-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
J
God clearly hates divorce, as Jesus said.
Is divorce and polygamy really all that different when you stop and think about it, as we are talking about multiple husbands/wives? Could polygamy be yet another thing that was "never intended from the beginning"?
And if that is the case, would any marriage after the first be recognized in the eyes of God or would it be viewed as adultery (IF the first marriage was not ruined due to adultery, as Jesus recognized in Matthew 19:9)?
So if a man had five "wives", would he really have five "wives" or would he have one wife and four concubines?
This question in my mind comes from what Jesus said here:
Jesus said to her, “You are right when you say you have no husband. [SUP]18 [/SUP]The fact is, you have had five husbands, and the man you now have is not your husband. What you have just said is quite true.”
Is divorce and polygamy really all that different when you stop and think about it, as we are talking about multiple husbands/wives? Could polygamy be yet another thing that was "never intended from the beginning"?
And if that is the case, would any marriage after the first be recognized in the eyes of God or would it be viewed as adultery (IF the first marriage was not ruined due to adultery, as Jesus recognized in Matthew 19:9)?
So if a man had five "wives", would he really have five "wives" or would he have one wife and four concubines?
This question in my mind comes from what Jesus said here:
Jesus said to her, “You are right when you say you have no husband. [SUP]18 [/SUP]The fact is, you have had five husbands, and the man you now have is not your husband. What you have just said is quite true.”
J
For me, this part of that passage is the very definition of marriage, so I find it definitely relatable:
[SUP]22 [/SUP]Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.
[SUP]23 [/SUP]The man said,
“This is now bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
she shall be called ‘woman,’
for she was taken out of man.”
[SUP]24 [/SUP]That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.
[SUP]22 [/SUP]Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.
[SUP]23 [/SUP]The man said,
“This is now bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
she shall be called ‘woman,’
for she was taken out of man.”
[SUP]24 [/SUP]That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.
Shill tactic no 17
17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can “argue” with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can “argue” with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
R
Polygamy doesn't offend or seduce me one way or the other, but for the record, we have both major lawgivers, Moses and Paul, stating that a priest specifically, should have only one wife.
Which implies that non-priests might be free to a looser condition.
Though the point of this I think is that a priest should physically practice his spiritual condition of "one specific focus", by having a single wife to focus on.
I think having only one wife, when you could have more, exposes the man to a different learning environment, one that God for whatever reason, suggests for a priest.
Which implies that non-priests might be free to a looser condition.
Though the point of this I think is that a priest should physically practice his spiritual condition of "one specific focus", by having a single wife to focus on.
I think having only one wife, when you could have more, exposes the man to a different learning environment, one that God for whatever reason, suggests for a priest.
LT, did you read Romans 7:1-3? Did you read Matthew 19:4-8? [SUP]
4 [/SUP]“Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’[SUP][a][/SUP] [SUP]5 [/SUP]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’[SUP][b][/SUP]? [SUP]6 [/SUP]So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”
[SUP]7 [/SUP]“Why then,” they asked, “did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?”
[SUP]8 [/SUP]Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. [SUP]9 [/SUP]I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”
Jesus goes back to the original law of marriage.
Note the particulars: Adultery though divorced!
The TWO shall be ONE. Not the THREE shall be ONE.
Again, read Romans 7:1-ff. How do you explain Jesus and the church? Israel committed spiritual adultery when they served idols.
I think you've been stringing that guitar too long.
(Who's your favorite guitar player of all time?)
Myself, I love the more heavenly notes from a piano. But camping . . . a camp fire . . . family and friends . . . and a guitar!!! That's close to heaven.
4 [/SUP]“Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’[SUP][a][/SUP] [SUP]5 [/SUP]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’[SUP][b][/SUP]? [SUP]6 [/SUP]So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”
[SUP]7 [/SUP]“Why then,” they asked, “did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?”
[SUP]8 [/SUP]Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. [SUP]9 [/SUP]I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”
Jesus goes back to the original law of marriage.
Note the particulars: Adultery though divorced!
The TWO shall be ONE. Not the THREE shall be ONE.
Again, read Romans 7:1-ff. How do you explain Jesus and the church? Israel committed spiritual adultery when they served idols.
I think you've been stringing that guitar too long.
(Who's your favorite guitar player of all time?)
Myself, I love the more heavenly notes from a piano. But camping . . . a camp fire . . . family and friends . . . and a guitar!!! That's close to heaven.
L
Shill tactic no 17
17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can “argue” with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can “argue” with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
I would change subject, if I addressed your prophet as a terrorists. That's changing the subject.
David had many wives and concubines and it wasn't enough. Thus, he took another man's wife and killed the man to hide his lust. God took all of David's wives and concubines and gave them to another and David, once he returned, put them away and never lay with them again.
When God was saying He would have given David more, He wasn't referring to wives. That was something David already had.
When God was saying He would have given David more, He wasn't referring to wives. That was something David already had.
Change of subject, and random, but it's funny that since I've changed my avatar, I always feel angry after I post, due to the face in my picture. I don't know if this is good or bad...but in case anyone ties that feeling into what I say, know that I'm not angry. Just saying. Sorry to interrupt. Carry on.
Just saying. Sorry to interrupt. Carry on.
L
You were bringing up Christ and claim He never forbade it, while it was the Will of God from the first as you can see in Matthew 19 where Christ quoted the Old Testament. I assumed you brought up Christ, because you want to advocate poligamists, and specifically Islam's order and example on marriage.