RE: Polygamy -- continuation of older thread.

[TraySir]

Re: Polygamy -- continuation of older thread.

We are all parts of his body.



You will find no disagreement from me on this point.



Please elaborate. I am not actually defending all forms of polygamy; only the form most commonly referred to as polygamy, known as polygyny.



This allows but does NOT mandate monogamy. All this proves is that polygamy is not required. It is a description of marriage. The point is that a man LEAVES his home to start a new one. You are trying to form a completely different doctrine out of this, that was never intended.



No it is not. The Bible NEVER calls it sin.

I'm trying to 'see' what you are thinking, concluding. I appreciate your response.

The 'many members' answer to the One Body of Christ, does not change the truth: Jesus has one body. The one husband and one wife marriage shadows that truth. One body, Ephesians 4.4; Colossians 1.18.

Two, not three, become ONE.

Genesis 3.24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be ONE flesh.
Jump ahead about 2,000 years, and we find that same concept, truth being used by the apostle Paul: For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they TWO shall be ONE flesh. This is a great mystery: but I speak CONCERNING CHRIST and the CHURCH. Ephesians 5.31-32.

The spiritual truth, reality is understood by God's order, plan, institution of marriage: One Man and One Woman (married) = One. One body.

"You are trying to form a completely different doctrine out of this, that was never intended." And mine: Polygamy is sin.
I believe the bible teaches, reveals sin and what is sinful both explicitly and implicitly.
I am not 'trying to form a completely doctrine.' I am not. I look at the pattern of marriage all through the bible and come to the conclusion. What is approved, what is raised up as an example, what is the tenor throughout scripture concerning marriage.
It is One Man and One Woman = One Flesh. Jesus pointed to that as God's standard as did Paul.

Polygamy
One man + Two wives =???? (We know it does not equal the truth.)
Did Jesus ever use polygamy to buttress truth about marriage?
Did Paul?

As Moses wrote the account of creation and the state of Adam and Eve, Moses (whom I believe wrote Genesis [scripture, given by inspiration of God]) included the union of two becoming one. That's what it was in the beginning. But Moses wrote after sin entered the world. Why didn't Moses include polygamy in Genesis? Evidently not part of God's plan, will for man and woman. And not a spiritual reality, a truth of Christ and the church.

 

[Magenta]

Re: Polygamy -- continuation of older thread.

You are relying on the "Appeal to Extremes" Logical Fallacy. I am sorry to have to call you out on that, and I don't mean to be insulting when I point this out, but just because the extreme example is wrong, does not mean the moderation is also wrong. The Law given to Moses simply states that a king should not have MANY wives. It does not forbid him from having a few wives. David was fine with eight, until he stepped outside the boundaries and took another man's wife.

No, you fail to see that anything more than one wife is presented again and again as idolatry which is censured quite harshly throughout all of Scripture. You accept neither the simplicity nor the extremes, that is your fault, not mine.

 

[Chokmahiel]

Re: Polygamy -- continuation of older thread.

It varies. That could be an imitation of Joseph Smith, Muhammad, or Abraham, Jacob, David, etc. It depends on where that man draws his so called "justification"m as if something that is not a sin needs justification.

Okay well we're getting somewhere now. Mindful I'm not asking for justification or any of that.

So with this answer, and I would add a pretty interesting one too; Could that be summed up that the example set by marrying multiple wives is to imitate other men? Or put in another way; polygamy is imitated to act like certain other men?

 

[DanD]

Re: Polygamy -- continuation of older thread.

Men will go to great lengths to pervert the Word of God to satisfy the lusts of their flesh. Threads like this prove it if nothing else does... and yes, the verse has been given

I have not had time to respond to this, as I have furiously been typing in an effort to respond to as many comments as a human being can possibly respond to. In fact, I have responded to the verse in question. Jesus' emphasis was clearly on a man remaining faithful to his wife, not how many wives the man should have. Anti-polygamists are putting the emphasis on "two" when Jesus's emphasis was on "becoming one". Here, the verse is completely ripped out of context. When one reads the context, one can see that Jesus was being challenged on divorce, not polygamy. Yet people continue to try to invent an entire doctrine by misusing this and other passages of Scripture.

 

[Magenta]

Re: Polygamy -- continuation of older thread.

Not all polygamists are Christians.

Nobody said they were. Yet here you are arguing with Christians on a Christian site about polygamy, pretending that because it is written about that it is given the okay despite all the very plain evidence to the contrary. I suppose evidence, though, is only for those with eyes to see.

 

[kaylagrl]

Re: Polygamy -- continuation of older thread.

Argumentum ad populum.



The Bible tells us it is adultery on the part of the unfaithful woman, and the man she carries out her adulterous act with. Your argument is with God Himself.



I wish this were true. Then you would have no issue with a man fulfilling his lusts by having sex within the context of marriage.



Two logical falacies employed here: Argument from personal ignorance (no insult intended, that is just what it is called) and the Straw Man fallacy.

I don't believe that your husband should be making love to another woman, as at the moment, you do not appreciate the benefits you would enjoy, having a second woman in your marriage.

Quote "Argumentum ad populum."


Ok,so lets make a few things clear, if you'd indulge me.You said your wife does not agree with having another wife. Can you understand why she feels this way? Can you explain to me from her point of view why she would be against this?

Quote " her adulterous act"

​If he's also her husband as you are how can she be committing adultery?

Quote" Then you would have no issue with a man fulfilling his lusts by having sex within the context of marriage."

Before I answer this again can you define what you mean by lust? Maybe we need to see of we're using the same definition first.


Quote "as at the moment, you do not appreciate the benefits you would enjoy, having a second woman in your marriage.


No,I see jealousy and jockeying for position as a favorite. I see resentment and a lot of hurt feelings.And I think it would be difficult for you to see this and admit it could make a lot more issues and headaches for you than you'd have with the one wife you have. If you look from the womans point of view,with honesty,you'd see my point. One more question,if I may,why did you not marry a woman that was open to this sort of marriage? Just curious.

 

[kaylagrl]

Re: Polygamy -- continuation of older thread.

OK, you should have pointed out to Magenta, that she should not be using that passage to oppose polygamy.

​She's more than capable of handling her own discussions.

 

[DanD]

Re: Polygamy -- continuation of older thread.

Okay well we're getting somewhere now. Mindful I'm not asking for justification or any of that.

So with this answer, and I would add a pretty interesting one too; Could that be summed up that the example set by marrying multiple wives is to imitate other men? Or put in another way; polygamy is imitated to act like certain other men?

Yes and no. Yes in the sense that one can see the fact that God did not condemn the action on the part of those men, and so continues to permit it. No, and this only applies to Christian polygamists, in the sense, that a Christian imitates Christ, who never married as far as we know, even if he only marries one wife.

 

[DanD]

Re: Polygamy -- continuation of older thread.

I'm trying to 'see' what you are thinking, concluding. I appreciate your response.

The 'many members' answer to the One Body of Christ, does not change the truth: Jesus has one body. The one husband and one wife marriage shadows that truth. One body, Ephesians 4.4; Colossians 1.18.

No. We do not answer to the body. We are the body. You could get into serious doctrinal errors on this distinction alone.

Two, not three, become ONE.

Genesis 3.24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be ONE flesh.
Jump ahead about 2,000 years, and we find that same concept, truth being used by the apostle Paul: For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they TWO shall be ONE flesh. This is a great mystery: but I speak CONCERNING CHRIST and the CHURCH. Ephesians 5.31-32.

The spiritual truth, reality is understood by God's order, plan, institution of marriage: One Man and One Woman (married) = One. One body.

"You are trying to form a completely different doctrine out of this, that was never intended." And mine: Polygamy is sin.
I believe the bible teaches, reveals sin and what is sinful both explicitly and implicitly.
I am not 'trying to form a completely doctrine.' I am not. I look at the pattern of marriage all through the bible and come to the conclusion. What is approved, what is raised up as an example, what is the tenor throughout scripture concerning marriage.
It is One Man and One Woman = One Flesh. Jesus pointed to that as God's standard as did Paul.

Polygamy
One man + Two wives =???? (We know it does not equal the truth.)
Did Jesus ever use polygamy to buttress truth about marriage?
Did Paul?

As Moses wrote the account of creation and the state of Adam and Eve, Moses (whom I believe wrote Genesis [scripture, given by inspiration of God]) included the union of two becoming one. That's what it was in the beginning. But Moses wrote after sin entered the world. Why didn't Moses include polygamy in Genesis? Evidently not part of God's plan, will for man and woman. And not a spiritual reality, a truth of Christ and the church.

Once again, Biblical marriage includes at least one woman. No requirement for more than one woman, but no restriction against it. I hate to repeat myself, but there are multiple examples of polygamy in the Bible with no negative consequences.

 

[DanD]

Re: Polygamy -- continuation of older thread.

​She's more than capable of handling her own discussions.

Then why did you decide to involve yourself in that discussion?

 

[Chokmahiel]

Re: Polygamy -- continuation of older thread.

Yes and no. Yes in the sense that one can see the fact that God did not condemn the action on the part of those men, and so continues to permit it. No, and this only applies to Christian polygamists, in the sense, that a Christian imitates Christ, who never married as far as we know, even if he only marries one wife.

Well, regardless of whether they are Christian or not. Would you still say the example is they are imitating other men, whether it be David, Muhammad, Joseph Smith, or even their own fathers?

On your part exclusively for Christians, I like this answer a lot, though indeed Jesus did not marry while in the flesh, it is written he has a Bride to be prepared for him. This makes me think of another question, though it is probably too complex to go over today. I'll ask it though and we can come back to it after we parse out the tangent about polygamy regardless of religious affiliation. The question this makes me think exclusively pertaining to Christians then is; that if Christians are to imitate Christ, then are they suppose to be single/virgins while in the flesh or else to be the husband of only one Bride in imitation of the foreshadowing of the Christ and the Bride at the end of all days?

 

[Magenta]

Re: Polygamy -- continuation of older thread.

I have not had time to respond to this, as I have furiously been typing in an effort to respond to as many comments as a human being can possibly respond to. In fact, I have responded to the verse in question. Jesus' emphasis was clearly on a man remaining faithful to his wife, not how many wives the man should have. Anti-polygamists are putting the emphasis on "two" when Jesus's emphasis was on "becoming one". Here, the verse is completely ripped out of context. When one reads the context, one can see that Jesus was being challenged on divorce, not polygamy. Yet people continue to try to invent an entire doctrine by misusing this and other passages of Scripture.

It is not the only passage that has been given to prove that polygamy is not acceptable in the eyes of God according to the writers of Scriptures. You must forgive us for not commending you for working so furiously to promote such un-Godliness as polygamy. Your proclivity (support of, or favorable disposition toward) to promiscuity (having more than one sexual partner in a culture that values monogamy above all other forms of sexual bonding) no doubt plays some huge role in this, or you are not a Christian. Anyone who would use Mohammed as an example for Christians to follow immediately becomes suspect. You must excuse us for that view also, since Mohammed was an adulterous war mongering pedophile, and nobody in their right mind follows him (yes, it is true: Islamists who uphold Mohammed as a paragon of virtue, are not in their right mind).

 

[kaylagrl]

Re: Polygamy -- continuation of older thread.

Then why did you decide to involve yourself in that discussion?

​Because this is a discussion forum and I comment where I see fit. Thats why.

 

[TraySir]

Re: Polygamy -- continuation of older thread.

I have not had time to respond to this, as I have furiously been typing in an effort to respond to as many comments as a human being can possibly respond to. In fact, I have responded to the verse in question. Jesus' emphasis was clearly on a man remaining faithful to his wife, not how many wives the man should have. Anti-polygamists are putting the emphasis on "two" when Jesus's emphasis was on "becoming one". Here, the verse is completely ripped out of context. When one reads the context, one can see that Jesus was being challenged on divorce, not polygamy. Yet people continue to try to invent an entire doctrine by misusing this and other passages of Scripture.

I am ONE who is putting emphasis on TWO becoming ONE flesh.
I am putting emphasis on ONE from scripture. The truth is ONE. ONE body. Christ and the church = ONE.
Paul emphasizes ONE. Why? UNITY. A spiritual truth exists. Therefore, marriage was created. If there was not truth of ONE in God, ONE with Christ and His BODY, the CHURCH, there would not be ONE MAN and ONE WOMAN becoming ONE FLESH.
I hope that explains why I am putting emphasis on ONE.

This subject is also ONE of discernment!

You know, some kids never learn. They never grow up and discern. They've always got to hear the reprimand, the do's and don'ts.

Spiritual discernment: on this issue, rare do those who read the bible from Genesis through Revelation end up believing that polygamy is right and acceptable to God. The great grand majority end up with ONE. ONE man and ONE woman = ONE flesh.

 

[Magenta]

Re: Polygamy -- continuation of older thread.

​Because this is a discussion forum and I comment where I see fit. Thats why.

I had a ridiculous guy telling me yesterday I was out of line for responding to him when he has me on ignore. LOLOLOLOLOLOL Then after telling all of us how he was ignoring me, he went on and on in a number of responses to me, proving to everyone that he was not ignoring me at all, and acting as if I had no right to address him while he pretends to ignore me. People are strange. That is putting it kindly

 

[TraySir]

Re: Polygamy -- continuation of older thread.

Yes and no. Yes in the sense that one can see the fact that God did not condemn the action on the part of those men, and so continues to permit it. No, and this only applies to Christian polygamists, in the sense, that a Christian imitates Christ, who never married as far as we know, even if he only marries one wife.

The church is the BRIDE of Christ!
That's a spiritual reality, a truth.
And it's a SINGULAR body, ONE body.

ONE, some folks don't like ONE.
Paul did:
ONE body,
ONE Spirit,
ONE hope,
ONE Lord,
ONE faith,
ONE baptism
ONE God and Father of all. Ephesians 4.3-6.

 

[kaylagrl]

Re: Polygamy -- continuation of older thread.

I had a ridiculous guy telling me yesterday I was out of line for responding to him when he has me on ignore. LOLOLOLOLOLOL Then after telling all of us how he was ignoring me, he went on and on in a number of responses to me, proving to everyone that he was not ignoring me at all, and acting as if I had no right to address him while he pretends to ignore me. People are strange. That is putting it kindly

Ha! I know. Ive had people say they put me on ignore and then keep responding.Its too funny and very immature.

 

[DanD]

Re: Polygamy -- continuation of older thread.

Quote "Argumentum ad populum."


Ok,so lets make a few things clear, if you'd indulge me.You said your wife does not agree with having another wife. Can you understand why she feels this way? Can you explain to me from her point of view why she would be against this?

You have already explained her position. That does not make her position correct. The question is not what a man or woman's opinion is, but what God has clearly said.

Quote " her adulterous act"

​If he's also her husband as you are how can she be committing adultery?

I'm sorry, that response does not make sense. The Bible tells us that a woman who is unfaithful to her husband commits adultery. It does not say the same about a man having multiple wives. You seem to be adding that to Scripture. I am sorry if that comes off as insulting, but you should not add something to the text that simply is not there.

Quote" Then you would have no issue with a man fulfilling his lusts by having sex within the context of marriage."

Before I answer this again can you define what you mean by lust? Maybe we need to see of we're using the same definition first.

My understanding was that there was an issue with a man fulfilling his sexual desires. I believed that is what was meant when I made my response about fulfilling lust. There is a clear boundary set for men, where those desires are restricted, such as in the case of David and Bathsheba, where he stepped outside that restriction, but not when he married Abigail and Ahinoam and the other eight women.

Quote "as at the moment, you do not appreciate the benefits you would enjoy, having a second woman in your marriage.


No,I see jealousy and jockeying for position as a favorite. I see resentment and a lot of hurt feelings.And I think it would be difficult for you to see this and admit it could make a lot more issues and headaches for you than you'd have with the one wife you have. If you look from the womans point of view,with honesty,you'd see my point. One more question,if I may,why did you not marry a woman that was open to this sort of marriage? Just curious.

Well, my wife has experienced plenty of jealousy over the course of our 15 year marriage, and there is no other woman in the marriage, so I don't see that as a negative that I don't already face, but only an act of the sinful nature. My investigation into polygamy is somewhat recent, and only after multiple instances of her telling me that I should marry someone else. If I had not read Joshua Harris' book on Kissing Dating Goodbye, I honestly would have never married my wife. We all make mistakes, but rather than putting her away after much long-suffering, I have remained faithful to her, and will continue to do so until death separates us. If it is God's will to bless me and my wife with a second wife, He will eventually open her eyes to the truth.

 

[DanD]

Re: Polygamy -- continuation of older thread.

The church is the BRIDE of Christ!
That's a spiritual reality, a truth.
And it's a SINGULAR body, ONE body.

ONE, some folks don't like ONE.
Paul did:
ONE body,
ONE Spirit,
ONE hope,
ONE Lord,
ONE faith,
ONE baptism
ONE God and Father of all. Ephesians 4.3-6.

The church is not the bride of Christ. That is not found anywhere in Scripture.

 

[DanD]

Re: Polygamy -- continuation of older thread.

​Because this is a discussion forum and I comment where I see fit. Thats why.

Then you ought to defend her reasons for using that passage of Scripture.