sheya joie Posted January 18, 2013 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 7 Topic Count: 13 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 2,054 Content Per Day: 0.29 Reputation: 351 Days Won: 2 Joined: 03/15/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted January 18, 2013 I believe it is best for marriage to be between one man and one woman, but polygamy was never forbidden. It was regulated in the law of Moses. I believe there are certain instances where polygamy is necessary, such as in a society where the majority of men are killed off because of war. The way I know it is not a sin is because it is regulated in the law of Moses. If God considered it sinful, it wouldn't have ever been allowed by a Holy God in his law. There is also a passage that speaks of a day where 7 women will cling to 1 man in marriage because of a shortage of men. What I have found strange is the push for acceptance of homosexual marriage, which was never acceptable in the eyes of God, and the continued attack on polygamy. Polygamy is far less offensive than homosexual marriage. Point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevenseas Posted January 18, 2013 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 30 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,373 Content Per Day: 0.76 Reputation: 683 Days Won: 22 Joined: 02/28/2012 Status: Offline Share Posted January 18, 2013 Perhaps the question would be better asked if God allowed it, as He 'allowed' divorce, or, did He say "Oh...good idea....should be entertaining." Polygamy, the practice of one man having multiple wives, was common in antiquity. Though practiced in the Old Testament, polygamy was never God’s perfect plan. First, the ideal pattern of monogamous marriage of one woman and one man was established early in Genesis: “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh” (2:24). Moreover this very passage was quoted by both Jesus and Paul in defense of the sacredness and exclusivity of monogamous marriage (Matthew 19:3–9; 1 Corinthians 6:15–17; cf. 1 Corinthians 7:2). Furthermore, the Bible explicitly condemns the polygamy of Old Testament kings (Deuteronomy 17:17). Likewise, New Testament elders and deacons are called to be “the husband of but one wife” (1 Timothy 3:2, 12; Titus 1:6). Just as the requirements for church leaders set the standards of morality and spiritual maturity for all believers, so too the admonition against polygamy for the kings of Israel demonstrates the danger of this practice for all. Solomon is the quintessential example of one whose legacy of faithfulness was compromised because of his polygamous behavior. Finally, God’s disdain for polygamy is seen in its consequences. The Old Testament clearly reveals the familial strife and temptations that accompany the practice. Solomon’s peaceful and prosperous rule ended in idolatrous scandal and civil strife, for “his wives turned his heart after other gods” (1 Kings 11:4). For further study, see Gleason Archer, Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1982). MATTHEW 19:4–6 “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh?’ So they are no longer two, but one.” I copy pasted. It was so convenient; also, based on scripture and I found myself in agreement There was the discussion on slavery in another thread. Slaves were not disallowed either. But did God give everyone one or two or did mankind, through the practice of war, bring home those they had defeated, captive, to be used as convenient domestics and even, on occasion, entertainment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevenseas Posted January 19, 2013 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 30 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,373 Content Per Day: 0.76 Reputation: 683 Days Won: 22 Joined: 02/28/2012 Status: Offline Share Posted January 19, 2013 Is there some point to saying the Bible never forbids polygamy? There are many things the Bible does not forbid that people would be better off not doing. Kings of Israel were told not to multiply wives for themselves, the NT commands that elders and deacons have but ONE wife and not only that, their ENTIRE family must be in order...which is something that people with unruly children and wives who have no respect should consider before they tell others what they think God told them to tell (others) obviously not meaning that part to you Butero, and of course God set the example when he created but one woman for Adam and not seventeen. Is there some reason we should consider polygamy simply because God does not forbid it? In that context, He does not forbid slavery either...but is either one of those things really His will? I think that is what is at the heart of this discussion...not a black and white issue such as...well, God does not forbid me to take heroin, so I guess I will go ahead. While that certainly sounds quite silly to any rational person who is persuaded in their conscience by the Word of God, the Bible actually details MORE of why neither polygamy or slavery are actually something He ordained...He simply allowed it, as He allowed divorce...divorce was allowed because of the HARDNESS of men's (and women too) hearts...so God ALLOWED it. Yet, as Jesus explains, it was not always so “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh” (2:24). Moreover this very passage was quoted by both Jesus and Paul in defense of the sacredness and exclusivity of monogamous marriage (Matthew 19:3–9; 1 Corinthians 6:15–17; cf. 1 Corinthians 7:2). So yes, of course the Bible does not forbid either slavery or polygamy...but my point is, is that the issue? Isn't the issue really what is actually God's desire for his creation? It would seem to be easy enough to ascertain that by a simple examination of what, in fact, God actually created. Two people... one of each sex. In fact, that indicator is so obvious and so expressly the will of God as opposed to what God simply allows because of sin and preexisting sin, that when He had Noah build the ark, each species of animal was to be included as two by two, that is, one of each sex of each species. Don't you suppose that God might have said take two of each female? Of course the argument can be made that there was not enough room on the ark...HOWEVER, don't you think God could just have had Noah make the ark one half times larger? Solomon's problem was that he married heathen women who were idolaters, and in an attempt to please them, he joined them in their idol worship. The fact there were problems in polygamist marriages doesn't show "God's disdain" for it, anymore than the fact that 1 in 2 marriages ends in divorce would show God's disdain for the institution of marriage. First, and let's be careful here please, I never used the word disdain and that is not the word God uses either. OK, regarding Solomon, the Kings of Israel were told not to multiply wives to themselves. The command is simply not to multiply wives...and God had ALREADY instructed the Jewish men NOT to marry outside of their faith. The Bible says that Solomon's rule was marred and ended badly because his multiplied foreign wives (political arrangements which, as a King of Israel were not needed as God had promised to protect them if they obeyed Him...they did not need all these alliances...that, is the idea of someone who doesn't really trust in God) The Bible explicitly condemns the polygamy of Old Testament kings (Deuteronomy 17:17). The principal that we see, is that ANYONE in leadership...setting an example if you will...was not to indulge in polygamy, again, Solomon's wives were not God's ideas not the expression of His perfect will. I wonder what the story would have been if Solomon had not done what he did, and bedded anything he could command to get between the sheets. Again, this is the model that God intended: MATTHEW 19:4–6 “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh?’ So they are no longer two, but one.” Anything else, creates problems and is not the example that those in leadership (and oh my how they have failed) are to portray. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevenseas Posted January 19, 2013 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 30 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,373 Content Per Day: 0.76 Reputation: 683 Days Won: 22 Joined: 02/28/2012 Status: Offline Share Posted January 19, 2013 There will be cases where it is necessary, especially in the example given where 7 women will cling to 1 man because of a shortage of potential husbands. If there is actually necessity, and I do not believe that, the Bible does not call it necessity, then that necessity would exist because of sin ie: war, killing, genocide etc I might add that I do not see the point in continuing to question whether God allowed polygamy as He obviously did.... My only point has been and still is, that such a practice is not the express desire of God's heart nor is it commended in scripture. It is simply allowed as was slavery. If there is a disagreement with the above, then it shall remain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enoob57 Posted January 19, 2013 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 35 Topic Count: 99 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 41,043 Content Per Day: 7.97 Reputation: 21,386 Days Won: 76 Joined: 03/13/2010 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/27/1957 Share Posted January 19, 2013 What is the (s)(S)pirit that wishes to live on the outskirts of God's Pleasure when the center of His desire can be seen in the orignal design of beginning... but because sin (our choice) that design will not be seen in conclusion till the eternal state... the real issue of ability to focus all heart, all mind and all strength upon God Who 'IS' One then in turning to focus that bond and love upon many ? Love, Steven Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdemoss Posted January 19, 2013 Group: Royal Member Followers: 8 Topic Count: 59 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 4,402 Content Per Day: 0.99 Reputation: 2,154 Days Won: 28 Joined: 02/10/2012 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/26/1971 Share Posted January 19, 2013 David was a man after God's own heart. David was a polygamist. David had what was necessary to satisfy all the righteous requirements of having more than one wife. The only issue God had with David, according to God himself, is the issue with Uriah. Debate the issue all you want. The Word of God stands sure. It is true. Bishops and deacons should be the husband of one wife, not polygamists. A righteous man who is in the congregation of the living will never multiply wives unto himself for the purpose of multiplying wives unto himself. The difficulty we run into is truly understanding and discerning that which is the righteous thing to do in any given situation. I have no issue with a righteous man who is in the congregation of the living having multiple wives or multiple slaves as I am a wife unto Christ of many as well as his slave of many. Light shown in the darkness and the darkness comprehended it not. I speak from experience. I once was blind but now I see and it is getting clearer by the day since the day dawned and the daystar arose in my heart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enoob57 Posted January 19, 2013 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 35 Topic Count: 99 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 41,043 Content Per Day: 7.97 Reputation: 21,386 Days Won: 76 Joined: 03/13/2010 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/27/1957 Share Posted January 19, 2013 David was a man after God's own heart. David was a polygamist. David had what was necessary to satisfy all the righteous requirements of having more than one wife. The only issue God had with David, according to God himself, is the issue with Uriah. Debate the issue all you want. The Word of God stands sure. It is true. Bishops and deacons should be the husband of one wife, not polygamists. A righteous man who is in the congregation of the living will never multiply wives unto himself for the purpose of multiplying wives unto himself. The difficulty we run into is truly understanding and discerning that which is the righteous thing to do in any given situation. I have no issue with a righteous man who is in the congregation of the living having multiple wives or multiple slaves as I am a wife unto Christ of many as well as his slave of many. are you not equating an equal performance of God to us and us to others? Light shown in the darkness and the darkness comprehended it not. I speak from experience. I once was blind but now I see and it is getting clearer by the day since the day dawned and the daystar arose in my heart. Rightly divide the Word is what is required of us! What God allowed and what God desires have, because of sin, become a major division within The Scripture! Love, Steven Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allofgrace Posted January 19, 2013 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 0 Topics Per Day: 0 Content Count: 158 Content Per Day: 0.04 Reputation: 26 Days Won: 0 Joined: 10/30/2012 Status: Offline Share Posted January 19, 2013 1 Tim 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior, hospitable, able to teach; 1 Tim 3:12 Let deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well. If the qualification to be blameless for a bishop or a deacon is to be the husband of one wife then that is the qualification for every saint to have only one spouse. To wiggle from the principle is not scriptural because there is no scripture that says that one can have two wives and still be blameless on this issue. Each is accountable for their own actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevenseas Posted January 19, 2013 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 30 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,373 Content Per Day: 0.76 Reputation: 683 Days Won: 22 Joined: 02/28/2012 Status: Offline Share Posted January 19, 2013 David was a man after God's own heart. David was a polygamist. David had what was necessary to satisfy all the righteous requirements of having more than one wife. The only issue God had with David, according to God himself, is the issue with Uriah. Debate the issue all you want. The Word of God stands sure. It is true. Bishops and deacons should be the husband of one wife, not polygamists. A righteous man who is in the congregation of the living will never multiply wives unto himself for the purpose of multiplying wives unto himself. The difficulty we run into is truly understanding and discerning that which is the righteous thing to do in any given situation. I have no issue with a righteous man who is in the congregation of the living having multiple wives or multiple slaves as I am a wife unto Christ of many as well as his slave of many. Light shown in the darkness and the darkness comprehended it not. I speak from experience. I once was blind but now I see and it is getting clearer by the day since the day dawned and the daystar arose in my heart. David was an adulterer and he paid for that sin the rest of his life. David was also a murderer by proxy. God had to send the prophet in order for David to hear God's voice. David's sin separated him from God so that the voice that had once been clear, no longer was. Does God have to continually use a prophet even though that which is written is already made clear to those who have eyes to see and ears to hear? Yes, David was a man after God's heart...apparently though, it was not his heart that was the issue Your personal experience is not the experience of many other other people. At any rate, scripture is the guide, as agreed upon by those who are filled with the Spirit of God. Personal experience is never the measuring rule from which another should take their cue David, is a case in point. I am sure he would be the first to say that if he could. He died cold in his bed even though a young woman had been sent in to 'warm' him...I doubt there was anything sexual in that contact. There is no one in darkness that agrees that God made one man and one woman and did so from the first. The sinful nature of mankind who excuses their sin is what allowed polygamy and slavery and many other ills that have plagued the course of God's creation from A to long awaited Z Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdemoss Posted January 19, 2013 Group: Royal Member Followers: 8 Topic Count: 59 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 4,402 Content Per Day: 0.99 Reputation: 2,154 Days Won: 28 Joined: 02/10/2012 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/26/1971 Share Posted January 19, 2013 David was a man after God's own heart. David was a polygamist. David had what was necessary to satisfy all the righteous requirements of having more than one wife. The only issue God had with David, according to God himself, is the issue with Uriah. Debate the issue all you want. The Word of God stands sure. It is true. Bishops and deacons should be the husband of one wife, not polygamists. A righteous man who is in the congregation of the living will never multiply wives unto himself for the purpose of multiplying wives unto himself. The difficulty we run into is truly understanding and discerning that which is the righteous thing to do in any given situation. I have no issue with a righteous man who is in the congregation of the living having multiple wives or multiple slaves as I am a wife unto Christ of many as well as his slave of many. Light shown in the darkness and the darkness comprehended it not. I speak from experience. I once was blind but now I see and it is getting clearer by the day since the day dawned and the daystar arose in my heart. David was an adulterer and he paid for that sin the rest of his life. David was also a murderer by proxy. God had to send the prophet in order for David to hear God's voice. David's sin separated him from God so that the voice that had once been clear, no longer was. Does God have to continually use a prophet even though that which is written is already made clear to those who have eyes to see and ears to hear? Yes, David was a man after God's heart...apparently though, it was not his heart that was the issue Your personal experience is not the experience of many other other people. At any rate, scripture is the guide, as agreed upon by those who are filled with the Spirit of God. Personal experience is never the measuring rule from which another should take their cue David, is a case in point. I am sure he would be the first to say that if he could. He died cold in his bed even though a young woman had been sent in to 'warm' him...I doubt there was anything sexual in that contact. There is no one in darkness that agrees that God made one man and one woman and did so from the first. The sinful nature of mankind who excuses their sin is what allowed polygamy and slavery and many other ills that have plagued the course of God's creation from A to long awaited Z Do what seems good unto you and serve God as you are led. Reject what I say and believe as you will. The truth remains the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts