why is polygamy allowed in the Old Testament?

[BlindSeeker]

The idea of 'roles' IS parroted, and it's talked about alot in religious circles and has been for 15 years. I get tired of hearing it.

15 years?

The bible is much older than that.

[Guest]

The Order Of The Way

"He must increase, but I must decrease." John 3:30

What The LORD Had To Say

"My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:" John 10:27

Boys And Girls Who Hungered And Ate

"Thy words were found, and I did eat them; and thy word was unto me the joy and rejoicing of mine heart: for I am called by thy name, O LORD God of hosts." Jeremiah 15:16

Humbly Sit At Heaven's Holy Gate

"Be still, and know that I am God: I will be exalted among the heathen, I will be exalted in the earth." Psalms 46:10

Holding The Brothers And Sisters Up High

"Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves." Philippians 2:3

I Love You LORD Is Heard As They Cry

"Saying with a loud voice, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing." Revelation 5:12

Bless You Lord Jesus Praise You Abba Father

Holy Spirit Of The Living God Fall Afresh Upon This Heart Bowed To You

And Bless This Dear Family For That Holiest Of Names They Carry Is Yours, Hallelujah!

In Jesus

Love

Joe

"Search me, O God, and know my heart: try me, and know my thoughts:"

"And see if there be any wicked way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting." Psalms 139:23-24

[Xan]

22Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord.

23For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body.

24But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything.

25Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her,

26so that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word,

27that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she would be holy and blameless.

28So husbands ought also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself;

29for no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ also does the church,

30because we are members of His body.

31FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND SHALL BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH.

32This mystery is great; but I am speaking with reference to Christ and the church.

33Nevertheless, each individual among you also is to love his own wife even as himself, and the wife must see to it that she respects her husband.

What a beautiful picture well written by the Apostle Paul in Ephesians. Feminism is an afront to femininity and the way God made us. However, this only works the way God intended when both parties obey the will of God.

[firehill]

The idea of 'roles' IS parroted, and it's talked about alot in religious circles and has been for 15 years. I get tired of hearing it.

15 years?

The bible is much older than that.

The popluar sayings, 'equal but different in fucntion' AND 'difference of roles' have not even been around for 30 years . Such ideas are new, having been formulated by CBMW which also created the term 'complementarian'. Problem is they left off the 'with hierarchy' part because I am a complementarian without hierarchy as any other egal. 'Patriarchy' was too negative a term and so they created a new one which was not concise. All these new ways of expressing male dominace jst make it all sound purdy. Right now, at their cite what is being taught? That male headship will exist in heaven. But guess what? THIS is ALSO entirely NEW. CBMW has never published on eternal male headship before. They are now beginning to move to the patriarchal far right and this new teaching sounds similar to Mormonism. Patriarchy is the far right, with complementarianism far from center, egalitarianism being the middle ground and Matriarchy on the far left.

Main point is this, 30 years ago the language you use today, er 'roles' did not even exist and even now the language is ABOUT to CHANGE. Watch.

I myself believe in balance.

More on topic...what will follow? The acceptance of polygamy?

[BlindSeeker]

The idea of 'roles' IS parroted, and it's talked about alot in religious circles and has been for 15 years. I get tired of hearing it.

15 years?

The bible is much older than that.

The popluar sayings, 'equal but different in fucntion' AND 'difference of roles' have not even been around for 30 years . Such ideas are new, having been formulated by CBMW which also created the term 'complementarian'. Problem is they left off the 'with hierarchy' part because I am a complementarian without hierarchy as any other egal. 'Patriarchy' was too negative a term and so they created a new one which was not concise. All these new ways of expressing male dominace jst make it all sound purdy. Right now, at their cite what is being taught? That male headship will exist in heaven. But guess what? THIS is ALSO entirely NEW. CBMW has never published on eternal male headship before. They are now beginning to move to the patriarchal far right and this new teaching sounds similar to Mormonism. Patriarchy is the far right, with complementarianism far from center, egalitarianism being the middle ground and Matriarchy on the far left.

Main point is this, 30 years ago the language you use today, er 'roles' did not even exist and even now the language is ABOUT to CHANGE. Watch.

I myself believe in balance.

More on topic...what will follow? The acceptance of polygamy?

If you read my post correctly, you would know I am not for polygamy.

[firehill]

The idea of 'roles' IS parroted, and it's talked about alot in religious circles and has been for 15 years. I get tired of hearing it.

15 years?

The bible is much older than that.

The popluar sayings, 'equal but different in fucntion' AND 'difference of roles' have not even been around for 30 years . Such ideas are new, having been formulated by CBMW which also created the term 'complementarian'. Problem is they left off the 'with hierarchy' part because I am a complementarian without hierarchy as any other egal. 'Patriarchy' was too negative a term and so they created a new one which was not concise. All these new ways of expressing male dominace jst make it all sound purdy. Right now, at their cite what is being taught? That male headship will exist in heaven. But guess what? THIS is ALSO entirely NEW. CBMW has never published on eternal male headship before. They are now beginning to move to the patriarchal far right and this new teaching sounds similar to Mormonism. Patriarchy is the far right, with complementarianism far from center, egalitarianism being the middle ground and Matriarchy on the far left.

Main point is this, 30 years ago the language you use today, er 'roles' did not even exist and even now the language is ABOUT to CHANGE. Watch.

I myself believe in balance.

More on topic...what will follow? The acceptance of polygamy?

If you read my post correctly, you would know I am not for polygamy.

I mentioned polygamy in relation to CBMW now moving towards the far right, since it is now being taught at their site that male headship is eternal (or will exist in heaven) which sounds like mormonism. I didn't have you in mind when I questioned a leaning in the near future towards more extremism. 'Complementarianism' taught by CBMW will reach it's final destination eventualy, I am sure of it.

I say we should all strive for the middle ground becasue balance is good.

[Ovedya]

What is "CBMW"?

[firehill]

What is "CBMW"?

The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. CBMW a leading organization on the teachings of complementarianism. It formed in oppositon to growing egalitarianism. It 'serves as the evangelical voice for the biblical view of gender to the Christian community and the world.'

http://www.cbmw.org/Why-We-Exist#partnering

Co-founder and once president of the council is, Wayne Grudem: Biblical Foundations for Manhood and Womanhood, Evangelical Feminism: A New Path to Liberalism?, Evangelical Feminism and Biblical Truth: An Analysis of Over 100 Disputed Questions, Pastoral Leadership for Manhood and Womanhood, Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood: A Response to Evangelical Feminism.

CBMW also formed the Danvers Statement. http://www.cbmw.org/Danvers

'Mission

The mission of The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood is to set forth the teachings of the Bible about the complementary differences between men and women, created equally in the image of God, because these teachings are essential for obedience to Scripture and for the health of the family and the church.'

http://www.cbmw.org/Our-Mission-&-Vision

[glorywatch]

Why did God allow polygamy in the Old Testament? The Bible does not specifically say why God allowed polygamy. The best anyone can do is

[traveller]

There are those that wish to change the paradigm of this forum. While we welcome open discussions on a number of issues, we do not tolerate those that are singularly focused on teaching an opinion as if it were the truth. Worthyboards was created to lift up Jesus - to glorify His Name. When members center all their postings on one idea, one subject, which is lifting up something besides Christ, it becomes an unbalanced message, an unbalanced quest.

What does it matter how many women were at the crucifixion, if it takes our eyes off the One hanging on the cross, even if for a fraction of a second? And why notice the women at the tomb instead of looking at the One Who emerged victoriously from it? While we should be encouraged to study each and every aspect of His word, this should not take away from the overall message, which is found in Jesus Christ, who came that we might have life- life more abundantly.

My point here is this: while each of us have our own beliefs on various issues in the word, and are at liberty to discuss those at appropriate times, it is not an acceptable behavior to be so single focused as to alter the course of every thread that a member engages in to shift it to their own teaching.

The hour is late, saints. The earth is groaning. Mankind should look up