Results 1 - 9 of 9
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | Swordman007 | 68317 | ||
Dear friends, please understand that I am not a Mormon. I am a Southern Baptist. Polygamy existed as a foundational marriage structure LONG before Mormonism was ever known on this planet. It is interesting that many will jump onto the bandwagon of condemnation when the issue of polygamy is brought up. Many say that God's Law prohibited a man from having more than one wife, and yet they say this at the expense of ignoring the fact that God's Law made governing provision for a man to have more than one wife in Deut, 21:15. Lev. 18:18 is not in any way a prohibition against a man having more than one wife. God Himself gave king David five of his 18 wives as is revealed in 2 Sam. 12:8. Is God therefore sinning against His own moral absolutes? Also, the use of the verses dealing with a man multiplying wives to himself is also a common blunder made by many. The same context deals with a man multiplying horses and chariots to himself. Are we then to assume that it is wrong for a man to own more than one horse, or more than one car (chariot)? Not so. The idea of multiplying women, horses and chariots had to do with pride in one's wealth. If one multiplies these things (or anything else for that matter) as a form of pride in one's social "status", then he has done so for the wrong reason. The patriarchs fell not because they had more than one wife, but because they sinned. If having more than one wife were a sin, then one would have to accuse God Himself of sin, especially when He provided imagry of His being a polygamist Himself when He called Judah and Israel His "wives". God would certainly not associate Himself with that which He considered to be sin, and He certainly would not have given king David several of his already multiple wives. Where it is true that God gave Adam only one wife, this is an argument with no merit when applying it with such broad meaning that stretches it FAR beyond the intent within Genesis. God also gave Adam a Garden to tend, but He did not give the rest of us a Garden. Have we been cheated? Not at all. God aldo gave Elisha power that He did not give to Abraham. Does that mean that Abraham was cheated because he was not given the same power. It is my hope that the many falacies in the reasoning presented against polygamy can teach us all to be more succinct and powerful in our reasoning and presentation. Then we move on to Titus and Timothy. Suppose that we leave the popular translation intact. The prohibition is only against bishops (overseers) and deacons from having more than one wife, not the laity. Translating the Greek word (mia) as "one" is actually inconsistent with the context of these verses. It makes more sense to translate (mia) as "first" wife, just as the Greek Lexicons show us. This gives greater consistency to Paul's instructions. It makes far better sense to say that a bishop and a deacon should STILL be married to his first wife, therefore not having been divorced since divorce is a poor example to the Church, and VERY anti-family. To think that Paul would suddenly throw in the issue of plural wives out of nowhere is beyond textual consistency and introduces incontinuity. Many people try to speak authoritatively by declaring that God intended there to be only one man and one woman in marriage, but this is a declaration with no real teeth. It denies God's clear teaching on this issue. It rests itself upon the grounds of misinterpretation and transliteration of the root texts from which our Bibles were translated. Yes, God has many "brides". If we are the "bride" of Christ, that "bride" is still composed of MANY individuals. The imagry is consistent. Several wives are joined togeher into one family unit through a common husband, just as we are joined together into one body through a common Lord. If God did not look favorably upon polygamy, then He certainly did a good job of saying absolutely nothing against it to all the prophets and patriarchs who practiced it across more than 1000 years. Does this sound absurd? It is my thought that we would do better to abstain from pitting God's word against itself and read it for what it says. I can reasonably take to task any who add meaning into key verses that clearly is not there. Any of us can weave a doctrinal tapestry by pulling verses out of context. The REAL challenge is keeping that tapestry from unraveling when pulling on the many wild threads hanging loose. | ||||||
2 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | Morant61 | 68404 | ||
Greetings Don! I just happened across your post this morning! May I address a few points you made? 1) You said: " Many say that God's Law prohibited a man from having more than one wife, and yet they say this at the expense of ignoring the fact that God's Law made governing provision for a man to have more than one wife in Deut, 21:15." Yet, Deut. 21:15 does not provide a legal mandate for plural marriages. It simply provides legal protection for the children of multiple marriages. Where are the verses which specifically say that multiple marriages is authorized by God? 2) You wrote: "It makes more sense to translate (mia) as "first" wife, just as the Greek Lexicons show us." Which Greek lexicons show us this? According to my information, 'mia' can be used in phrases like 'one hour' or 'one of the week' to indicate the 'first hour' or 'the first day of the week'. However, this is the only place where 'mia' would be translated 'first'. 3) You wrote: "If we are the "bride" of Christ, that "bride" is still composed of MANY individuals." The problem with this approach is that the Bride is identified in Scripture as the New Jerusalem, not each individual believer! I've got to run now, but welcome to the forum! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
3 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | Swordman007 | 68438 | ||
Thank you, Tim, for your note. I now see that the reference in Deut. is not quite as compelling as one would think. Allow me therefore to point you to Ex. 21:10. This section of scripture makes governing provision for a man to have more than one wife. Children are not mentioned here, so it therefore cannot be cluttered with that thought. If God were against a man having more than one wife, then this would certainly have been a good place to address any displeasure with the practice, but the Lord was completely silent concerning any alleged dislike of men having a plurality of wives. As for "mia", the Thayers is a good lexicon to learn more about this word. The case being made here is that when one counts, starting from one through ten, the first nu,ber is not "mia". You are right that "mia" can be translated as "one", but it is used as "one" within a succession, which makes its usage more consistent with "first" in this case. Again, I also made mention that placing "first" in those passages is more consistent with Paul's overall address concering divorce rather than a plurality of wives. Suddenly addressing the issue of plural wives out of the clear blue seems very inconsistent with Paul's style, which is generally consistent throughout. However, for the sake of arguemtn, let us leave "one" as the proper translation of Paul's meaning. Those verses are only addressing church leadership, not the general populace (laity). Either way, one is left with having to inject nonexistent meaning into the scriptures to say that "what was good for the leadership was good for the general populace." Can you give me more reference of the Bride being the New Jerusalem. This sounds interesting. Thanks in advance. Don |
||||||
4 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | Morant61 | 68479 | ||
Greetings Don! Thanks for your response! Allow me to respond to your points. 1) Ex. 21:10: This verse still has the same problem as your previous example. The verse deals with protecting the marital rights of women, but does not prescribe, nor condone multiple marriages. At best, your argument appears to be one of silence my friend. 2) 'Mia': You wrote: "The case being made here is that when one counts, starting from one through ten, the first number is not "mia"." Actually, this statement is not true. 'Mia' is simply the feminine form of 'heis', which is 'one'. It is not the case that it "can be" translated as 'one'. It is the case that it is usually translated as 'one'. Only rarely is it translated as 'first', and then only when it is used with an hour or day. Now, as you said, the passage is addressed to the leadership of the church. However, there is not a single verse which states that it is okay to have more than one wife. So, aren't you doing exactly what you object to others doing by reading into the silence of Scripture a point which is never actually made? ;-) 3) Bride of Christ: Rev. 21:2 and 21:9-10 are the only verses I could find which refer to the Bride of Christ, and each of these refers to the New Jerusalem. Well, I have to get some work done now! I'll chat with you later! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
5 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | Swordman007 | 68541 | ||
Ex. 21:10 says, "If he take him another wife; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish." Now, if one cannot observe that God obviously had no problem with a man having more than one wife, then He CERTAINLY would not have made governeing allowance that, as you said, ensured that the first wife would still be cared for. If God was against a man having more than one wife, then 1) this verse would either not exist at all, or 2) God would have condemned a man having plural wives in this verse without worrying about governing how the first was to be treated, AND He certainly would NEVER have given king David several more on top of what he already had. There is no reason to rehash the "mia" debate since it is a dead end street when all my comments concerning this issue are taken out of context or completely ignored. I did not see any mention of the new Jerusalem in the entire chapter of Revelation 19 when speaking of the Bride of Christ. Rev. 21:2 says, "...prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband..." There is not indication of this bride being the same as the Bride of Christ. However, verses 9-11 do make for a compelling case in your favor. Thanks for pointing that out to me. I had never really studied it before. One thing I will point out is that city STILL had FOUR walls, nit just one. ;) Thanks Don |
||||||
6 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | Morant61 | 68549 | ||
Greetings Don! Four walls! That's bad! :-) 1) Regarding laws: So, are you saying my friend that because something is legislated in the Old Testament that God approves of the legislated activity? How about Ex. 21:22? Since God legislated the action of hitting a pregnant woman, and didn't specifically say that we shouldn't do it, then God approves of it? :-) I say it respectfully, but I still say that you are doing exactly what you accuse others of doing - reading into the silence of Scripture what you what it to say. Where is the specific command and/or statement which says that a man can marry more than one woman? 2) 'Mia': In what way were your comments takend out of context or ignored? I simply made the point that 'mia' is the feminine form of 'one' and that 'one' is the usual translation, not 'first'. I'm just curious! :-) 3) New Jerusalem: Rev. 19 never identifies the Bride of the Lamb, but Rev. 21:9-10 specifically identifies the bride of the Lamb as being the city New Jerusalem. It is an interesting study. I have always heard of the Bride of Christ as being the Church, but was surprized to discover that the phrase never occurs in Scripture. 2 Cor. 11:2 is the closest I could find. Have a great day! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
7 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | Reformer Joe | 68551 | ||
I think the "bride of Christ" idea finds its support in Ephesians 5, even though the term is not used. --Joe! |
||||||
8 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | Morant61 | 68555 | ||
Greetings Joe! I concur! I was just surprized that it wasn't used as much or as clearly as I thought it might be! :-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
9 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | Reformer Joe | 68594 | ||
I just started looking more in-depth at this myself when my kooky mother-in-law came to me with her fanciful notion that the "bride of Christ" is a faithful subset of all Christians, and not the church itself. I was as surprised as you seem to be. Just goes to show what we can take for granted... --Joe! |
||||||