Polygamy

[Justin Mangonel]

Dear Zebra,

I really like your posts...very well thought out.

Blessings,

Justin

 

[Raeneske]

My point with David was quite simple. The wives became David's wives. If polygyny didn't please God, I doubt that he himself would be giving David more wives!

Explain how it's adultery? Well, I would say that Jesus was extending the definition of adultery, just as he did when he explained about the sin in the mind. The emphasis is on putting away.

The point I'm going to make, is that if ANYONE knew the oracles of God by heart, DAVID DID!
Your assumption that polygyny is a sin of ignorance, is completely unsupported, since even in the NT, all you can pull up, are verses relating to divorce.



A person? Please read more carefully. Paul was referring to specific offices - deacons and bishops to be precise. Now if we're going to accept this at base value, then instantly it tells us that polygyny WAS practised in the church, and was accepted, bar these two positions. Any more questions?

But I'm not finished! lol.
If you look at the greek word for one in these verses, you find that they mean "one or first". I can think of a much better explanation. Paul was saying that if you want to get involved in ministry, you can't be a divorcee, you must still be married to your first wife.

This harmonizes with what we read in Scripture. As I've stated so many times, polygyny is never denounced nor condemned. Go figure.

Of course Jesus was expanding the definition of adultery. But, did he do so arbitrarily, or was there a reason for what He said? Why was it sin to put away your wife, and marry another, if you supposedly have a "bill of divorcement".

1 Corinthians 7:10-11 And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart 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.

Jesus said to put your wife away and marry another, you commit adultery. In this passage, the Lord commands again not to put your wife away, or for the wife to divorce her husband. If they do, He tells them to remain unmarried, or be reconciled back to one another. However, if they marry, what did Jesus say they have done?

Matthew 19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

Mark 10:11-12 And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery.

The question is, why is it sin to marry another, if they "supposedly" have been put away? The only true divorce was that of adultery and fornication. Anything other than that, there is no divorce.

David may have known the Orcales of God, but that does not mean that David knew everything.

The reason I pull up scriptures of marriage (you say divorce), is because I'm trying to get you to reason something, and then you can see the reasoning of one who firmly takes his stand that the scriptures say, "No!".

And how about concubines? Is this okay too, since David had them? After all, he knew the oracles of God.

2 Samuel 5:13 And David took him more concubines and wives out of Jerusalem, after he was come from Hebron: and there were yet sons and daughters born to David.

 

[Selene]

My point with David was quite simple. The wives became David's wives. If polygyny didn't please God, I doubt that he himself would be giving David more wives!

Explain how it's adultery? Well, I would say that Jesus was extending the definition of adultery, just as he did when he explained about the sin in the mind. The emphasis is on putting away.

The point I'm going to make, is that if ANYONE knew the oracles of God by heart, DAVID DID!
Your assumption that polygyny is a sin of ignorance, is completely unsupported, since even in the NT, all you can pull up, are verses relating to divorce.



A person? Please read more carefully. Paul was referring to specific offices - deacons and bishops to be precise. Now if we're going to accept this at base value, then instantly it tells us that polygyny WAS practised in the church, and was accepted, bar these two positions. Any more questions?

But I'm not finished! lol.
If you look at the greek word for one in these verses, you find that they mean "one or first". I can think of a much better explanation. Paul was saying that if you want to get involved in ministry, you can't be a divorcee, you must still be married to your first wife.

This harmonizes with what we read in Scripture. As I've stated so many times, polygyny is never denounced nor condemned. Go figure.

St. Paul was saying that in order to take the office of bishop or deacon, one must be of MORAL STANDING. This is what St. Paul stated:

1 Timothy 3:2-3 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;

All the things that St. Paul put under that list is a requirement for morality. To be the husband of one wife was considered moral together with being vigilant, sober, of good behavior, etc.... Thus, by the New Testament, it is already understood that polygamy is IMMORAL.

 

[Rex]

St. Paul was saying that in order to take the office of bishop or deacon, one must be of MORAL STANDING. This is what St. Paul stated:

1 Timothy 3:2-3 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;

All the things that St. Paul put under that list is a requirement for morality. To be the husband of one wife was considered moral together with being vigilant, sober, of good behavior, etc.... Thus, by the New Testament, it is already understood that polygamy is IMMORAL.

I find it humorous that you use scripture to support a point
But the RCC ignores the same scripture when it comes to its own Bishops, actually prohibiting marriage. Is that good behavior?

 

[Metatron]

1 Corinthians 7:1-40

Marriage

1Now for the matters you wrote about: It is good for a man not to marry. 2But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband. 3The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4The wife's body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband's body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife.5Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. 6I say this as a concession, not as a command. 7I wish that all men were as I am. But each man has his own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that.
8Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I am. 9But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.
10To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. 11But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife.
12To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord): If any brother has a wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must not divorce her.13And if a woman has a husband who is not a believer and he is willing to live with her, she must not divorce him. 14For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.
15But if the unbeliever leaves, let him do so. A believing man or woman is not bound in such circumstances; God has called us to live in peace.16How do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or, how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?
17Nevertheless, each one should retain the place in life that the Lord assigned to him and to which God has called him. This is the rule I lay down in all the churches. 18Was a man already circumcised when he was called? He should not become uncircumcised. Was a man uncircumcised when he was called? He should not be circumcised. 19Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing. Keeping God's commands is what counts.20Each one should remain in the situation which he was in when God called him. 21Were you a slave when you were called? Don't let it trouble you—although if you can gain your freedom, do so. 22For he who was a slave when he was called by the Lord is the Lord's freedman; similarly, he who was a free man when he was called is Christ's slave. 23You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of men. 24Brothers, each man, as responsible to God, should remain in the situation God called him to.
25Now about virgins: I have no command from the Lord, but I give a judgment as one who by the Lord's mercy is trustworthy. 26Because of the present crisis, I think that it is good for you to remain as you are. 27Are you married? Do not seek a divorce. Are you unmarried? Do not look for a wife. 28But if you do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. But those who marry will face many troubles in this life, and I want to spare you this.
29What I mean, brothers, is that the time is short. From now on those who have wives should live as if they had none; 30those who mourn, as if they did not; those who are happy, as if they were not; those who buy something, as if it were not theirs to keep; 31those who use the things of the world, as if not engrossed in them. For this world in its present form is passing away.
32I would like you to be free from concern. An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord's affairs—how he can please the Lord. 33But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world—how he can please his wife— 34and his interests are divided. An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord's affairs: Her aim is to be devoted to the Lord in both body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world—how she can please her husband. 35I am saying this for your own good, not to restrict you, but that you may live in a right way in undivided devotion to the Lord.
36If anyone thinks he is acting improperly toward the virgin he is engaged to, and if she is getting along in years and he feels he ought to marry, he should do as he wants. He is not sinning. They should get married. 37But the man who has settled the matter in his own mind, who is under no compulsion but has control over his own will, and who has made up his mind not to marry the virgin—this man also does the right thing. 38So then, he who marries the virgin does right, but he who does not marry her does even better.
39A woman is bound to her husband as long as he lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to marry anyone she wishes, but he must belong to the Lord. 40In my judgment, she is happier if she stays as she is—and I think that I too have the Spirit of God.

 

[Selene]

I find it humorous that you use scripture to support a point
But the RCC ignores the same scripture when it comes to its own Bishops, actually prohibiting marriage. Is that good behavior?

Does this mean that you support polygamy?? Actually, we do support scripture when it comes to bishops. Our bishops and priests prefer to answer to a much higher calling. They want to imitate Christ who is single. As Christ said in the Holy Bible:

Luke 20:34-36 Jesus replied, "The people of this age marry and are given in marriage. But those who are considered worthy of taking part in that age and in the resurrection from the dead will neither marry nor be given in marriage, and they can no longer die; for they are like the angels. They are God's children, since they are children of the resurrection

1 Corinthians 7:1-40

Marriage

1Now for the matters you wrote about: It is good for a man not to marry. 2But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband. 3The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4The wife's body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband's body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife.5Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. 6I say this as a concession, not as a command. 7I wish that all men were as I am. But each man has his own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that.
8Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I am. 9But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.
10To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. 11But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife.
12To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord): If any brother has a wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must not divorce her.13And if a woman has a husband who is not a believer and he is willing to live with her, she must not divorce him. 14For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.
15But if the unbeliever leaves, let him do so. A believing man or woman is not bound in such circumstances; God has called us to live in peace.16How do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or, how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?
17Nevertheless, each one should retain the place in life that the Lord assigned to him and to which God has called him. This is the rule I lay down in all the churches. 18Was a man already circumcised when he was called? He should not become uncircumcised. Was a man uncircumcised when he was called? He should not be circumcised. 19Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing. Keeping God's commands is what counts.20Each one should remain in the situation which he was in when God called him. 21Were you a slave when you were called? Don't let it trouble you—although if you can gain your freedom, do so. 22For he who was a slave when he was called by the Lord is the Lord's freedman; similarly, he who was a free man when he was called is Christ's slave. 23You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of men. 24Brothers, each man, as responsible to God, should remain in the situation God called him to.
25Now about virgins: I have no command from the Lord, but I give a judgment as one who by the Lord's mercy is trustworthy. 26Because of the present crisis, I think that it is good for you to remain as you are. 27Are you married? Do not seek a divorce. Are you unmarried? Do not look for a wife. 28But if you do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. But those who marry will face many troubles in this life, and I want to spare you this.
29What I mean, brothers, is that the time is short. From now on those who have wives should live as if they had none; 30those who mourn, as if they did not; those who are happy, as if they were not; those who buy something, as if it were not theirs to keep; 31those who use the things of the world, as if not engrossed in them. For this world in its present form is passing away.
32I would like you to be free from concern. An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord's affairs—how he can please the Lord. 33But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world—how he can please his wife— 34and his interests are divided. An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord's affairs: Her aim is to be devoted to the Lord in both body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world—how she can please her husband. 35I am saying this for your own good, not to restrict you, but that you may live in a right way in undivided devotion to the Lord.
36If anyone thinks he is acting improperly toward the virgin he is engaged to, and if she is getting along in years and he feels he ought to marry, he should do as he wants. He is not sinning. They should get married. 37But the man who has settled the matter in his own mind, who is under no compulsion but has control over his own will, and who has made up his mind not to marry the virgin—this man also does the right thing. 38So then, he who marries the virgin does right, but he who does not marry her does even better.
39A woman is bound to her husband as long as he lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to marry anyone she wishes, but he must belong to the Lord. 40In my judgment, she is happier if she stays as she is—and I think that I too have the Spirit of God.

Excellent point!! This biblical scripture says it better. In the New Testament, it is already polygamy is already considered immoral. It was never part of God's plan in the first place.

 

[Rex]

Does this mean that you support polygamy?? Actually, we do support scripture when it comes to bishops. Our bishops and priests prefer to answer to a much higher calling. They want to imitate Christ who is single. As Christ said in the Holy Bible:

Luke 20:34-35 Jesus replied, "The people of this age marry and are given in marriage. But those who are considered worthy of taking part in that age and in the resurrection from the dead will neither marry nor be given in marriage,

Oh far be it from me, a lowly protestant to speak before those that hold the keys to interpretation, why! even the very keys of life.
So please find my lowly post in this thread and discern for yourself the intent of my heart. Your appears to change with the tide, like a stick in the sea

 

[Selene]

Oh far be it from me, a lowly protestant to speak before those that hold the keys to interpretation, why! even the very keys of life.
So please find my lowly post in this thread and discern for yourself the intent of my heart. Your appears to change with the tide, like a stick in the sea

God bless you, my brother. :)


By the way, in case you did not know, some of the bishops and priests of the Eastern Catholics (who are also Roman Catholics) are married. It is only in the western-rite Church that bishops and priests chose not to marry. :) I am a Roman Catholic of the western-rite Church.

 

[THE Gypsy]

Does this mean that you support polygamy?? Actually, we do support scripture when it comes to bishops. Our bishops and priests prefer to answer to a much higher calling. They want to imitate Christ who is single. As Christ said in the Holy Bible:

Luke 20:34-36 Jesus replied, "The people of this age marry and are given in marriage. But those who are considered worthy of taking part in that age and in the resurrection from the dead will neither marry nor be given in marriage, and they can no longer die; for they are like the angels. They are God's children, since they are children of the resurrection

You do know who Christ was talking to in those verses, right? And what he was talking about? To apply that scripture to the support the control of bishops and priests is taking it totally out of the context of the original intent.

 

[Rex]

God bless you, my brother. :)


By the way, in case you did not know, some of the bishops and priests of the Eastern Catholics (who are also Roman Catholics) are married. It is only in the western-rite Church that bishops and priests chose not to marry. :) I am a Roman Catholic of the western-rite Church.

Well wheee doggy you must think that's something very special, why down were I was taught we don't spend much time a bragging about something that was a given to us, cuss you see we never earned it in the first place, and it wern't no gift from some dude a wearing a costume and a carrin a golden walking stick. We a don't be a kiddin ourselves that we be a doin Gods work ether.

Oh and youra welcome I thought I would feed your ego and sure enough you done swallowed hook line and sinker.

You do know who Christ was talking to in those verses, right? And what he was talking about? To apply that scripture to the support the control of bishops and priests is taking it totally out of the context of the original intent.

Wooo now there brother, you gest be a carful their these people bea believen that only them is a worthy of a knowin God.
Lord only knows what may bea lerking, have youa cheked their household?
for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God’s church?
I'd be sayin that Ifin I never had a household then hows coulda I ever be a knowin

 

[Raeneske]

Does this mean that you support polygamy?? Actually, we do support scripture when it comes to bishops. Our bishops and priests prefer to answer to a much higher calling. They want to imitate Christ who is single. As Christ said in the Holy Bible:

Luke 20:34-36 Jesus replied, "The people of this age marry and are given in marriage. But those who are considered worthy of taking part in that age and in the resurrection from the dead will neither marry nor be given in marriage, and they can no longer die; for they are like the angels. They are God's children, since they are children of the resurrection



Excellent point!! This biblical scripture says it better. In the New Testament, it is already polygamy is already considered immoral. It was never part of God's plan in the first place.

Let me get this straight. While you're defending traditional marriage (I do as well), you use the verse that states bishops should have a wife.The verse even seems to imply having children; After all if you cannot rule your own house well, how in the world do you expect to take care of God's church? But when it comes your church making the priests have to be celibate, you call it a higher calling?

1 Timothy 3:2-5 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)

How is forbidding what the Word of God says a higher calling?

1 Timothy 4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

I'm not sure if you realize this, but not only is this hypocritical, but the Word of God says it's also a doctrine of devils.

 

[Pelaides]

You do know who Christ was talking to in those verses, right? And what he was talking about? To apply that scripture to the support the control of bishops and priests is taking it totally out of the context of the original intent.

Matthew 19:12 "For there are some eunuchs,which are born from their mothers womb:and their are some eunuchs,which were made eunuchs of men:and their are eunuchs,which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdoms of heavens sake.He that is able to receive it let him recieve it"

Here Jesus is explaining to his diciples that celibacy is the best way to be.
The Priests ,Bishops and all other christians who are celibate are doing the right thing.

 

[Raeneske]

Matthew 19:12 "For there are some eunuchs,which are born from their mothers womb:and their are some eunuchs,which were made eunuchs of men:and their are eunuchs,which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdoms of heavens sake.He that is able to receive it let him recieve it"

Here Jesus is explaining to his diciples that celibacy is the best way to be.
The Priests ,Bishops and all other christians who are celibate are doing the right thing.

Choosing celibacy is one thing, but forbidding themany other choice but celibacy, is a doctrine of devils.

 

[Rex]

Well I just been a takin with my pa and he was a tellin me that these catholic believe; that a knowin God is like a game of tag yasee
Jesus tagged and made his followers it, and its been a goin on ever since, someone makes someones else it and ifin they dont take a liken to ya they wont tag ya.
So yasee ifin that dude with the fancy robes dont take a liken to ya or you not be a doin as he says he won't tag ya with a knowin God.

Sounds kinda like a kids game to me, spreading cooties and all exceptin they be thinkin they be spreadin God around as they be a liken.

 

[Pelaides]

Oh far be it from me, a lowly protestant to speak before those that hold the keys to interpretation, why! even the very keys of life.
So please find my lowly post in this thread and discern for yourself the intent of my heart. Your appears to change with the tide, like a stick in the sea

Why dont you just stick to the topic.instead of turning this into a protesant vs the catholics thing.

 

[THE Gypsy]

Wooo now there brother, you gest be a carful their these people bea believen that only them is a worthy of a knowin God.
Lord only knows what may bea lerking, have youa cheked their household?
for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God’s church?
I'd be sayin that Ifin I never had a household then hows coulda I ever be a knowin

Silly me.





BTW...Do I look like a "brother"?

 

[Pelaides]

Choosing celibacy is one thing, but forbidding themany other choice but celibacy, is a doctrine of devils.

Its a doctrine of your imagination,ive been reading your posts for 2 days now ,and you are wrong about 80% of the time.

Jesus himself says celibacy is something good,and you are opposed to it ?

 

[THE Gypsy]

Matthew 19:12 "For there are some eunuchs,which are born from their mothers womb:and their are some eunuchs,which were made eunuchs of men:and their are eunuchs,which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdoms of heavens sake.He that is able to receive it let him recieve it"Here Jesus is explaining to his diciples that celibacy is the best way to be.The Priests ,Bishops and all other christians who are celibate are doing the right thing.

That's just fine, however, THAT was NOT the scripture I was addressing in my post nor was it the subject content now was it? But, then again, I suspect you are well aware of that.

 

[Raeneske]

Its a doctrine of your imagination,ive been reading your posts for 2 days now ,and you are wrong about 80% of the time.

Jesus himself says celibacy is something good,and you are opposed to it ?

Not what I said. I said, choosing to be celibate is one thing, but forbidding them any other choice (ie. forbidding marriage, by demanding they be celibate) is a doctrine of Devils. And those aren't my words. Those are God's. (1 Timonthy 4:1-3).

 

[Rex]

Why dont you just stick to the topic.instead of turning this into a protesant vs the catholics thing.

ooh ge can't a feller have a little funnin
This topic and the main players will still be discussing this when the Lord returns.
Just when was the last time when discussing theology you actually seen someone say, your right and I'm wrong in real life let alone on a forum.

May your many wifes provide you the desires of your heart.