A Good Man is Hard to Find. Is Polygamy One Answer?
Posted: Sunday, November 23, 2008
by Mogama
http://www.mogama.info
My father was married to one woman for much of his adult life. That woman was my mother. But Dad's brother had 7 wives, and Uncle Johnson also managed to be the Town Chief as well as the richest man in our village. Uncle's was a family of means, the economic powerhouse of our village. Other than Western missionaries coming in and saying how evil polygamy was, not one day did I notice Uncle Johnson's household being dysfunctional due to his many wives and his large family.
I'm glad that at age 10, I learned English, and was able to attend school to learn how to read the white man's spiritual manual, the Holy Bible. I've read the Scriptures from Genesis to Revelation, from cover to cover many times. Nowhere does the Bible ever hint that it is sinful for a man to marry more than one wife, as the missionaries insisted Uncle Johnson do, if he was serious about following Jesus Christ. Apart from imposing a Western version of Christian family values on the Scriptures and on African believers, we cannot find one direct word against polygamy in the Holy Book. On the contrary, we can find much in the Bible that supports the case for polygamy.
Yes, I've heard this one: God created one man, Adam, and one woman, Eve. That means He wanted one male to marry one female. Period. O yeah? Adam and Eve didn't eat meat either. Does that mean it is sinful to be anything but vegetarian? Of course not. But God later approved a meat diet for humans. Similarly, in the beginning, Adam and Eve didn't wear clothes either. Does that mean nudity or public nakedness is the godly thing to do? Just because God began the human race with monogamy, one man married to one woman, is no reason to construct a doctrine that declares polygamy a sinful sexual conduct.
First off, without polygamy, there would have been no such thing as the nation of Israel. That's right. Check the biblical record with a mind free of Western Christian bias, and you'll find this to be true. The nation of Israel came out of the 12 tribes of Israel. Right? And where did the 12 tribes come from? From the the 12 sons of Jacob! And what type of marriage produced those 12 sons? Polygamy! Jacob was a polygamist. And God never said Jacob sinned by marrying those 4 women. Fact is, if Jacob had been a monogamist, he would have married Rachel alone. Do you know how many children Rachel had? Just two: Joseph and Benjamin. The other 10 sons came from Jacob's other three wives. Not only that, but Judah, the son from whose lineage Jesus Christ came, was birthed by Jacob's first wife, Leah. Without the birth of Judah, no Jesus Christ! Think hard before you slam polygamy. It helped produce Israel, which produced the tribe of Judah, which produced the Savior.
Of course, Western theologians and their descendants can argue all day long from silence that if Jacob had married only one wife, God would have worked out something else to bring Messiah into the world. Fine. But why tie knots about what could have been, or what didn't happen? Why not deal with what actually happened? And what happened is that the chosen nation, and the Savior, can be traced to a polygamous home. Namely, the family of Jacob, the polygamist.
Second, the biblical law of levirate marriage clearly allows for polygamy as a responsible sexual arrangement. According to Wikipedia, the word "levirate" comes from the Latin word "levir", which means "husband's brother". The law of levirate marriage says, if a man dies childless, his widow may marry one of his brothers. The purpose of this marriage is for the living brother to produce a child by his brother's widow, so as to continue the deceased brother's name through that child. It did not matter whether or not the living brother was single. If he was already married, he'd just add his brother's widow as his second wife, if not his third or fourth bride.
The point is, how can the Bible so directly command or expect something that is sinful, or contrary to God's moral law? Short answer:Levirate marriage means polygamy was not sin.
Third, the Bible has no commandment that says, "Thou shall not have more than one wife". Only "thou shall not commit adultery". The Bible does say, "Flee fornication", which is sex outside of the responsible relationship of marriage. Strange how those who frown on responsible polygamy give the wink to irresponsible, premarital sex by themselves or by their children.
The Bible says, no incestuous marriages (see Leviticus 18) -- don't marry your parent; don't marry your sibling, aunt or uncle. Don't marry someone of the same gender. But not a word against marrying more than one wife.
Why do Western Christians want to ban something that God allows as responsible behavior? Let's not forget, it is the same Western Christianity that bans marriage for Catholic priests, when celibacy in the Bible is a matter of personal choice, based on one's God-given ability to tame his/her sex drive.
Fourthly, not only did God condone polygamy by Israelites, He actually gave David many wives. That means, God did not simply tolerate polygamy as a pre-Christian practice. No, God actually approved polygamy directly, as I have already pointed out, by virture of levirate marriage. When it comes to David, remember that David was the greatest king Israel ever had. David was the king to whom God promised an everlasting kingdom through the Messiah. David was the ideal human king. He was the beloved of God. Yet he was a polygamist, with God's full approval. In fact, David's many wives were among God's blessings to him!
Speaking as God's mouthpiece in 2 Samuel 12:8, after David committed adultery with Bathsheba the wife of Uriah, the prophet Nathan told King David, "I gave you your master's house and your master's wives into your keeping, and gave you the house of Israel and Judah. And if that had been too little, I also would have given you much more!"
What was Nathan the man of God telling David? 'I've given you many wives already, but I would have given you more wives, if you had asked me, rather than going after another man's wife!'
Some rebut by saying, 'Yes, but look at all the family problems that David experienced.' A poor argument. Scripture never makes David's polygamy the culprit or cause of his family problems. Instead, the Bible clearly states that those troubles were due to David's sin with Bathsheba. In fact, the priest Eli, like David, had a dysfunctional family; yet Eli was married to one woman.
As an African Christian, I have witnessed first hand how Western missionaries' insistence on one man one wife has shamed African husbands and unnecessarily dismantled many African homes, who were living in responsible, stable polygamous families.
Is it possible that polygamy could be the answer to a practical problem in today's world? Women usually outnumber men under normal conditions, unless there's some government interference in reproductive matters, like the one-child policy of China. There are more women than men for several reasons. Women outlive men by years. More men than women die from accident, war, and suicide. In America, for instance, the number of available males is further reduced by the fact that more men than women are sitting in jails. How do we solve this drastic male shortage? Bingo: polygamy. Allow women to marry men, who are already married. The leftover women need to share a limited number of men. How about one man to 7 women, like Uncle Johnson and his brides?
In the New Testament, we are told that a church leader like a bishop (pastor) or deacon should be a husband of one wife (1 Timothy 3:12). Do we realize the obvious in this stipulation? That command only makes sense if there were Christian men in the Ephesian Church, where Timothy was pastor, who had married many wives. The Apostle Paul was telling Pastor Timothy to only appoint monogamous Christian men as pastors and deacons. One implication of this charge is that men with multiple wives could not hold high office in the church, but it does not mean those men could not be good Christian men just because they were polygamists. Like the Old Testament, the New Testament does not speak one word against polygamy.
Do we realize what our ban on polygamy has done? (1) We increase the number of single women. By insisting on 'one man one woman' we continue to multiply the number of single women, single mothers, etc. According to the Census Bureau, in 2004, there were 149.1 million females in the USA, compared to 144.5 million males. (2) We promote divorce, because we require one marriage to end before another can begin. I can tell you that very few divorces happen in my village, and it's not because the women are not free to divorce their husband. No, it's because many women don't mind loving one husband, and sharing their man. Now, that's what I call love and sharing! Allowing brothers to marry more than one bride will dramatically increase the number of marriages. (3) We destabilize families, by tearing biological parents apart, because our law insists that married parents have to divorce before they can recreate another family unit, that is foreign to their existing kids. (4) We guarantee promiscuity. Our nation is filled with sex-crazed people, because we forbid polygamy. (5) Similarly, we encourage prostitution. The money that prostitutes seek they could find within a polygamous family that is usually an economic power, because there are so many workers to bring income into the family, instead of a one-income or two-income family.
Some American religious people say allowing polygamy will start us down a slippery slope, just like gay marriage will. I beg to differ. Polygamy is consistent with the most important purpose for marriage: procreation. Homosexual marriage is not. So comparing polygamy and gay marriage is like comparing apples and oranges. Besides, for us Bible believers, Scripture commands polygamy via levirate marriage. The same cannot be said of homosexuality.
May be the real reason behind all the outcry against polygamy has everything to do with Western individualism, self-centered, and jealousy, and less to do with the wrongness of having more than one wife.
Oh, yes, Mormons, our Latter Day Saints friends. Could it be that the one thing Mormons have going right is the one thing we condemn them for? How come Mormons have such stable, strong families compared to the rest of the population?
Next, I need to have a conversation with my wife of 16 years, to see if we can work out a deal in prep for wife #2. We could use the extra income in these economic down times. Why wait for the Obama economic recovery plan when an additional wife or two might bring a quicker recovery to this household? Hey, it worked for Uncle Johnson, with his 7 brides. It seems like there's something to that biblical number 7, as we see from this Scripture in Isaiah 4:1:
"And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying, "We will eat our own food and wear our own apparel; only let us be called by your name, to take away our reproach.''
See? Seven single women -- don't mind become the wives of one guy. With all these single women running around, we could be headed that way, and it could be a good thing.
Yes, I've heard this one: God created one man, Adam, and one woman, Eve. That means He wanted one male to marry one female. Period. O yeah? Adam and Eve didn't eat meat either. Does that mean it is sinful to be anything but vegetarian? Of course not. But God later approved a meat diet for humans. Similarly, in the beginning, Adam and Eve didn't wear clothes either. Does that mean nudity or public nakedness is the godly thing to do? Just because God began the human race with monogamy, one man married to one woman, is no reason to construct a doctrine that declares polygamy a sinful sexual conduct.
First off, without polygamy, there would have been no such thing as the nation of Israel. That's right. Check the biblical record with a mind free of Western Christian bias, and you'll find this to be true. The nation of Israel came out of the 12 tribes of Israel. Right? And where did the 12 tribes come from? From the the 12 sons of Jacob! And what type of marriage produced those 12 sons? Polygamy! Jacob was a polygamist. And God never said Jacob sinned by marrying those 4 women. Fact is, if Jacob had been a monogamist, he would have married Rachel alone. Do you know how many children Rachel had? Just two: Joseph and Benjamin. The other 10 sons came from Jacob's other three wives. Not only that, but Judah, the son from whose lineage Jesus Christ came, was birthed by Jacob's first wife, Leah. Without the birth of Judah, no Jesus Christ! Think hard before you slam polygamy. It helped produce Israel, which produced the tribe of Judah, which produced the Savior.
Of course, Western theologians and their descendants can argue all day long from silence that if Jacob had married only one wife, God would have worked out something else to bring Messiah into the world. Fine. But why tie knots about what could have been, or what didn't happen? Why not deal with what actually happened? And what happened is that the chosen nation, and the Savior, can be traced to a polygamous home. Namely, the family of Jacob, the polygamist.
Second, the biblical law of levirate marriage clearly allows for polygamy as a responsible sexual arrangement. According to Wikipedia, the word "levirate" comes from the Latin word "levir", which means "husband's brother". The law of levirate marriage says, if a man dies childless, his widow may marry one of his brothers. The purpose of this marriage is for the living brother to produce a child by his brother's widow, so as to continue the deceased brother's name through that child. It did not matter whether or not the living brother was single. If he was already married, he'd just add his brother's widow as his second wife, if not his third or fourth bride.
- Genesis 38:8, Then Judah said to Onan, "Lie with your brother's wife and fulfill your duty to her as a brother-in-law to produce offspring for your brother."
- Deuteronomy 25:5-6, If brothers are living together and one of them dies without a son, his widow must not marry outside the family. Her husband's brother shall take her and marry her and fulfill the duty of a brother-in-law to her. The first son she bears shall carry on the name of the dead brother so that his name will not be blotted out from Israel.
The point is, how can the Bible so directly command or expect something that is sinful, or contrary to God's moral law? Short answer:Levirate marriage means polygamy was not sin.
Third, the Bible has no commandment that says, "Thou shall not have more than one wife". Only "thou shall not commit adultery". The Bible does say, "Flee fornication", which is sex outside of the responsible relationship of marriage. Strange how those who frown on responsible polygamy give the wink to irresponsible, premarital sex by themselves or by their children.
The Bible says, no incestuous marriages (see Leviticus 18) -- don't marry your parent; don't marry your sibling, aunt or uncle. Don't marry someone of the same gender. But not a word against marrying more than one wife.
Why do Western Christians want to ban something that God allows as responsible behavior? Let's not forget, it is the same Western Christianity that bans marriage for Catholic priests, when celibacy in the Bible is a matter of personal choice, based on one's God-given ability to tame his/her sex drive.
Fourthly, not only did God condone polygamy by Israelites, He actually gave David many wives. That means, God did not simply tolerate polygamy as a pre-Christian practice. No, God actually approved polygamy directly, as I have already pointed out, by virture of levirate marriage. When it comes to David, remember that David was the greatest king Israel ever had. David was the king to whom God promised an everlasting kingdom through the Messiah. David was the ideal human king. He was the beloved of God. Yet he was a polygamist, with God's full approval. In fact, David's many wives were among God's blessings to him!
Speaking as God's mouthpiece in 2 Samuel 12:8, after David committed adultery with Bathsheba the wife of Uriah, the prophet Nathan told King David, "I gave you your master's house and your master's wives into your keeping, and gave you the house of Israel and Judah. And if that had been too little, I also would have given you much more!"
What was Nathan the man of God telling David? 'I've given you many wives already, but I would have given you more wives, if you had asked me, rather than going after another man's wife!'
Some rebut by saying, 'Yes, but look at all the family problems that David experienced.' A poor argument. Scripture never makes David's polygamy the culprit or cause of his family problems. Instead, the Bible clearly states that those troubles were due to David's sin with Bathsheba. In fact, the priest Eli, like David, had a dysfunctional family; yet Eli was married to one woman.
As an African Christian, I have witnessed first hand how Western missionaries' insistence on one man one wife has shamed African husbands and unnecessarily dismantled many African homes, who were living in responsible, stable polygamous families.
Is it possible that polygamy could be the answer to a practical problem in today's world? Women usually outnumber men under normal conditions, unless there's some government interference in reproductive matters, like the one-child policy of China. There are more women than men for several reasons. Women outlive men by years. More men than women die from accident, war, and suicide. In America, for instance, the number of available males is further reduced by the fact that more men than women are sitting in jails. How do we solve this drastic male shortage? Bingo: polygamy. Allow women to marry men, who are already married. The leftover women need to share a limited number of men. How about one man to 7 women, like Uncle Johnson and his brides?
In the New Testament, we are told that a church leader like a bishop (pastor) or deacon should be a husband of one wife (1 Timothy 3:12). Do we realize the obvious in this stipulation? That command only makes sense if there were Christian men in the Ephesian Church, where Timothy was pastor, who had married many wives. The Apostle Paul was telling Pastor Timothy to only appoint monogamous Christian men as pastors and deacons. One implication of this charge is that men with multiple wives could not hold high office in the church, but it does not mean those men could not be good Christian men just because they were polygamists. Like the Old Testament, the New Testament does not speak one word against polygamy.
Do we realize what our ban on polygamy has done? (1) We increase the number of single women. By insisting on 'one man one woman' we continue to multiply the number of single women, single mothers, etc. According to the Census Bureau, in 2004, there were 149.1 million females in the USA, compared to 144.5 million males. (2) We promote divorce, because we require one marriage to end before another can begin. I can tell you that very few divorces happen in my village, and it's not because the women are not free to divorce their husband. No, it's because many women don't mind loving one husband, and sharing their man. Now, that's what I call love and sharing! Allowing brothers to marry more than one bride will dramatically increase the number of marriages. (3) We destabilize families, by tearing biological parents apart, because our law insists that married parents have to divorce before they can recreate another family unit, that is foreign to their existing kids. (4) We guarantee promiscuity. Our nation is filled with sex-crazed people, because we forbid polygamy. (5) Similarly, we encourage prostitution. The money that prostitutes seek they could find within a polygamous family that is usually an economic power, because there are so many workers to bring income into the family, instead of a one-income or two-income family.
Some American religious people say allowing polygamy will start us down a slippery slope, just like gay marriage will. I beg to differ. Polygamy is consistent with the most important purpose for marriage: procreation. Homosexual marriage is not. So comparing polygamy and gay marriage is like comparing apples and oranges. Besides, for us Bible believers, Scripture commands polygamy via levirate marriage. The same cannot be said of homosexuality.
May be the real reason behind all the outcry against polygamy has everything to do with Western individualism, self-centered, and jealousy, and less to do with the wrongness of having more than one wife.
Oh, yes, Mormons, our Latter Day Saints friends. Could it be that the one thing Mormons have going right is the one thing we condemn them for? How come Mormons have such stable, strong families compared to the rest of the population?
Next, I need to have a conversation with my wife of 16 years, to see if we can work out a deal in prep for wife #2. We could use the extra income in these economic down times. Why wait for the Obama economic recovery plan when an additional wife or two might bring a quicker recovery to this household? Hey, it worked for Uncle Johnson, with his 7 brides. It seems like there's something to that biblical number 7, as we see from this Scripture in Isaiah 4:1:
"And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying, "We will eat our own food and wear our own apparel; only let us be called by your name, to take away our reproach.''
See? Seven single women -- don't mind become the wives of one guy. With all these single women running around, we could be headed that way, and it could be a good thing.
This Article has been viewed 1,171 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (8 total)Along with every story you shared here, each one has the painful jealously of the other wives, and a string of consequences. Also, Jesus himself supported one wife at a time in Matthew on the issue of divorce. And in the instance of marrying the brother's wife, it was after he was dead. meaning one husband for her. I won't agrue this point with you, but I guess I would ask you to consider would you be okay with some other man making love to your wife and her looking into his eyes telling him how much she loves him and then when she is ready to have you, she will just come join you in your room and share the same thing?God never said it was okay to have more than one wife. He told David I gave you your master's house and master's wives into your keeping..he did not say gave to you as wive--just that he was to care for them. Interesting that later in David's life only had martial relations with one wife. I wonder why? I believe your arguement is weak here. Maybe in your culture the women are more amazing than the Hebrew women if there is no jealousy among them. I suppose this is where we must agree to disagree. Maybe its the american in me, but if my husband asked me if he could marry another woman, I just might end up in black and white striped attire. (this is a joke) let's just say he wouldn't be able to move for a while. I cannot imagine him sharing the same intimacy with me with another woman/women. I think Pologamy is a convenient way of having your cake and eating it to. God upholds sex within marriage so high on his chart that I just cannot see how the beauty of what he created to be between a man and a women being upheld by polygamy.Maybe there is a big cultural difference in how marriage is viewed. Maybe the act of sexual relations isn't held in the same esteem as Western Christianity. It sounds more to me like the non believers who think there is nothing wrong with casual sex. I don't mean to put you down or question your faith. I guess its just hard to fathom and it is the only thing that would make sense to me.Just one more thought on this and then I will put it to rest:"And the two shall become one flesh" When you marry someone you become one flesh, how is it then that you become one with so many? It is a spiritual thing that God puts in place. If my husband is one with me--he in me and me in him, I just can't see how him becoming one with some else would not interupt God's perfect plan for marriage. We read alot of things that were done by godly people in the bible, it doesn't mean it is God's will. Then we have 1 Corinthians chapter 7 Paul's teaching on marriage. always says wife and husband. Not wife or wives or husband or husbands.I guess my little statement in my other article got you thinking and coming out in strong defense. Interesting when that happens to us believers isn't it? Okay, I am done. Peace from your sister in Christ, TeresaI don't mind taking the spanking from you, Teresa. But it's big time spin to say that Nathan was telling David that He gave David other people's houses to keep. No, Nathan was clearly saying God had given David many wives, and God would have given him even more, if he had asked him rather sleep with Uriah's wife. One major point in my article is how Judah, through whom Jesus Christ descended, came from a polygamous family. And the Bible truth remains that God never spoke a single word against polygamy. The Bible does say, God hates divorce (Malachi 2:16). Not once does it say the same for polygamy. Not one from Jesus, Peter, John, and Paul against polygamy. That's quite striking, considering that they spoke against fornication (premarital sex), homosexuality, and divorce. Monogamy is more a cultural preference for Westerners, because it fits their individualistic emphasis. ~mogama~Hi Mogama, hardly a spanking from me dear brother. Just a strong difference of opinion in what the Scriptures teach. God in his foreknowledge knew exactly what his people would choose and in that, of course our Lord Jesus would come through those blood lines. But we remember that Jesus could not come from man completely because then he would be of sin just as we are. The Seed was of woman but the the Spirit of God breathed life into Mary's womb. Thereby being 100% man and 100% God.It still does not prove that God approved of Polygamy. Even though he put up with it and used it. I think there are many passages that speak to one wife. The problem with buying into cultural Christianity is that it negates God's call for us to not be of this world but of his.I believe polygamy falls under the catagory of sexual immoralty and adultery. Jesus, when condemning divorce because of the hardness of heart said if you marry another even after divorce , he considers it adultery, how much more if you are still married and you marry another? The only reason Jesus permits divorce is because of sexual relations. That speaks volumes to the sanctity of sexual relationships. Just because the word Polygamy is not on the list, it's very meaning means having multiple partners which is defined as adultery when you are married, or fornication if not married. I believe Jesus made it quite clear here that having more than one wife was not in God's will. Nethertheless God brings about his plan through man regardless if they are in his will or not. All teaching on marriage in the Bible is always spoken of in the singular - "Wife"Please don't misunderstand me, I am in no way denying that Polygamy was big in the old testament, but that does not negate the fact that God created man and woman and he said the two shall become one flesh. His people were to be set apart from the culture, not follow its customes yet they did time and time again and they paid a high price for doing so.It is obvious we will remain divided on this issue, I suppose you are clinging to recordings of how our forefathers of faith lived and I am clinging to the words of Jesus and what the rest of the bible teaches about marriage. Only God can judge our hearts. I am sorry for the hurt missionaries brought to your village in time past, but don't make the judgment that western Christianity is narrow minded. It is obvious there are strong biblical reasons why each of us believe the way we do. If you can serve God with a clear conscience, and that you would not cause any harm to your wife emotionally by marrying another, than who am I to judge.I suppose it comes down to anything not done in 100% faith with a clear conscience is sin. For me, I could not do it. For you, maybe you can. We each stand or fall before our maker when we face him. This I know we agree on.Cultural preferences really have nothing to do with how Christians should live their lives. We belong to a heavenly kingdom not earthly.The peace of God between us regardless of our difference of opinion on this subject. I respect your writing and you as a brother in Christ. Blessings, Teresa
hi Mogama,quite interesting and brave of you.very well written. i think you might have a few thousand replies to this article.if people would simply get it through their heads to live honestly and responsibly, being thoughtful, loving, and caring, maybe the world would be a better place. i believe in God, but i really can't see why he would care how many wives, husbands,(if you choose, ) i don't have the mindset to share my man with anyone, and if he chose to, bye bye, but i don't care if those do who have a different mindset) or children, houses, cars, horses, goats,or whatever you have, as long as you REALLY live the way He expects, lovingly towards all.thanks for a good article.....good luck,my best regards,sueYour openness is appreciated, Sue. It is not helpful for one group of people to impose their cultural mores on another people as Western Christians have done to Africans and other non-Westerners. A form of marriage that is not incestuous and fulfills procreation, the most important function of matrimony as far as the human race is concerned, should be deemed valid, especially in light of the Holy Bible. ~mogama~
Mogama, you put up a strong defense using scriptures at that. I do not believe in polygamy as I believe it is a sin. And in this case, it would be condemning for me. "There is now therefore no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus who walk not after the flesh but after the spirit." I think masturbation falls under the same context as being a sin, for me.
I feel very content if I were to err on the side of caution. In either case, being the only wife of one would get me eternal life (praying nothing else besets me) with my Savior. If however, it is not a sin, I would not knowingly share my husband's heart with another woman and would have no regrets for not doing it. If it is what he wishes, I feel we would not be equally yoked and would not marry him in the first place.
I live and let live. I speak what I feel is the Truth from the Holy Scriptures just as you do. I am not persuaded at all by your rationale and it is highly respected. It's not your way or my way, but Yahweh! Agreed? We will find out on that Great Day!
Blessings to you.
Avis
PS In my flesh, [with polygamy] I would only want the benefits and not the man. "They" could have him! But . . my walk is a spiritual walk. I'll stick with caution.Now Avis, how can you call sin what God commands as a family duty? Clearly, Moses, speaking on God's behalf, did command the Israelite man to marry the widow of his deceased brother (levirate marriage), regardless if the living brother already had a wife. The man who refused to perform this brotherly duty was humiliated in a public ritual of disgrace. Besides, it is impossible for polygamy to bar anyone from entering Heaven. How can God shut Heaven's door in someone's face, and at the same time let polygamists like Jacob and David into Heaven? Unless we are willing to say that Jacob and David will not be in Heaven... I won't go there. It seems the Western interpretation is calling the shots concerning the condemnation of polygamy, instead of letting the biblical record stand as it is. And the record is that Jesus the Messiah descended from a tribe born of polygamy, and that David, the polygamist, was the one promised an eternal dynasty through the Messiah. That's no small point to dismiss. ~mogama~I liked what I believed to be the tone of the "Now Avis" admonishment, Mogama. I laughed softly. (That's how I am.)
Mogama, I hear you. I read you. I read the scriptures. I can see how one can possibly feel this way and the Lord would know their heart far better than I. I can't say He will not permit that person into Heaven. I don't know. If you noted, I said for me. I sincerely believe it would keep me out so I won't do it or condone it. I'm against it.
I remember the scripture about a man finding himself a wife finds a good thing etc. I know you covered the singleness and not plural form of one woman being created for Adam, not two. But I like this translation of that verse: Douay-Rheims Bible
Prov. 18:22 He that hath found a good wife, hath found a good thing, and shall receive a pleasure from the Lord. He that driveth away a good wife, driveth away a good thing: but he that keepeth an adulteress, is foolish and wicked.
That last part, is what I believe polygamy is all about, adultery. Also note, wife not wives. I won't do it. Also, I can accept it was not a sin before the Cross. . . but after the Cross, the shed blood of Jesus, "He was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities . . . " those iniquities were the bent and twisted sins that may have been in our bloodline, polygamy, homosexuality etc. and they were left in the grave. He didn't bring any of those things back with Him. His shed blood was the atonement for all perverse acts because of Adam and Eve's sin in the garden. The way is straight and narrow (to Him) not crooked and broad.
Those things I mentioned are related to the flesh. Fleshly pleasures- whether another wife for you to add additional income; sexual pleasure because of your virility, or hers; etc. You know we must die to our flesh daily and put on the mind of Christ, let the spirit man rule everything about us. Holiness/Godliness is a tall order, Mogama but He paid a tall price; yet He is so merciful and full of grace. I just don't believe His grace covers polygamy for everyone who just wants to do it!
I am unable to dismiss what I believe. -AvisNo, please, Avis, do not dismiss what you believe. As long as you don't make your belief an article of Christian faith, a matter of doctrine, we're fine. I have looked up all the lists of sins in Scripture, and they frequently include adultery, homosexuality, murder, fornication, jealousy, outburst of anger, murmuring, etc, but never once is polygamy on the list. That is striking, since polygamy was very common in the world of the Bible. And to call polygamy "adultery" is a hard knot to crawl out of, because when Nathan condemned David for committing adultery, he also informed David that God would have preferred David practicing polygamy, which God clearly sanctioned by saying He was more than willing to add more wives to David. How could God be condemning adultery, and recommending adultery in the form of polygamy at the same time? That's why I say condemnation of polygamy is a Western doctrine, not a Christian doctrine, not according to the Holy Bible. It's got little to do with the flesh and the narrow way. It has everything to do with cultural imperialism dressed up as Christian teaching. Is monogamy preferable to polygamy? Perhaps, but it's a purely cultural call, not a matter of sin and righteousness. ~mogama~Mogama, I believe polygamy being a sin is a matter of doctrine and Christian faith. I am not trying to remain "fine with you" or against you either. I disagree with you, totally. You'll just have to be miffed with me for teaching it. I am comfortable with not being able to prove it to you just as I am unable to show an atheist a picture of God other than to show him/her me. I am in His image. My faith in God makes me believe polygamy is a sin. I will tell anyone who asks my opinion it is. It is then their choice to believe what he/she wishes. Personal call.
Please understand when I say I am not trying to remain "fine with you" as in your "we're fine" if I do not do what you stated. I mean no disrespect. I wish to please God and stay on His good side. You know, "what is man (Adam) that thou art mindful of him etc." I choose for Christ to say I am fine with Him. You and I will just disagree with each believing differently. That, is fine with me as I'm sure it is with you.
I enjoy discussing different beliefs instead of fighting/arguing over them. Thank you for being a gentleman. I still believe polygamy is an unrighteous sin and I don't judge you because you do not. -Avis
You have received many good comments on this subject, so I won't belabour the issue by giving another large comment. The only things I will add is that the Bible says we are to obey the laws of the land, and the laws in most of the world says that polygamy is illegal. The second thing I will comment on is when you say, "How come Mormons have such stable, strong families compared to the rest of the population?" That is quite an assumption you are making, and a rather unfounded one. Keep in mind that the Mormon religion puts up a good face, but if you check behind the scenes, you will probably find that they have all the same problems as the rest of the population. And finally, one comment that you make that rather offends me, is when you refer to the Bible as, " the white man's spiritual manual". The Bible wasn't written by white men, but I'm sure you know that.Good to point this out David. I know several mormon families--some genuinely happy and some putting up fronts. I know of several personally who hide what they do from their parents because they have to keep looking good to the congregation. Otherwise they will be ex-communicated.Mormons have no more superiority on genuine behavior than any other. We all fall prey to humanity.
Mogama,In a society where polygamy is the norm the rich and powerful chiefs will take the most wives and leave the poor without. And the wives will envy each other. I agree with what Teresa and Avis wrote so I won't repeat it here. One man, one woman is the orthodox biblical teaching.
Regards,
Joel
Why would anyone want to deal with more then one woman? Now i'll leave that commnet open for the replies and duck. Actually I have found the one that is all I ever need.I'm laughing as you would expect from me, RM. And you responded as I would have expected. You're one of those blessed husbands . . . couples.Yes Avis but we both keep our glasses clean. Regards, Robert
Mogama, this was interesting to read. Thanks for sharing; especially this: "with a mind free of Western Christian bias..."
You give much to think about, and your logic seems sound. As I read your article though, I could not help thinking that this was the same kind of arguing that men used, to defend slavery, in America prior to our Civil War. Neither God nor Jesus spoke out against the institution of slavery either, but I do not think for a moment that they thought it was in any way ideal.Thank you for a great article.You do have a good point about slave masters twisting the Scriptures to defend the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade. All I'm trying to do here is to offer one practical solution to solving practical social problems that continue to break down the family unit. Some of those problems are too many single mothers, fatherless children, prostitution, divorces, promiscuity, and other sex-related problems. In polygamous cultures that have not bought into the Western mode of monogamy only, these problems are not as rampant. But thanks for your keen observation, Jeff. ~mogama~"All I'm trying to do here is to offer one practical solution to solving practical social problems that continue to break down the family unit."
Mogama, God gave His Son as the solution. Man is rebellious. Be not deceived; God is not mocked, whatsoever a man soweth that shall he also reap." Man's ways are not His and trying to use them [man's ways] as a solution for a perverse and rebellious generation of disobedient people isn't Truth. Truth is like a well-fitting pair of shoes. With or without hosiery, the fit is perfect. No adjustments required. Truth cannot be manipulated to ease social problems. Truth is the answer to them. Truth stands on It's own.
A few thoughts on your quoted text. I hope you and your family had a glorious day of Thanksgiving and fellowship.
AvisSo, what is the Truth? Is it not Jesus Christ? And is not God's word the Truth? If God's word is the truth, and Deuteronomy 25:5-6 on Levirate marriage is God's word, then how can it be anything but the truth? Does the truth have to jive with Western theology to be accepted as truth? Perhaps the "truth" may be just a version of the truth as Western Christians define and interpret it. I do believe The Truth who is Jesus Christ, and that's the main thing. I take Jesus, not the culturally filtered version of Jesus. ~mogama~Excellent and astute point, Jeff! Thank you for pointing that out. There are others as well. Submissive wives, for example. But, I believe your example is by far the most suitable!
Hope you had a festive and thankful day!
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.