|
|
Post by bryce on Jul 11, 2009 8:13:56 GMT -8
The first commandment in the  is that we get married and have children, God blessed them; and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth." (Genesis 1:28, NASB)What are some instances where people might not obey that commandment? Some people don't want to get married, and some who do get married don't want to have children or they want to control the number of children they have through birth control methods. Paul says that bad people "forbid marriage" (1 Timothy 4:3, NASB). I don't know a tonne about the ideas in the early church, but I've heard that monasticism became something that people adopted. Are the ideas of monasticism valid? I also heard that monogamy, as opposed to polygyny, was established as the only valid form of marriage. "Now indeed in our time, and in keeping with Roman custom, it is no longer allowed to take another wife, so as to have more than one wife living." [emphasis added] (The Good of Marriage, Chapter 7, Saint Augustine)In my search for truth I have come across the values that many Christians have and I've noticed that they are contrary to Scripture in many cases. I'd love to discuss these matters with you folks and come to understand them better! Love, brYce |
|
|
|
Post by lawrenceofisrael on Jul 11, 2009 13:39:21 GMT -8
You know brother there is a bible verse which states that some brothers and sisters are chosen to live a single life. The Apostle Shaul (may the Lord remember him) said that it is better for a person that way. However marriage is still something with a high value for us.
To that polygamy point. I agree there is not one single proof in the bible that only monogamy is permitted. I´ve had a lot of discussions on that and nobody could provide proof.
peace and blessings be upon you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Jul 12, 2009 4:43:56 GMT -8
I have to disagree, if upon no other basis, that mathmatically more than one wife is not reasonable.
And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
(Matthew 19:5-6 KJV)
The word "du-o" is the word "two". The five shall not become one flesh, nor the three; but the two.
It's unfortunate that the limitations of language (or our simplistic understanding of it) leaves room in the Hebrew texts for multiple wives. The "eeshah" (wife or woman) is generic in the sense that not all women who are under the protective covering of a man are his wives as we would understand the term today; but as the term would be used in the Bible. For instance, both my wife and her mother live in my home. Both are under my protection and care: both are sustained by my financial providence; yet only one of them wears my wedding ring.
If he take him another wife; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish.
(Exodus 21:10 KJV)
The understanding of this text is that if you are able to take on a second wife (in the sense that we understand marriage), then you really weren't much of a husband to the first wife to begin with. You certainly were not "one flesh" with her, otherwise there could be no room for the second.
|
|
|
|
Post by lawrenceofisrael on Jul 12, 2009 11:31:03 GMT -8
See Mark the reason why i believe in polygamy is because it was practised in ancient Israel.
Yes it says the two shall be one flesh, of course because its impossible to lie with too women at the same time.
God even used Yakov´s two wives for establishing his nation on earth.
He even forced some people two marry at least a second wife,
When the physical brother died the Israelite is commanded to take his wife (if there´s not already a son) as his own wife and the first male offspring shall be named after the death brother that his name should not be erased.
Now what if the brother is already married?
And why didn´t God jugde anybody in the tenach for conducting polygamy but rather commanded his prophets sometimes to do so??
Peace and blessings be upon you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Jul 12, 2009 15:43:37 GMT -8
God also used the tower of babel; but that doesn't justify open rebellion against God's commands. There are a lot of things that were practiced by ancient Israel (like folks doing whatever seemed right in their own eyes) which were blatantly against . If you consider Paul to have been a observant Jew and consider His description of the husband/wife relationship in Ephesians 5:25-28, there is no room for polygamy. How could you possibly say, "I love my wife unselfishly and sacrificially; but I think I'll get another." I know that my wife would question such logic quite strongly. |
|
|
|
Post by Rachel on Jul 12, 2009 20:57:47 GMT -8
If a man were to take a second wife, couldn't it be considered adultery?
|
|
|
|
Post by lawrenceofisrael on Jul 12, 2009 23:56:42 GMT -8
Still if you forget all the morals of the western world which obviously is a world of monogamy there is still the question of the physical brother´s wife one has to marry when the brother is death without a male descendant.
That is forced polygamy. And it´s not open rebellion Mark for there is no explicit truth for it in the scriptures.
Peace and blessings be upon us all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Jul 13, 2009 5:12:27 GMT -8
The conditions for this rule in Deut. 25:5 are very specific: if brethren dwell together. The likely circumstance is that the brother yet living is not yet married since they are all part ofone household. Yet, even if the living brother is married, the conditions of this new relationship do not place her on the same grounds in relationship as his first wife (he is not to diminish anything in the primary relationship). Any sexual involvement is specifically fo rthe purpose of bringing a son into the world so that the woman will have someone to care for her in her old age. Monogamy was a trademark of Roman society, and thus, considered by a number of scholars as a Roman influence upon Christianity (and by extension upon Judaism). Yet, at first glance, also commands ethnic genocide, human sacrifice, ritual mutilation/child abuse and a whole host of other deplorable things that once we begin to understand cultural context in which these things were written become much clearer and thus more reasonable. I've explained already that "eeshah" (the word for wife) is not exclusively referring to the modern husband/wife relationship. It is true that there is an accomodation of multiple eeshah's under the responsibility of one man; but the specificity of the requirements placed upon these relationships make clear that biblical Judaism does not embrace a polygamous society. |
|
veggirl
Full Member
Greetings!
Posts: 103
|
Post by veggirl on Jul 13, 2009 10:11:42 GMT -8
Rachel,
Yes if a man has a second wife its adultery! Polygamy is also against the law! and it says in the bible we are to obey the law of the land!
Its also not healthy to have many wives, having that much sex and with a lot of women come on! thats gross... Just like a women God wants the man healthy also..
Peace~Bri'gette
|
|
|
|
Post by bryce on Jul 24, 2009 17:22:12 GMT -8
I have to disagree, if upon no other basis, that mathmatically more than one wife is not reasonable. I think that is realistic to think that there are some situations where there might be more men in a community than women. For example, after a war there might be a lot more women than men and some men would have to take more than one wife to ensure there weren't lonely women. Or, perhaps some faith communities might find themselves with many more women in their congregations than men. Should those single Christian women marry unbelievers instead of men who already have a wife? God forbid! If he take him another wife; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish. (Exodus 21:10 KJV) The understanding of this text is that if you are able to take on a second wife (in the sense that we understand marriage), then you really weren't much of a husband to the first wife to begin with. You certainly were not "one flesh" with her, otherwise there could be no room for the second. Well, that might be true. However, I don't think it's fair to make that judgement about all men who would have more than one wife. |
|
|
|
Post by bryce on Jul 24, 2009 17:26:56 GMT -8
You know brother there is a bible verse which states that some brothers and sisters are chosen to live a single life. The Apostle Shaul (may the Lord remember him) said that it is better for a person that way. However marriage is still something with a high value for us. To that polygamy point. I agree there is not one single proof in the bible that only monogamy is permitted. I´ve had a lot of discussions on that and nobody could provide proof. peace and blessings be upon you. It's nice to meet someone who understands that the Bible does not forbid a man more than one wife. Sadly, the common Christian understanding of what adultery is, and isn't, is wrong. The common Jewish understanding of adultery is pretty good. Now, I wonder about your statement that Paul thought it was better to be single. Perhaps he thought that for people who were as he was, but I don't think he thought that was best for all Christians. What do you think? |
|
|
|
Post by bryce on Jul 24, 2009 17:32:47 GMT -8
See Mark the reason why i believe in polygamy is because it was practised in ancient Israel. Yes it says the two shall be one flesh, of course because its impossible to lie with too women at the same time. God even used Yakov´s two wives for establishing his nation on earth. He even forced some people two marry at least a second wife, When the physical brother died the Israelite is commanded to take his wife (if there´s not already a son) as his own wife and the first male offspring shall be named after the death brother that his name should not be erased. Now what if the brother is already married? And why didn´t God jugde anybody in the tenach for conducting polygamy but rather commanded his prophets sometimes to do so?? Peace and blessings be upon you. You made a good point concerning the Levirate marriage. I'd also like to point out that a man who seduced a virgin was commanded to marry her. Of course, married men weren't exempted from this commandment. Check out Exodus 22:16-17. It was this verse that set me off on discovering what the Tanach says about marriage. I asked myself, "What if the man is married?" and I tried to find evidence that the commandments of forbade a man more than one wife. The next thing I discovered is that I had been lied to concerning what adultery was. Oh boy! |
|
|
|
Post by bryce on Jul 24, 2009 17:37:25 GMT -8
Ladies,
Adultery is when a man has sex with a married woman. A married man who has sex with an available woman does not commit adultery. If you don't believe me, Google it and search for the JEWISH definition of adultery — not the Christian one.
Peace,
brYce
|
|
|
|
Post by yeshuafreak on Jul 24, 2009 20:42:01 GMT -8
any type of sexual immorality is called fornication. however, specific types of sexual immorality is called adultry, whichbrYce gives the definition of above.
i agree that the bible no where says that polygamy was wrong except in the cases of priests and leaders in the church.
also, i read somewhere in ex or dt where it limits the number of wives to two.
however, sometimes as brYce pointed out, married men are cammanded to be polygamists. however, these laws are no longer in place as theocratic Yisraelno longer exists, and the law of the land commands that monogomy is the way.
however, i have alot of political issues concerning the law restricting certain types of marriage- politics has no business getting into a persons bedroom. but this is not th eplace.
anyway, shalom- john
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Jul 25, 2009 4:35:52 GMT -8
Getting past the fact that I find this discussion personally offensive and just plain creepy (for the record), I find it odd that you (Bryce) would wonder about Paul's statement that it is better for a man to remain single. He explains his comment straightforwardly:
But I would have you without carefulness. He that is unmarried careth for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please the Lord: But he that is married careth for the things that are of the world, how he may please his wife. There is difference also between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please her husband.
(1 Corinthians 7:32-34 KJV)
Consistently, in Paul's addresses, the word is found to be singular. Monogamy is assumed. A bit tongue in cheek; but somewhat applicable, Messiah's words come to mind where He says, "No man can serve two masters..." I believe that the application is consistent- that preference will be undeniably given to one above another. Even if that prefence alternates, such circumstances make the husband unable to fulfill the command for the husband to love the wife (Ithe lesser wife of the moment) as Messiah self-sacrificially as Messiah loves the Church (Epheisians 5:25).
The rules allowing for more than one wife are given for specific and extreme circumstances- as are the laws concerning genocide, as are the laws for the cities of refuge. It is adding to the Law to broaden the scope of the command to be applied one's preferences.
|
|
is that we get married and have children,
