Biblical Polygamy?

[posthuman]

you are wrong, he punished David and his unborn child for Adultery with Bathsheba and the murder of Uriah.

not sure his brother would agree that was 'punishment'

Ecclesiastes 4:1-3​

Then I returned and considered all the oppression that is done under the sun: ​

and look! The tears of the oppressed, but they have no comforter— on the side of their oppressors [there is] power, but they have no comforter. ​

Therefore I praised the dead who were already dead, more than the living who are still alive. ​

Yet, better than both [is he] who has never existed, Who has not seen the evil work that is done under the sun.​

​

.. and David's sin was removed, in conjunction with the death of a child who was born, a son who was given.

 

[posthuman]

So, I have been having problems accessing and posting to the site, has anyone else had similar issues?

yeah the server keeps crashing, it's been bad for a year but particularly the last couple weeks

 

[Josepus86]

not sure his brother would agree that was 'punishment'

Ecclesiastes 4:1-3​

Then I returned and considered all the oppression that is done under the sun: ​

and look! The tears of the oppressed, but they have no comforter— on the side of their oppressors [there is] power, but they have no comforter. ​

Therefore I praised the dead who were already dead, more than the living who are still alive. ​

Yet, better than both [is he] who has never existed, Who has not seen the evil work that is done under the sun.​

​

.. and David's sin was removed, in conjunction with the death of a child who was born, a son who was given.

I am honestly sorry, but I do not understand your point,
David's brother would not consider what happened to David punishment is how I first read your post?
But after re-reading it I think you are saying that Solomon would not consider the death of his brother as punishment.
I have always read this section in Ecclesiastes as hyperbole, and I think it sets a bad precedent to interpret it your way.
"If they're going to die then they had better do it and decrease to surplus population." Ebenezer Scrouge
Are you saying that Solomon truly believed that it was better to be Dead than Alive?

I think this should be the next thread I post.

 

[Snackersmom]

The question I then raise is are converts who are polygynist grandfathered in?
And if so, why is this not an avenue for all believing men and consenting women?

Coming to faith in a less-than-ideal marriage situation isn't a license for believers to knowingly enter the same situation.

If we come to faith with a non-believing spouse in tow, we are commanded to fulfill our vow to them as long as they are willing to stay with us. Which, I feel, illustrates just how seriously God takes the marriage covenant.

HOWEVER, that does NOT give a believer license to marry a non-believer. This has nothing whatsoever to do with said believers' leadership aspirations (or lack thereof). We are to follow God's ideal for our lives because it is His ideal; we shouldn't need a "better" reason than that.

As a side note, that whole "buyer's remorse" line was a bit dramatic, don't ya think? 🙄 😜

 

[2ndTimeIsTheCharm]

Polygamy, polygyny, polyandry, polyamory, I often use polygamy meaning polygyny, but it is an umbrella term that could mean all of them so I will try to say polygyny to be precise.

I think we can agree that only polygyny was practiced in biblical times among God's people.
The common belief is that God tolerated this but did not endorse or recommend it.
I know of one biblical example where God sanctioned Polygyny, but I would not like to reveal that yet.

In the case for Adam, God referred to his singleness as "not good" and made a helper "suitable for him."
Paul says that it is best to be single, that all men should be as he is. which makes tension between the two examples.
But I personally believe that some are called to be married, and some are called to be single.

The common belief, which I disagree with, is that Paul requires church officers (bishops/elders/deacons) to have only "one wife"

So, the question is what do we do with converts who are polygynists?
If you God into the third world or direct a ministry to a cult like the FLDS,
And a man who has three wives comes to christ, what is he to do with his three wives?
Common arguments I hear are:
1. Stay married, but cannot pursue officership.
2. must divorce all but one.
a. divorce we obligation to provide
b. divorce with obligation not to provide
3. Something else entirely that I have not though of?

Why not ask God what His answer would be? He's the best one to determine what's the right solution. When asking these types of questions, you really shouldn't leave God out of it because your questions are about God's own rules that seem to conflict with each other.

I personally think that if the spouses that practiced polygamy really did get saved, that he/she would bring this issue to God Himself and follow what God says, not what anyone else says. God will definitely get involved in that situation and sort things out.


💒

 

[posthuman]

I am honestly sorry, but I do not understand your point,
David's brother would not consider what happened to David punishment is how I first read your post?
But after re-reading it I think you are saying that Solomon would not consider the death of his brother as punishment.
I have always read this section in Ecclesiastes as hyperbole, and I think it sets a bad precedent to interpret it your way.
"If they're going to die then they had better do it and decrease to surplus population." Ebenezer Scrouge
Are you saying that Solomon truly believed that it was better to be Dead than Alive?

I think this should be the next thread I post.

well Solomon did write what he wrote, and i don't have reason to believe it means the opposite of what it says.
Christ says similar things in Matthew 26:24 & in Luke 17:2

but in the account of David --

So David said to Nathan, ​

“I have sinned against the Lord.”​

And Nathan said to David, ​

“The Lord also has put away your sin; you shall not die. However, because by this deed you have given great occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme, the child also who is born to you shall surely die.” ​

Then Nathan departed to his house.​

(2 Samuel 12:13-15)
​

is this really punishment?
God had removed David's sin. for what then is he being punished, if his sin is forgiven?
the reasoning Nathan gives isn't "in order to punish sin" it is to prevent the enemies of God from blaspheming.

preventing blasphemy, taking away the power of the wicked, these are not 'bad' things -- but good.
overall there are key elements of Christology here:

• the life of an innocent firstborn son is given, preventing sin
• sin is recognized as primarily against God, not Uriah or Bathsheba
• sin is removed - forgiven - sin for which in the Law there is no sacrifice

that's just the surface here; this event is incredible.

 

[Josepus86]

well Solomon did write what he wrote, and i don't have reason to believe it means the opposite of what it says.
Christ says similar things in Matthew 26:24 & in Luke 17:2

but in the account of David --

So David said to Nathan, ​

“I have sinned against the Lord.”​

And Nathan said to David, ​

“The Lord also has put away your sin; you shall not die. However, because by this deed you have given great occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme, the child also who is born to you shall surely die.” ​

Then Nathan departed to his house.​

(2 Samuel 12:13-15)​

​

is this really punishment?
God had removed David's sin. for what then is he being punished, if his sin is forgiven?
the reasoning Nathan gives isn't "in order to punish sin" it is to prevent the enemies of God from blaspheming.

preventing blasphemy, taking away the power of the wicked, these are not 'bad' things -- but good.
overall there are key elements of Christology here:

• the life of an innocent firstborn son is given, preventing sin
• sin is recognized as primarily against God, not Uriah or Bathsheba
• sin is removed - forgiven - sin for which in the Law there is no sacrifice

that's just the surface here; this event is incredible.

You do raise some interesting points, let's discuss this further on another thread.

 

[Josepus86]

Why not ask God what His answer would be? He's the best one to determine what's the right solution. When asking these types of questions, you really shouldn't leave God out of it because your questions are about God's own rules that seem to conflict with each other.

I personally think that if the spouses that practiced polygamy really did get saved, that he/she would bring this issue to God Himself and follow what God says, not what anyone else says. God will definitely get involved in that situation and sort things out.

💒

Can the Spirit convict two Christians to go in opposite direction, I believe so?
I feel this is a debate that needs to happen, and I am convicted that I must take the unpopular side,
If only to have such points considered.
B F Skinner took a hard stance for behaviorism, though he did not fully believe in true behaviorism
Just so such a philosophy was not dismissed, and he was an atheist.

 

[2ndTimeIsTheCharm]

Can the Spirit convict two Christians to go in opposite direction, I believe so?
I feel this is a debate that needs to happen, and I am convicted that I must take the unpopular side,
If only to have such points considered.
B F Skinner took a hard stance for behaviorism, though he did not fully believe in true behaviorism
Just so such a philosophy was not dismissed, and he was an atheist.

You're just making assumptions about what God would do in this situation and not actually letting Him determine for Himself how to solve this situation which really has nothing to do with you but has everything to do with Him since He is not only the Savior of these polygamists, but their LORD as well.. The truly saved polygamists would turn to God for the right solution, not you. I don't know why you're inserting yourself in this matter since you are of no importance to this matter.


💒

 

[Josepus86]

You're just making assumptions about what God would do in this situation and not actually letting Him determine for Himself how to solve this situation which really has nothing to do with you but has everything to do with Him since He is not only the Savior of these polygamists, but their LORD as well.. The truly saved polygamists would turn to God for the right solution, not you. I don't know why you're inserting yourself in this matter since you are of no importance to this matter.
💒

I think I was asking the members of the faith, their opinions and convictions on the subjects.
As I have said, if a bigamist throuple comes to faith and one wife is convicted to stay in the relationship
And the other is convicted to leave; they are both valid.
These analogies were to illustrate the idea of polygynist that such relationships "could" be grandfathered into the church.
My opinion is that the Lord calls some to be single, like Paul, most to be married like Adam, and some to be in a Plural marriage like David, but I believe that the last should be approached with the most discretion.
What is the "right direction" for a polygynist who is married to multiple women, who want to continue to be with him?
It seems to me that you as the church are the initiators of divorce to oblige others to your interpretations.

 

[Josepus86]

Why not ask God what His answer would be? He's the best one to determine what's the right solution. When asking these types of questions, you really shouldn't leave God out of it because your questions are about God's own rules that seem to conflict with each other.

I personally think that if the spouses that practiced polygamy really did get saved, that he/she would bring this issue to God Himself and follow what God says, not what anyone else says. God will definitely get involved in that situation and sort things out.

💒

Your question presupposes that I have not asked God for the answer,
And also, that I cannot find God's answer from the scripture,
I believe that most people who have practiced monogamy are going to hell,
You are not made right before God by your actions,
But by election alone. David practice polygamy, as did Saul, did they ultimately share the same fate?
I am not advocating for antinomianism, but that there is precedent, and a potential loophole.

 

[Snackersmom]

It seems to me that you as the church are the initiators of divorce to oblige others to your interpretations.

I do not "oblige" anyone to my interpretations, all I could do is share scripture and encourage the person to seek God in the matter.

I agree with you that God's choice could be different depending on the situation and the people involved. I also agree that any non-believing women who wanted to leave such a situation should be allowed to do so.

But the question remains: Why are you fighting so hard for a "loophole" in the one-woman-man clause? 🤔 One could argue that 1 Corinthians 7:12 -14 is a loophole in the "don't be unequally yoked" clause, or even that 1 Corinthians 7:21 is an endorsement of slavery (it clearly isnt, but just saying).

Sooooo.... why ya fighting so hard for polygyny specifically, @Josepus86 ? 🧐