Biblical Polygamy

Discussion in 'Your Religion & Spiritual Center' started by daBronx, Mar 31, 2012.

ATTN: Our forums have moved here! You can still read these forums but if you'd like to participate, mosey on over to the new location.

  1. daBronx

    daBronx New Member

    www.biblicalpolygamy.com
     
  2. Intrepid

    Intrepid New Member

    The Bible is full of really good passages. You should post some of them and focus on those instead.
     
  3. daBronx

    daBronx New Member

    Like this perhaps?
    The Gospel of Thomas
    Thomas 114
    Simon Peter said to them,"Make Mary leave us,for females don't deserve life".Jesus said,"Look,I will guide her to make her male,so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males.For every female who makes herself male will enter the domain of Heaven".
     
  4. Intrepid

    Intrepid New Member

    Change religions if you don't like the one you follow. There are plenty out there.
     
  5. daBronx

    daBronx New Member

    Yes there are plenty out there but there's only one savior and that's Jesus Christ.
     
  6. Intrepid

    Intrepid New Member

    So follow His teachings and live by His example. That was exactly my point. Stop posting controversial Biblical passages that don't provide anybody, especially yourself, any benefit. Look for the good stuff in the Bible and focus on that instead.
     
  7. daBronx

    daBronx New Member

    Well I don't believe you should pick and choose what you like and what you don't like.The entire bible should be accepted by those of us who believe in the Christ.The Jews never accepted Jesus and will answer to the Father come Judgement Day.
     
  8. Intrepid

    Intrepid New Member

    Fine by me. Accept that polygamy exists in the Bible and be okay with it.
     
  9. daBronx

    daBronx New Member

    Well you see that's just it.Even though it is in the bible there are some things I have trouble accepting,like polygamy and slavery or women not going to Heaven as stated in the Gospel of Thomas.
     
  10. Intrepid

    Intrepid New Member

    The way I see it you have two choices since you've rejected the third one of looking for some other religion.

    1. The entire Bible should be accepted by those of you who believe in Christ (your words).

    2. Pick and choose the most significant passages that are relevant to you and help you live a Christ-filled life (my suggestion).

    I am not a Christian so it makes no difference to me what is written or how it is worded in the Bible. I'm just offering you secular support.
     
  11. shartsoe

    shartsoe New Member

    daBronx, there's a reason the Gospel of Thomas is outside the realm of Christian orthodoxy. I might suggest that you read a book called "The Canon of Scripture" or go to check out this website, http://christianthinktank.com/

    A good teaching on women in the bible

    http://christianthinktank.com/femalex.html

    Polygamy

    http://christianthinktank.com/polygame.html

    Or, as Sarita said, focus on the good that Jesus taught and try not to be so concerned with what you don't understand.
     
  12. Intrepid

    Intrepid New Member

    A friend of mine from school was talking to me the other day about what the Bible says in regard to women. He is a young man in his twenties, who is focused, has clear ideas and believes deeply in his faith. We get along very well despite the age difference and our difference in religious outlook. He mentioned passages from the Bible that speak of treating women like princesses and considering them to be equals.

    He does not take the Bible to be the literal word of God so passages are interpreted and understood according to their historical context. The Bible is not the only book to mention polygamy. Historically, polygamy was a necessity because of the man woman ratio, because women needed taking care of by males, because more children were needed to tend to the land and the animals, more children were needed to increase the size of tribes etc.

    I have never considered the Bible to be the literal word of God and as such, I've always taken the historical, political, social and economic contexts in which passages were written into consideration.

    So, yes, polygamy is mentioned in the Bible several times but not in the New Testament. I understand there is a discrepancy between thou shalt not commit adultery and so and so having more than one wife, but again, take the context into consideration along with the words.
     
  13. daBronx

    daBronx New Member

    I typed in the search bar,"Is polygamy mentioned in the new testament"and the answer is,contrary to what Sarita said,yes.
     
  14. Intrepid

    Intrepid New Member

    Which verse? I'm curious. Teach me something new.
     
  15. Gina05

    Gina05 Guest

    I like the phrasing, it's almost just like the Presidentail Debates!

    Y $$$ on David.
     
  16. shartsoe

    shartsoe New Member

    I think this might be too long, but I'll try to post it. If you read nothing else, read the last sentence. :)

    Now the New Testament Data:

    1. The clearest verse comes from Jesus in His teaching on divorce:


    Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. 9 I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery." (NIV Matt 19.8-9, pp. Mark 10.1-12)


    The key thing to note here is that this argument fails if polygamy is acceptable! Jesus' point is that improper divorce does not nullify a marriage, and if the first marriage still stands, then a "second" marriage is adultery--and NOT simply 'polygamy'! This is very clear.



    "The saying is hyperbolic-that is, it has exaggerated, intensified force: because God does not accept divorce as valid, any man who divorces his wife is not really divorced, and if he marries someone else, he commits adultery. No one else in antiquity spoke of divorce in such strong terms. (Because most Jewish teachers allowed polygamy, they would not have seen marrying a second wife as adultery, even if they had agreed that the man was still married to the first wife. But Jesus eliminates the double standard; a man consorting with two women is as adulterous as a woman consorting with two men.) [BBC, in.loc. Mark 10:11.

    "The school of Shammai ... did not permit divorce except for the wife's unfaithfulness (whether successful or attempted), but they did not consider remarriage afterward adulterous. Jesus is more consistent: if one divorces one's spouse without valid grounds , the marriage is not truly dissolved and subsequent marriage is adulterous." [BBC, in. loc. Mtt 19.9]





    2. Paul, in Romans 7, actually uses the same principle, but applies it to the wife:


    So then, if she marries another man while her husband is still alive, she is called an adulteress. But if her husband dies, she is released from that law and is not an adulteress, even though she marries another man. (Rom 7)

    Notice that a polyandrous relationship would also be adultery.





    3. There is another, more general argument expressed in the New Testament, concerning the example of godly leaders.


    It is clear (as the questioner notes) that those in Church government/leadership are to be monogamous (the 'husband of one wife' clause shows up in both statements of elder/deacon qualifications: 1 Tim 3.2 and Titus 1.6).

    But these leaders are told to be examples to the flock, and the believers are told to follow the example of the apostles, disciples, and leaders. [Phil 3.17; 4.9; 1 Thess 1.6,7; 2 Thess 3.7,9; 1 Tim 4.12; Tit 2.7; 1 Pet 5.3; 1 Cor 4.6; 1 Cor 11.1]

    Therefore, in the absence of other NT instruction, ALL believers are to emulate the purity and scripturally-mandated characteristics of our elders--including the monogamous one (2nd in each list!).

    In fact, one measure of the 'godliness' of a widow, worthy of welfare support from scarce church funds, was that she be a "wife of one husband" (the exact same phrase turned around)--I Timothy 5.9. The reference to polyandry shows that monogamy was important for general believers as well.



    The NT data is rather clear--for both forms of polygamy: polygyny and polyandry--that monogamy is important to God's will, and that entering into polygamy is committing adultery.

    [This, the commentators quickly point out, does not mean that existing polygamous marriages in foreign cultures are supposed to be dissolved through multiple-divorce! That is not the same thing, according to most, as entering into one as a Christian.]




    We might also point out that the post-NT church was likewise anti-polygamy:


    1. Justin Martyr (c.160) rebukes the Jews for allowing polygamy:


    "Your imprudent and blind masters [i.e., Jewish teachers] even until this time permit each man to have four or five wives. And if anyone sees a beautiful woman and desires to have her, they quote the doings of Jacob." [ANF, vol. 1, p. 266]



    2. Irenaeus (c.180) condemns the Gnostics for, among other things, polygamy:


    "Others, again, following upon Basilides and Carpocrates, have introduced promiscuous intercourse and a plurality of wives..." [ANF, vol. 1, p.353]



    3. Tertullian (c.207) was also explicit:


    "Chapter II.-Marriage Lawful, But Not Polygamy. We do not indeed forbid the union of man and woman, blest by God as the seminary of the human race, and devised for the replenishment of the earth and the furnishing of the world, and therefore permitted, yet Singly. For Adam was the one husband of Eve, and Eve his one wife, one woman, one rib. (ANF: Tertullian, To His Wife)




    4. Methodius (cf.290) was clear on the issue, arguing that it had stopped at the time of the Prophets:


    "The contracting of marriage with several wives had been done away with from the times of the prophets. For we read, 'Do not go after your lusts, but refrain yourself from your appetites'...And in another place, 'Let your fountain be blessed and rejoice with the wife of thy youth.' This plainly forbids a plurality of wives." [ANF, vol. 6, p.312]




    5 The Pseudo-Clementine Literature boasts about how St. Thomas taught the Parthians [i.e., an Iranian culture] to abandon polygamy:


    "But I shall give a still stronger proof of the matters in hand. For, behold, scarcely seven years have yet passed since the advent of the righteous and true Prophet; and in the course of these, inert of all nations coming to Judaea, and moved both by the signs and miracles Which they saw, and by the grandeur of His doctrine, received His faith; and then going back to their own countries, they rejected the lawless rites of the Gentiles, and their incestuous marriages. In short, among the Parthians-as Thomas, who is preaching the Gospel amongst them, has written to us-not many now are addicted to polygamy; nor among the Medes do many throw their dead to dogs; nor are the Persians pleased with intercourse with their mothers, or incestuous marriages with their daughters; nor do the Susian women practise the adulteries that were allowed them; nor has Genesis been able to force those into crimes whom the teaching of religion restrained. (ANF 8: "Book IX: Chapter XXIX.-The Gospel More Powerful Than 'Genesis.'"]



    6. The Council of Neocaesarea a.d. 315 (circa) refers to a 'purification period' for polygamists. By that time, sinners had to 'sit out' of Church activities until they had demonstrated reformation. If a sin showed up on this list of canons, it was considered a 'bad sin'--and polygamy shows up here:


    "Ancient Epitome of Canon III. The time (for doing penance and purification) of polygamists is well known. A zeal for penance may shorten it." [ANF]



    7. Basil, Archbishop of Caesarea, mentioned it a number of times in his letters, generally concerning the period for exclusion from church for polygamists, calling it 'limited fornication'(!):


    "IV. In the case of trigamy and polygamy they laid down the same rule, in proportion, as in the case of digamy; namely one year for digamy (some authorities say two years); for trigamy men are separated for three and often for four years; but this is no longer described as marriage at all, but as polygamy; nay rather as limited fornication. It is for this reason that the Lord said to the woman of Samaria, who had five husbands, "he whom thou now hast is not thy husband." He does not reckon those who had exceeded the limits of a second marriage as worthy of the title of husband or wife. In cases of trigamy we have accepted a seclusion of five years, not by the canons, but following the precept of our predecessors. Such offenders ought not to be altogether prohibited from the privileges of the Church; they should be considered deserving of hearing after two or three years, and afterwards of being permitted to stand in their place; but they must be kept from the communion of the good gift, and only restored to the place of communion after showing some fruit of repentance. [ANF: (Canonica Prima.)To Amphilochius, concerning the Canons. Letter CLXXXVIII written c.347.]



    The data for the NT seems rather clear. Although it was already a minority practice (outlawed in many countries), the stance of Jesus, Paul, and the early church is emphatically condemnatory towards it. Monogamy is upheld as God's design, His will, and His expectation for His people.
     
  17. Michael

    Michael New Member

    Learn your history. Jesus was Jewish, the majority of his followers for the first 200 years after his death were Jewish, he was preaching to Jews about Jewish life under a Roman occupation. Christianity was a movement WITHIN Judaism. The first schism was between Paul and James on whether gentiles would be allowed to participate.

    And go learn your bible while you're at it. It was compiled over a period of 1,800 yrs and therefore contains a lot of contradictory ideas and usage of langauge. (And yeah, I can read it in the original Hebrew and minored in Biblical Transalation - the advantage here is mine)

    Da Bronx, this is the second time you have revealed yourself to be racist and anti-semetic on this board. I would appreciate it if you would keep your opinions about Jews and Judaism to yourself.
     
  18. hollymm

    hollymm Me, 'in' a tree.

    Simon Peter said to them,"Make Mary leave us,for females don't deserve life".Jesus said,"Look,I will guide her to make her male,so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males.For every female who makes herself male will enter the domain of Heaven".

    Michael - is it possible that daBronx took this a little out of context and it means something a bit different when taken as a whole? Like what is meant by "life" is certainly not actually a living breathing human, right? It sounds more spirtual than actual. What do you believe was meant by this particular statement? Maybe the question should be, what part of a male would Jesus make a female more like so she could get into heaven?
     
  19. Michael

    Michael New Member

    It's really impossible to know. Simon would've spoken to Jesus in Aramaic. The saying would have been written down in Greek no sooner than 50 years after his death by some one that wasn't there. Translated into Latin during the 300's AD and then into English nearly a thousand years after that.

    You have to look at the context of 1st Century Judaism. What this most likely meant is that the disciplies were troubled by the fact that Jesus accepted women into his inner circle and taught them spiritual information that was primarily reserved for men only, as most of these teachings were at the time. And still are many Orthodox sects. I think Jesus's answer was pretty smartassy. Sort saying to Simon "So it makes sense that only men go to heaven? So I should make Mary a guy and then she is closer to G-d?"

    In some of the none-canonical Gospels Jesus is exhorted by his followers for teaching women and allowing them to be disciplies. Similar to the way he was chastized for consorting with tax collectors. Apparently he saw all people as equal and deserving of G-ds love. Imagine that.
     
  20. hollymm

    hollymm Me, 'in' a tree.

    Thanks Michael - I see Mary sits at the table of "The Last Supper" beside him. Do you believe that to be true? The guys must've been a little jealous that Jesus thought of women as just as deserving as men.
     

Share This Page