Polygamy

[DanD]

There's a curse attached to polygamy.....just saying, plus it makes Christmas really complicated, best to be content with one

Care to elaborate on what that curse might be?

 

[DanD]

Yeah Give me Solomon who slept with a different women every night. But it oh it cost him everything.

Solomon was an extreme case. Multiple other men in the Bible had much fewer than a thousand wives and concubines, and they did just fine.

 

[DanD]

Polygamy doesn't necessarily treat women unequally, assuming that women are also allowed to marry multiple husbands.

I've often brought up polygamy in the context of the debate over gay marriage; when told that a child is better off with a mother and a father, I respond that multiple mothers and fathers would be even better by the same logic. Not only is polygamy a closer match to "biblical marriage" than our current model is, but it seems objectively more satisfying than "one man, one woman". It would be less romantic and intimate (naturally), but we humans have an innate ability to maintain many close relationships. I'm sure there aren't any Christians arguing that they can only love one parent because two parents means spreading their love too thinly, nor is anyone saying that a certain number of children is too many because you can't possibly love them all equally.

The child still needs both a mother and a father. Multiple fathers is probably not such a good idea, and polyamory just makes a joke out of marriage altogether, but there is nothing wrong with having multiple mothers around, nor is it incompatible with Scripture, only people's wishful interpretation thereof (think Eisegesis). With homosexual parents, you are missing either the male or female influence.

 

[DanD]

I would say I think Jesus teaching on marriage is plenty clear, for the purposes of polygamy. As part of that teaching, he also refers to God's original design in Genesis, and also gives us insight into the relationship of Moses' Law and God's original design. Moses' law contains concessions for human sinful activity, designed to limit the damage caused by human sinfulness, that do not reflect God's intended design. Jesus repeatedly calls attention to that design, and castigates others who hold to the letter of the law but do not seek to live in the true spirit of the law.

I would also welcome any further discussion you had in relation to the rest of what I ran past you.

You are taking Jesus clear teaching on divorce, and trying to apply it to polygamy. This is a clear example of Eisegesis. You are reading into the Scripture, what you want it to say. Jesus never said that polygamy was sinful, or that a man taking an additional wife, would not be considered a valid marriage. His point was clear; Once you marry someone, it should be for life. Don't force your wife to become another man's wife by abandoning her. So many Christians are emphasizing the "two" or "Duo" in Greek, when the emphasis Jesus had in mind, given the context of the passage, is "Become One". He even further emphasizes that by following up with, "What God hath joined together, let not man separate."

 

[DanD]

Jesus set the bar even higher for adultery

Matthew 5

27 “Ye have heard that it was said by them of old, ‘Thou shalt not commit adultery.’
28 But I say unto you, that whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

This passage really has nothing to do with polygamy.

 

[DanD]

That's what I was explaining in that long post, you can't divorce the other three because you aren't married to them in the first place by God's own ordinances- one man...one woman. It's literally impossible for a man to be married to more than one woman. The second and succeeding woman are only adulterers, they are not wives. Man can call them wives but they aren't because God is the one who decides the rules, not man.

So polygamy is another stupid man made word for something impossible for man to do. The real word can only be adultery.

But God does call them wives in multiple places in Scripture. The list of men who had what the Bible calls wives, is quite extensive, starting with Lamech. Genesis clearly states that he had two wives, and one would really have to twist Scripture in order to believe that they were not both alive at the time when he spoke with them. Genesis also tells us that Sarah gave Hagar to Abraham as his wife. It says quite clearly that Esau had two Canaanite wives, and then married a third. I could go on.

 

[DanD]

Hi Drett, Thanks for the reply.

Can you please refer me to cases where it is explicitly stated that polygamy is not only acceptible, but also is part of God's created design. I think you will appreciate the difference between the two when we consider the relevance that distcintion has to the related question of divorce. Jesus explicitly states that he and Moses teach two different things on the issue of divorce, so it is also important we clarify that question in this matter as well.

Answering that question will also help us answer how this question relates to your quote from Matthew 5:17, which critically turns on what is meant by the world 'fulfill'.

As for Augustine, again, you assert that he 'invented' the banning of polygamy in Christianity, and the only proof you offer is that he wrote against the practice. You ignore my previous post where I specifically name other pre-Augustinian writers who also write against the practice. I could also reference the pre-Christian Hillelites, or the Qumran community, as examples of people who thought polygamy was an objectionable practice for contemporary communities.

I did not say Augustine referred specifically to the the teaching of Jesus, I simply said he was reasoning from the Scriptures, which he does. He also reasons against it in that it is not acceptable under civil law. He makes the point that the church fathers did not have multiple wives out of lust, but for the purposes of filling the earth, which I think is questionable (I disagree with Augustine?! What?). But really, it matters little to me what you think of what Augustine wrote. I'm happy to cede the point - I have no particular desire to defend the specifics of Augustine's argument on the matter, as I merely referred to it as a secondary matter.

If you wish to deal with the specifics of Jesus teaching (which you did not address in your last post, only to say he did not make an explicit stateent. However, as I have already written, I do believe he makes at the very least a relevant remark)



Really? That's an argument from silence if ever I've seen one.

For reference, here is a short list of other things Jesus did not come straight out and explicitly ban:

1. Being drunk
2. Rape
3. homosexual sex
4. abortion
5. cannibalism
6. Drug taking
7. Speeding
8. belief and practice of witchcraft

Jesus can reject things by the principle of what he teaches, not just by explicitly saying "do this, do that". In fact, to often be deliberately general and image-based in his teaching is quite a Jesus kind of thing to do. You will have to show me Jesus not banning polygamy outright is sufficient to accept polygamy, particularly given the teaching of the rest of the Bible.

Why is it necessary to state where the Bible says that polygamy is acceptable? Those other sins are clearly spelled out in other places in Scripture, so nobody has to read into the text where Drunkeness is sinful. We see that in Galatians 5, as one of the acts of the sinful nature. Same with homosexual sex, spelled out explicitly in Leviticus. We read in Jeremiah, and in Psalms that God formed us in the womb, and that we are fearfully and wonderfully made. Witchcraft is clearly spelled out in Deuteronomy. Speeding falls under the umbrella of obedience to governing authorities. While this is true for polygamy in Western cultures, the Bible does not tell us how we should vote on that particular issue. If an individual were to procure a waiver for the speed laws, they would still be abiding be the obedience to governing authorities. The same applies to polygamy.

Jesus could have rejected polygamy, had He chosen to do so. For you to claim that He forbid it, is to add a requirement to God's Word, that quite frankly He never intended.

 

[Hungry]

DanD, there is no denying that polygamy was practiced and although many try to condemn it with scripture it isn't forbidden outright. I don't think there is any scripture forbidding women touching women sexually either. Even though scripture has it's purpose to correct and rebuke sinners, we won't be able to argue our case before Almighty God one day. A Christian should be able to clearly identify what sin is. Here is what people fail to acknowledge; we are not our own. We are here to serve the Lord. From experience I know that having one wife and children puts limitations on how devoted I can be to God. I can't imagine multiple wives and a litter of children would make it any easier. The only justification for polygamy in my opinion would be having a barren current wife, if there was a severe drop in the number of suitable men available, or to take a widow with children as your wife to provide for her needs. Even then it shouldn't be considered if it will cause your current wife to sin. This would include jealousy and hate towards another woman. These situations I feel would serve a purpose other than raw sexual desire. God could be glorified in these circumstances. Wanting excess of anything without serving a function or purpose is sin, sex included. When your mind is focused on the things of God, it is easy to spot the sins of the flesh.

 

[DanD]

DanD, there is no denying that polygamy was practiced and although many try to condemn it with scripture it isn't forbidden outright. I don't think there is any scripture forbidding women touching women sexually either. Even though scripture has it's purpose to correct and rebuke sinners, we won't be able to argue our case before Almighty God one day. A Christian should be able to clearly identify what sin is. Here is what people fail to acknowledge; we are not our own. We are here to serve the Lord. From experience I know that having one wife and children puts limitations on how devoted I can be to God. I can't imagine multiple wives and a litter of children would make it any easier. The only justification for polygamy in my opinion would be having a barren current wife, if there was a severe drop in the number of suitable men available, or to take a widow with children as your wife to provide for her needs. Even then it shouldn't be considered if it will cause your current wife to sin. This would include jealousy and hate towards another woman. These situations I feel would serve a purpose other than raw sexual desire. God could be glorified in these circumstances. Wanting excess of anything without serving a function or purpose is sin, sex included. When your mind is focused on the things of God, it is easy to spot the sins of the flesh.

Well said. I would never suggest that polygamy is for everyone, but occasionally you will encounter a married man who finds himself desiring another woman. Are we better off denying the reality that he is about to implode his marriage, or admitting that there is no Scriptural basis for keeping him from marrying the other woman, provided he can persuade his first wife that this is acceptable, and clearing all the legal hurdles.

 

[tanakh]

I thought the Mormons had to give up Polygamy as a condition for Utah to be part of the Union. Am I wrong about this?
Personally I have enough coping with one wife without having more. Anyway imagine all those Mother in Laws!!

 

[Hungry]

Well said. I would never suggest that polygamy is for everyone, but occasionally you will encounter a married man who finds himself desiring another woman. Are we better off denying the reality that he is about to implode his marriage, or admitting that there is no Scriptural basis for keeping him from marrying the other woman, provided he can persuade his first wife that this is acceptable, and clearing all the legal hurdles.

Desiring another woman means that you are focused on serving the flesh and not the Almighty. Sex with one woman should keep the chemicals responsible for procreation in check allowing you to fulfill the calling on your life. Everything else is excess. This is a result from our twisted view linking sex to personal worth and identifying it with being a man. Our minds are supposed to be renewed. Sex is for procreation. The more sex we get, the less joy we receive from it. It's all neurological, dopamine, serotonin and such. God designed us with limits, checks and balances. Like sugar, if we get too much, the body causes resistance creating diabetes. Pleasure, again too much creates resistance, too little less resistance. It's all balance. Addiction is when you keep trying to reproduce a surge of pleasure, but it was dangerous so your body put the brakes on receiving pleasure from it. This causes the need to take more and more, then the body resists more and more. Drugs, sugar, sex it's all the same. This also explains the increase in depression. The more excitement we expose ourselves to, the less we are responsive to excitement. The result, depression.

 

[BrokenSparrow]

Well said. I would never suggest that polygamy is for everyone, but occasionally you will encounter a married man who finds himself desiring another woman. Are we better off denying the reality that he is about to implode his marriage, or admitting that there is no Scriptural basis for keeping him from marrying the other woman, provided he can persuade his first wife that this is acceptable, and clearing all the legal hurdles.

If a married man looks on another woman to lust it is called adultery, and having more than one wife is against the law. It would just be setting the women up for a failure because of jealousy. Sounds sick to me and like it would be just a sack full of problems that no one needs.

 

[DanD]

Desiring another woman means that you are focused on serving the flesh and not the Almighty. Sex with one woman should keep the chemicals responsible for procreation in check allowing you to fulfill the calling on your life. Everything else is excess. This is a result from our twisted view linking sex to personal worth and identifying it with being a man. Our minds are supposed to be renewed. Sex is for procreation. The more sex we get, the less joy we receive from it. It's all neurological, dopamine, serotonin and such. God designed us with limits, checks and balances. Like sugar, if we get too much, the body causes resistance creating diabetes. Pleasure, again too much creates resistance, too little less resistance. It's all balance. Addiction is when you keep trying to reproduce a surge of pleasure, but it was dangerous so your body put the brakes on receiving pleasure from it. This causes the need to take more and more, then the body resists more and more. Drugs, sugar, sex it's all the same. This also explains the increase in depression. The more excitement we expose ourselves to, the less we are responsive to excitement. The result, depression.

None of what you said here is Biblical. There are many reasons why a man might desire another woman. It may be that the one he has is a contentious woman. How then would sex with that woman keep any chemicals in check. Marriage is about far more than sex anyway.

How is a man like the former worship pastor at my former (mega-)church in Plano, supposed to serve God, now that he has disobeyed Christ's directive regarding divorce and remarriage? Sure, he and his wife may have had to step away from that church, because that church has not yet accepted the Biblical teaching about polygamy, but he could have served the Christian Polygamy community very well, if he had simply taken a second wife. How is it that churches are still inviting people like Wayne Watson, who was my favorite artist before his divorce and remarriage, to perform concert events, but if he were to do the right thing and remarry his first wife, he would be shunned? Don't you see the hypocrisy?

All this nonsense about addiction and dopamine didn't keep God from giving David his wives! Read Psalms 16:11. David wrote that! How dare a follower of Jehovah think about enjoying pleasures! What was he thinking? That must have resulted from his twisted view, huh. Oh yeah, God inspired him to write that, didn't He.

 

[DanD]

I thought the Mormons had to give up Polygamy as a condition for Utah to be part of the Union. Am I wrong about this?
Personally I have enough coping with one wife without having more. Anyway imagine all those Mother in Laws!!

Very true. The Mormons did not believe strongly enough in the principle of Plural Marriage. In fact the Book of Mormon (BOM) claims that polygamy is wickedness! Mother in Laws are no fun, but you just gotta love them any way.

 

[Magenta]

All this nonsense about addiction and dopamine didn't keep God from giving David his wives! Read Psalms 16:11. David wrote that! How dare a follower of Jehovah think about enjoying pleasures! What was he thinking? That must have resulted from his twisted view, huh. Oh yeah, God inspired him to write that, didn't He.

How do you see polygamy being represented/promoted in Psalm 16 verse 11?

 

[DanD]

If a married man looks on another woman to lust it is called adultery, and having more than one wife is against the law. It would just be setting the women up for a failure because of jealousy. Sounds sick to me and like it would be just a sack full of problems that no one needs.

You are adding to Jesus' words here. He never said that a married man looking on a woman lustfully commits adultery. He said Everyone who looks at a woman to lust after her commits adultery. That includes unmarried men as well.

You know there is no excuse for misquoting Scripture here. How hard is it to go look things up on biblegateway.com?

Having more than one wife is against the law in some countries, but this is really more of an "is ought" fallacy. It ought to be against the law to marry a second or third woman without your first wife's (or wives') knowledge and consent. If the first wife knowingly gives consent, it really should not be the government's business how many wives a man has. If she gives consent, she has already dealt with the jealousy aspect. Jealousy is one of the acts of the sinful nature, and having lived in a monogamous marriage for 15 years now, I can assure you that jealousy is not unique to polygamy.

In your closing statement you resort to another logical fallacy known as "Argument from Personal Disgust". There may be problems with polygamy that most people are incapable of being able to handle, but that "sack full of problems" is probably not as bad as you might imagine, and that sentiment cannot be applied universally to everyone. Have you had any discourse or conversation of any sort with an actual polygamist, or are you just pulling that remark out of thin air? The fact is, there are many problems that can be solved by polygamy. Any serious research on your part would have cleared that up for you. My Great-Grandfather for instance, left his first wife for the maid. He later left her for the next maid. Two broken homes as a direct result of strict adherence to monogamy, disobeying Jesus' clear directive about divorce and remarriage. The end result: his son, my grandfather, committed suicide when his marriage started to fall apart. He himself, had engaged in marital infidelity, prompting my grandmother to demand that he leave his career in the military. He could not find a decent civilian job, so he went back to the military. Instead of putting his children through a divorce like he had been through, he took his own life. I don't think it is a leap of logic to understand, that if it had not been for this Roman Catholic dogma that you are clinging to, he could have married however many wives he desired, and there would have been no threat to his career or marriage. Hypocrites who look the other way when a man leaves his wife for another, but will shun a family which practices polygyny, will have to answer to God for this.

The only Biblical text you referred to in your response, was a misquotation of our Lord Jesus Christ. I urge you not to take our Savior's words, and twist them to say what you want Him to say. That is a clear case of Eisegesis! It is imperative of a follower of Christ to "Rightly handle the Word of Truth." It may be excused when an unbeliever does so, but not one who claims to follow Christ.

 

[DanD]

How do you see polygamy being represented/promoted in Psalm 16 verse 11?

Psalm 16:11 happens to have been written by a polygamist, but I was answering the diatribe about pleasure, as if too much is a bad thing.

 

[maxwel]

DanD,

You resurrected a 4 year old thread.

Please don't do that.

 

[samuel23]

When the gay marriage thing came out I remember hearing a couple of times on Christian radio that such a thing could lead down a slippery slope until folks may try polygamy. It can of blew my mind, polygamy was tolerated in the bible while just one homosexual act got the death penalty. Polygamy itself was never called a sin in the bible, however it was discouraged by the apostle Paul. I see no reason why polygamy should be practiced under normal circumstances, and it should never be practiced just because some guy wants another woman besides his wife. On the other hand, some unusual circumstances could warrant it. The bible says that there will be a time when seven woman will ask one man to marry them...obviously after a time of war when few men are left.

 

[DanD]

DanD,

You resurrected a 4 year old thread.

Please don't do that.

Why not? It seems like a lot of what I have said here is simply correcting the misunderstandings people have regarding what the Bible says about a very pertinent issue for our time. It seems as if you are trying to shut down debate that is not going the way you would like it to. I have no intention of going and resurrecting any other threads. This one has been resurrected, because it is what came up as one of the most recent discussions on this topic in the google search engine. If what I am saying is illogical, or contradicts Scripture, sound reasoning in this debate forum, ought to expose that. If not, then maybe, rather than shutting down debate, those who are truly concerned about the truth found in Scripture, ought to rethink their positions. Otherwise, you are engaging in a sort of virtual inquisition.