this is not an issue that I think needs studying, its is very clear to me what the Bible means about sexual immorality in regards to premarital sex.
That's why my question was for someone to provide a working definition of what sexual immorality would mean other than premarital sex and why to assume it does not mean premarital sex.
The point should be what the author meant, not the way it can be interpreted to fit the readers needs
Also, to mention, if adultery is wrong (which Biblically it is), then let's analyze why it is wrong. It is wrong because it is breaking the bond a man and a woman have to each other through sex.
But if premarital sex is not wrong, then why would adultery be wrong?
If you are committed to your "fiance" then why can't you wait till you are Married?
What if something happens before you get married and they end up not being "The One" and you end up marrying someone else?
Now you just wasted this precious gift that God gave you on someone other than your husband.
You may know that you are planning to be committed to that person but why not wait till you both have committed with God as your witness?
Is there really such a rush?
You have the rest of your lives to have Sex or at least you should, if you are truly committed. Marriage is supposed to be a bond between a man and a woman and sex is supposed to be the final unity of that bond. So wait and save it for that special day.