Is polygamy ok to God?

[Roughsoul1991]

i agree with this. i am not aware of the bible specifically saying its forbidden to take a 2nd wife but it should be understood by passages like this. you also have the men, women and animals on the ark, they went two by two.

its also strange to me that exodus leviticus which is laws laws and more laws, laws how to button your shirt, you cant keep up with all of them, yet no mention of taking more than one wife.

And where the Bible doesnt specifically say then we look at the related scriptures especially the new covenant, the teachings that God gave us while in the flesh. And beautifully poetically Christ's teaching doesn't destroy the old but completes it. If someone can show me scriptures saying God commands a marriage can be one man, one woman but its okay in some cultures to be one man, multiple woman. Then i would agree. But no one can find this. Just because one culture says they know God, doesn't mean they know God. Truth will hurt. I know I wouldn't want to be called white washed tomes.

 

[aboutenough]

David took several women and married them and it was not a sin, when David took a married woman then he committed adultery. This may sound strange, but in the OT a married man could take another woman as long as she was not married, adultery was mostly a man taking a married woman.

Do you think those Old Testament laws are relevant to today? If we were married today would it be appropiate to have another woman? Would that be adultery or a sin?

 

[Galatea]

One thing this particular forum has revealed are those who place their personal opinions or convictions on a par with the word of God, I like to call it, writing yourself into the bible. I have studied the bible for ages and I know what it says on this subject, and I also can see where folks are changing the word of God in order to make it conform to what they prefer to believe. I have zero interest in how many wives any man has, however I have great interest in being truthful with the word of God. In a few words, God did not introduce polygamy but neither did God EVER and I mean EVER call it a sin. People call polygamy a sin, I say people that twist the word of God and claim polygamy is a sin, have committed the sin of lying about what God has given us in His word. Abraham had two wives, Jacob four wives, father of Samuel two wives, all the kings of Israel both good and bad had several wives. Jesus gave a story where HE is going to marry 10 women...yes that is Christ in the story about to marry ten women. Most folks, including me, prefer one man to one woman, however I am not going to stoop to lying about the word of God in order to promote my personal belief.

I'll concede that it is not listed as a sin, per se. Adultery is, though, and one could make the argument that a polygamous marriage is one that is adulterous, as the man is literally becoming one flesh with many women instead of one- which distorts the picture of marriage as Christ with one bride, the Church. I would say man created polygamy, not God. Jesus spoke many parables, it doesn't mean He sanctions people doing things that are wrong. I think it must be remembered that Jesus never married anyone in the flesh. I suppose if you want to advocate polygamy like the bridegroom and ten virgins, then you would be advocating a form of polygamy where the man does not know his wives after the flesh. Your analogy is so strained. You also forget what Jesus said about marriage (not in a parable), that a man should leave his parents and cleave to his wife. Matthew 19:4-6

Alright, let's look at the Bible. The KING of polygamy was Solomon. He had 1,000 women. He was also given wisdom. We can listen to what he says about how happy polygamy is. He says it is not the way to live.

You sound a bit perturbed by people looking in the Bible and seeing polygamy as being an inferior lifestyle. NONE of the polygamous families in the Bible were happy, not one. We are not lying when we say that. Every single one had some sort of familial issues. You are incorrect in stating that all of the Kings of Israel and Judah had multiple wives.

The Bible tells us that men are to love their wives as Christ loves the Church, and gave Himself for the Church, total devotion. I don't know that any woman alive would feel like she is loved with total devotion if she were in a polygamous relationship. I find it hard to believe any women are happy in this sort of arrangement. The law hangs on two things: love God with all your heart, mind, and soul and love your neighbor as yourself. There's no way a man could love multiple women equally. One would be a favorite and others would be hurt. There is no way a woman could love multiple men equally. One would be a favorite and others would be hurt.

You may say we are "writing ourselves into the Bible", but we can read what Jesus and the Apostle Paul says about marriage, and it is monogamous.

 

[Dagallen]

I'll concede that it is not listed as a sin, per se. Adultery is, though, and one could make the argument that a polygamous marriage is one that is adulterous, as the man is literally becoming one flesh with many women instead of one- which distorts the picture of marriage as Christ with one bride, the Church. I would say man created polygamy, not God. Jesus spoke many parables, it doesn't mean He sanctions people doing things that are wrong. I think it must be remembered that Jesus never married anyone in the flesh. I suppose if you want to advocate polygamy like the bridegroom and ten virgins, then you would be advocating a form of polygamy where the man does not know his wives after the flesh. Your analogy is so strained. You also forget what Jesus said about marriage (not in a parable), that a man should leave his parents and cleave to his wife. Matthew 19:4-6

Alright, let's look at the Bible. The KING of polygamy was Solomon. He had 1,000 women. He was also given wisdom. We can listen to what he says about how happy polygamy is. He says it is not the way to live.

You sound a bit perturbed by people looking in the Bible and seeing polygamy as being an inferior lifestyle. NONE of the polygamous families in the Bible were happy, not one. We are not lying when we say that. Every single one had some sort of familial issues. You are incorrect in stating that all of the Kings of Israel and Judah had multiple wives.

The Bible tells us that men are to love their wives as Christ loves the Church, and gave Himself for the Church, total devotion. I don't know that any woman alive would feel like she is loved with total devotion if she were in a polygamous relationship. I find it hard to believe any women are happy in this sort of arrangement. The law hangs on two things: love God with all your heart, mind, and soul and love your neighbor as yourself. There's no way a man could love multiple women equally. One would be a favorite and others would be hurt. There is no way a woman could love multiple men equally. One would be a favorite and others would be hurt.

You may say we are "writing ourselves into the Bible", but we can read what Jesus and the Apostle Paul says about marriage, and it is monogamous.

I would not take all of what is said that Paul wrote to heart, however if Paul wrote all that is claimed he wrote, then everything that Paul wrote, all did not come from the Lord, as some was the inspired words of Paul himself.

 

[graceNpeace]

I would not take all of what is said that Paul wrote to heart, however if Paul wrote all that is claimed he wrote, then everything that Paul wrote, all did not come from the Lord, as some was the inspired words of Paul himself.

Seriously!!!!
So the word of God is not an inspired document then?????

 

[NoNameMcgee]

polygamy isnt ok to God

or any worthwhile spouse.....


end of story

 

[Galatea]

I would not take all of what is said that Paul wrote to heart, however if Paul wrote all that is claimed he wrote, then everything that Paul wrote, all did not come from the Lord, as some was the inspired words of Paul himself.

What about the words of Christ about marriage recorded by both Levi Matthew and John Mark? They wrote the same thing. Levi Matthew was one of the twelve, so it is probably pretty clear that his writing was a first person account. John Mark was not one of the twelve disciples. It is thought he wrote his gospel after interviewing Peter, although they think Mark was a disciple (there were many more disciples than 12) and present when Jesus was arrested.

The portions where Paul is giving his opinion only are clearly delineated as he prefaces it with, "this is me saying this, not the Spirit". Paul was a scholar, and I don't think he'd be so sloppy as to not make it clear when whatever he was writing was not by the Spirit. Also, Paul was a busy man, he often used an amanuensis to physically write what he said (it is thought his thorn in the flesh might have been ophthalmic problems, so this may have kept him from physically writing).

 

[Dagallen]

Seriously!!!!
So the word of God is not an inspired document then?????

God inspired mankind to write the words of God and the words of man, as it is a recording of a relationship between God and man. As Paul reveals the above in 1Corinthians, chapter 7 as Paul makes it clear in chapter 7 that some things in the chapter, was the words of the Lord and some was the words of Paul himself, as the biggest part of 1Corinthians, chapter 7 is the inspired words of Paul, very little was the inspired words of the Lord, not because I say so but because the writer himself say so, God inspired all to be written ? Yes ! But that does not mean that every word in the bible is the words of God himself, as it is both.

 

[Dagallen]

What about the words of Christ about marriage recorded by both Levi Matthew and John Mark? They wrote the same thing. Levi Matthew was one of the twelve, so it is probably pretty clear that his writing was a first person account. John Mark was not one of the twelve disciples. It is thought he wrote his gospel after interviewing Peter, although they think Mark was a disciple (there were many more disciples than 12) and present when Jesus was arrested.

The portions where Paul is giving his opinion only are clearly delineated as he prefaces it with, "this is me saying this, not the Spirit". Paul was a scholar, and I don't think he'd be so sloppy as to not make it clear when whatever he was writing was not by the Spirit. Also, Paul was a busy man, he often used an amanuensis to physically write what he said (it is thought his thorn in the flesh might have been ophthalmic problems, so this may have kept him from physically writing).

Paul's thorn in the flesh was his reputation he had before he changed his name to Paul, as his old reputation followed him to his grave, however if Paul was the writer of 1Corinthians, chapter 7, then Paul made it clear, what was of the Lord and what was of Paul himself, as this is still the case in the world today, as many today, speak the sayings of Jesus and yet they still speak their own sayings as well. Read 1Corinthians chapter 7 with an opened mind. Is God a one sided God, that does not allow mankind to speak his or her own words ? Its a relationship between God and mankind, that God has a desire to have, as God did not leave us speechless,, its an inspired relationship, inspired by God and mankind, a relationship I enjoy daily, its just what I see.

 

[Dagallen]

What about the words of Christ about marriage recorded by both Levi Matthew and John Mark? They wrote the same thing. Levi Matthew was one of the twelve, so it is probably pretty clear that his writing was a first person account. John Mark was not one of the twelve disciples. It is thought he wrote his gospel after interviewing Peter, although they think Mark was a disciple (there were many more disciples than 12) and present when Jesus was arrested.

The portions where Paul is giving his opinion only are clearly delineated as he prefaces it with, "this is me saying this, not the Spirit". Paul was a scholar, and I don't think he'd be so sloppy as to not make it clear when whatever he was writing was not by the Spirit. Also, Paul was a busy man, he often used an amanuensis to physically write what he said (it is thought his thorn in the flesh might have been ophthalmic problems, so this may have kept him from physically writing).

Paul's thorn in the flesh was his reputation he had before he changed his name to Paul, as his old reputation followed him to his grave, however if Paul was the writer of 1Corinthians, chapter 7, then Paul made it clear, what was of the Lord and what was of Paul himself, as this is still the case in the world today, as many today, speak the sayings of Jesus and yet they still speak their own sayings as well. Read 1Corinthians chapter 7 with an opened mind. Is God a one sided God, that does not allow mankind to speak his or her own words ? Its a relationship between God and mankind, that God has a desire to have, as God did not leave us speechless,, its an inspired relationship, inspired by God and mankind, a relationship I enjoy daily, its just what I see.

 

[samuel23]

I'll concede that it is not listed as a sin, per se. Adultery is, though, and one could make the argument that a polygamous marriage is one that is adulterous, as the man is literally becoming one flesh with many women instead of one- which distorts the picture of marriage as Christ with one bride, the Church. I would say man created polygamy, not God. Jesus spoke many parables, it doesn't mean He sanctions people doing things that are wrong. I think it must be remembered that Jesus never married anyone in the flesh. I suppose if you want to advocate polygamy like the bridegroom and ten virgins, then you would be advocating a form of polygamy where the man does not know his wives after the flesh. Your analogy is so strained. You also forget what Jesus said about marriage (not in a parable), that a man should leave his parents and cleave to his wife. Matthew 19:4-6

Alright, let's look at the Bible. The KING of polygamy was Solomon. He had 1,000 women. He was also given wisdom. We can listen to what he says about how happy polygamy is. He says it is not the way to live.

You sound a bit perturbed by people looking in the Bible and seeing polygamy as being an inferior lifestyle. NONE of the polygamous families in the Bible were happy, not one. We are not lying when we say that. Every single one had some sort of familial issues. You are incorrect in stating that all of the Kings of Israel and Judah had multiple wives.

The Bible tells us that men are to love their wives as Christ loves the Church, and gave Himself for the Church, total devotion. I don't know that any woman alive would feel like she is loved with total devotion if she were in a polygamous relationship. I find it hard to believe any women are happy in this sort of arrangement. The law hangs on two things: love God with all your heart, mind, and soul and love your neighbor as yourself. There's no way a man could love multiple women equally. One would be a favorite and others would be hurt. There is no way a woman could love multiple men equally. One would be a favorite and others would be hurt.

You may say we are "writing ourselves into the Bible", but we can read what Jesus and the Apostle Paul says about marriage, and it is monogamous.

I agree with you completely that a marriage is between a man and a woman. However to call polygamy adultery is to reject what the word of God is actually saying. David got in all kinds of trouble for taking another man's wife because that was adultery, David was blessed by the Lord for taking all those other women as wives, so it cannot be a sin. In the parable of the man who married ten women, the women were the church and the man was Christ. Most folks want one man for one woman, however what if there were ten women to each man? What I am saying is that it is not the normal thing to do, but when it was done it was never called a sin.

 

[samuel23]

Isaiah 3:25 & 4:1 Your men shall fall by the sword and your mighty in the war..and in that day seven women shall take hold of one man saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel, only let us be called by your name.

 

[Galatea]

Paul's thorn in the flesh was his reputation he had before he changed his name to Paul, as his old reputation followed him to his grave, however if Paul was the writer of 1Corinthians, chapter 7, then Paul made it clear, what was of the Lord and what was of Paul himself, as this is still the case in the world today, as many today, speak the sayings of Jesus and yet they still speak their own sayings as well. Read 1Corinthians chapter 7 with an opened mind. Is God a one sided God, that does not allow mankind to speak his or her own words ? Its a relationship between God and mankind, that God has a desire to have, as God did not leave us speechless,, its an inspired relationship, inspired by God and mankind, a relationship I enjoy daily, its just what I see.

The thorn in the flesh was never specified, maybe so people can identify with Paul in whatever thorn a person has himself.

From what I understand by reading I Corinthians 7, is there is a delineation between what Paul says of himself and what God has said through him. It seems that Paul is urging people to remain virgins, if they can. He is clear when he says that the Lord is telling people not to divorce their unbelieving spouses. He also seems to say that if a man sleeps with a virgin, and they marry, then they have not sinned. It is Paul's opinion that being unmarried is better, but not necessarily God's. I Corinthians 7 and Paul's opinions about virginity being better than marriage does not negate Ephesians 5 which comes from God through Paul as there is no proviso otherwise.

 

[Galatea]

I agree with you completely that a marriage is between a man and a woman. However to call polygamy adultery is to reject what the word of God is actually saying. David got in all kinds of trouble for taking another man's wife because that was adultery, David was blessed by the Lord for taking all those other women as wives, so it cannot be a sin. In the parable of the man who married ten women, the women were the church and the man was Christ. Most folks want one man for one woman, however what if there were ten women to each man? What I am saying is that it is not the normal thing to do, but when it was done it was never called a sin.

I don't know why anyone wants to take a parable that seems clearly spiritual and turn it into something literal. Besides, the bridegroom married five in the parable, not ten. So I suppose if you hang your hat on polygamy being sanctioned by Christ, five must be the magic number. I'm being facetious. Just because Jesus explained things in terms his hearers could understand, does not mean He approves of polygamy.

There is also a parable about an unjust judge and a petitioner. Surely, it is allegory and no one thinks God approves of unjust judges.

David was NOT blessed with all those women. Read his story- horrible, David had a terrible life. One son raped his half sister, his first born by Bathsheba died, his first wife despised him she was given to another man. When David claimed the throne, he demanded his first wife back. Her new husband walked behind her all the way to David, weeping (it's very sad that he took Michal from a man, Phaltiel who loved her), Michal despised David, good for her! There were power struggles among his sons. The son he loved best revolted against him and was killed by the captain of David's army (against David's wishes), Absalom had his half brother, Amnon, killed. When David was old, his son Adonijah, plotted to take the throne. Solomon kills his half brother Adonijah. So two of his boys killed two of his other boys, and one boy rapes one of his girls. What a blessing!

 

[Dagallen]

The thorn in the flesh was never specified, maybe so people can identify with Paul in whatever thorn a person has himself.

From what I understand by reading I Corinthians 7, is there is a delineation between what Paul says of himself and what God has said through him. It seems that Paul is urging people to remain virgins, if they can. He is clear when he says that the Lord is telling people not to divorce their unbelieving spouses. He also seems to say that if a man sleeps with a virgin, and they marry, then they have not sinned. It is Paul's opinion that being unmarried is better, but not necessarily God's. I Corinthians 7 and Paul's opinions about virginity being better than marriage does not negate Ephesians 5 which comes from God through Paul as there is no proviso otherwise.

I think that maybe you have missed the point I was making, so let me more clear ? 1Cirinthians 7:6 But I speak this by permission and not as a commandment ( 1-5 ) was not a commandment but he 1-5 according to the laws of man, if 1-5 was a commandment, then it would been from the Lord but 1-5 was not a commandment from the Lord, as Paul ends statement and give the answer to 7:1-5 in 7:1-6. Now Paul goes on and makes another in 7:7-9 as gives the answer to 7: 7:9 in 7:10:11, and he says, and unto the married, I command, yet not I but the Lord, let not the wife ddepart from her husband but and if she depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband and let not the husband put away his wife. 7:10-11 would be commandment from the Lord but 7:1-5 was not a commandment from the Lord. 7:9 says, but if they can not contain ( the desire to marry ) then let them marry, for it is better to marry than to burn ( with the passion to marry, in other words, they can marry. ) Now Paul goes on, so watch what he says ? But to the rest speak I, not the Lord. ( what he is about to speak, he says was not from the Lord but it was his words ) if any brother has a wife that believes not and she be pleased to dwell with him ( the believer ) let him not put her away. ( Paul throughout chapter 7 reveals what came from the Lord and what came from himself, now look at what Paul says about virgins ? 7:25 Now concerning virgins, I have no commandment of the Lord ( no commandment from the Lord concerning virgins ) yet I give my judgment ( his judgment not the Lords judgment ) as one that has obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful. He obtained mercy, meaning to speak his own judgment or his own words or give advice based on his understanding. Chapter 7 is more the words of Paul, his advice, with very little words from the Lord.

 

[Roughsoul1991]

I don't know why anyone wants to take a parable that seems clearly spiritual and turn it into something literal. Besides, the bridegroom married five in the parable, not ten. So I suppose if you hang your hat on polygamy being sanctioned by Christ, five must be the magic number. I'm being facetious. Just because Jesus explained things in terms his hearers could understand, does not mean He approves of polygamy.

There is also a parable about an unjust judge and a petitioner. Surely, it is allegory and no one thinks God approves of unjust judges.

David was NOT blessed with all those women. Read his story- horrible, David had a terrible life. One son raped his half sister, his first born by Bathsheba died, his first wife despised him she was given to another man. When David claimed the throne, he demanded his first wife back. Her new husband walked behind her all the way to David, weeping (it's very sad that he took Michal from a man, Phaltiel who loved her), Michal despised David, good for her! There were power struggles among his sons. The son he loved best revolted against him and was killed by the captain of David's army (against David's wishes), Absalom had his half brother, Amnon, killed. When David was old, his son Adonijah, plotted to take the throne. Solomon kills his half brother Adonijah. So two of his boys killed two of his other boys, and one boy rapes one of his girls. What a blessing!

Amen and no parable supports polygamy. The ten virgins was a representation of Christs return and the 5 who were true followers. The church being the bride, the church not a building but the church is all who are faithful. The church being a body means more than one body part makes up a whole body. Christ will return and take all who are part of his body.

 

[Roughsoul1991]

I don't know why anyone wants to take a parable that seems clearly spiritual and turn it into something literal. Besides, the bridegroom married five in the parable, not ten. So I suppose if you hang your hat on polygamy being sanctioned by Christ, five must be the magic number. I'm being facetious. Just because Jesus explained things in terms his hearers could understand, does not mean He approves of polygamy.

There is also a parable about an unjust judge and a petitioner. Surely, it is allegory and no one thinks God approves of unjust judges.

David was NOT blessed with all those women. Read his story- horrible, David had a terrible life. One son raped his half sister, his first born by Bathsheba died, his first wife despised him she was given to another man. When David claimed the throne, he demanded his first wife back. Her new husband walked behind her all the way to David, weeping (it's very sad that he took Michal from a man, Phaltiel who loved her), Michal despised David, good for her! There were power struggles among his sons. The son he loved best revolted against him and was killed by the captain of David's army (against David's wishes), Absalom had his half brother, Amnon, killed. When David was old, his son Adonijah, plotted to take the throne. Solomon kills his half brother Adonijah. So two of his boys killed two of his other boys, and one boy rapes one of his girls. What a blessing!

Amen and no parable supports polygamy. The ten virgins was a representation of Christs return and the 5 who were true followers. The church being the bride, the church not a building but the church is all who are faithful. The church being a body means more than one body part makes up a whole body. Christ will return and take all who are part of his body.

 

[Depleted]

Hi everyone!

I honestly think polygamy wouldn't be good for anyone and it isn't God's will. (I'd never share my husband )

What's your opinion?

"Give unto Caesar what is Caesar's." On that grounds, polygamy is out... at least in America. It's against the law. And as long as the law isn't against God's law, we're supposed to abide by it.

That said, I'm curious. You won't share your husband? Would you add a new one, or two, or three? It seems it's always assumed one guy/multiple wives. But it's still polygamy if it's one wife/multiple husbands.

(I personally think women are too smart to want more than one husband. It's usually the guys who think it won't be a problem. lol)

 

[Galatea]

I think that maybe you have missed the point I was making, so let me more clear ? 1Cirinthians 7:6 But I speak this by permission and not as a commandment ( 1-5 ) was not a commandment but he 1-5 according to the laws of man, if 1-5 was a commandment, then it would been from the Lord but 1-5 was not a commandment from the Lord, as Paul ends statement and give the answer to 7:1-5 in 7:1-6. Now Paul goes on and makes another in 7:7-9 as gives the answer to 7: 7:9 in 7:10:11, and he says, and unto the married, I command, yet not I but the Lord, let not the wife ddepart from her husband but and if she depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband and let not the husband put away his wife. 7:10-11 would be commandment from the Lord but 7:1-5 was not a commandment from the Lord. 7:9 says, but if they can not contain ( the desire to marry ) then let them marry, for it is better to marry than to burn ( with the passion to marry, in other words, they can marry. ) Now Paul goes on, so watch what he says ? But to the rest speak I, not the Lord. ( what he is about to speak, he says was not from the Lord but it was his words ) if any brother has a wife that believes not and she be pleased to dwell with him ( the believer ) let him not put her away. ( Paul throughout chapter 7 reveals what came from the Lord and what came from himself, now look at what Paul says about virgins ? 7:25 Now concerning virgins, I have no commandment of the Lord ( no commandment from the Lord concerning virgins ) yet I give my judgment ( his judgment not the Lords judgment ) as one that has obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful. He obtained mercy, meaning to speak his own judgment or his own words or give advice based on his understanding. Chapter 7 is more the words of Paul, his advice, with very little words from the Lord.

I understand, but I Corinthians 7 does not negate Ephesians 5 which is even stronger about marriage being monogamous. There is no proviso in Ephesians saying "Okay, guys, this is Paul speaking now, not God." I trust Paul was an ethical scholar and not just putting in his own thoughts, unless he tells us. If he were dishonest, he would have told us he definitely was caught up to the third Heaven. But he clearly says he is not sure if he had a vision or if his spirit actually left his body. I agree that there is not much in I Corinthians 7 that is not Paul's personal opinion, we are in accordance about this.

My point is that since Paul is so scrupulous, we can trust that when he does not give us a proviso, then the words are from God. So Ephesians 5 would be God's ideal of marriage (which echoes Christ's words about the subject).

 

[Roughsoul1991]

I think that maybe you have missed the point I was making, so let me more clear ? 1Cirinthians 7:6 But I speak this by permission and not as a commandment ( 1-5 ) was not a commandment but he 1-5 according to the laws of man, if 1-5 was a commandment, then it would been from the Lord but 1-5 was not a commandment from the Lord, as Paul ends statement and give the answer to 7:1-5 in 7:1-6. Now Paul goes on and makes another in 7:7-9 as gives the answer to 7: 7:9 in 7:10:11, and he says, and unto the married, I command, yet not I but the Lord, let not the wife ddepart from her husband but and if she depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband and let not the husband put away his wife. 7:10-11 would be commandment from the Lord but 7:1-5 was not a commandment from the Lord. 7:9 says, but if they can not contain ( the desire to marry ) then let them marry, for it is better to marry than to burn ( with the passion to marry, in other words, they can marry. ) Now Paul goes on, so watch what he says ? But to the rest speak I, not the Lord. ( what he is about to speak, he says was not from the Lord but it was his words ) if any brother has a wife that believes not and she be pleased to dwell with him ( the believer ) let him not put her away. ( Paul throughout chapter 7 reveals what came from the Lord and what came from himself, now look at what Paul says about virgins ? 7:25 Now concerning virgins, I have no commandment of the Lord ( no commandment from the Lord concerning virgins ) yet I give my judgment ( his judgment not the Lords judgment ) as one that has obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful. He obtained mercy, meaning to speak his own judgment or his own words or give advice based on his understanding. Chapter 7 is more the words of Paul, his advice, with very little words from the Lord.

Do you think God through the Holy Spirit wouldn't work in Paul and what he said? Do you think God is not powerful enough to influence man to write his Word down and to control what God wanted in the Bible? God tells us we can trust in him. Why? Because we can take his Word and know it to be true. His word being the holy inspired Word of God written down in the Bible. If some passages wasn't true then that would make God not trustworthy. And then we we would only use the words written in red and throw out Gods use in and through man. Not a wise way to take scriptures.