Polygamy in the Bible

[Dora]

Originally Posted by Aquila

I think there’s a philosophical disconnect among those who want to list polygamy as a sin. I think they just don’t understand how someone can believe that polygamy is not a sin and yet also advocate in favor of monogamy in our modern culture.

People pigeonhole the Bible. They see it strictly within the current “established” perceptions. Most today apply some very “Puritanical” interpretations of the Bible, especially in the area of marriage and marital relations. But the more I study the more I realize that the Bible is anything but Puritanical. There are marriages, customs, relationships, actions, and entertainments mentioned in the Bible that would shock most people if they really understood them. These things leave scholars scrambling for cover and passionately debating the meaning of various texts.

I can't for the life of me believe that so many of you guys buy into the idea that polygamy is NOT sin.

I also believe that owning slaves is sinful. Degrading human beings to the point of equating them to the value of so much livestock is dispicable.

Polygamy does the same thing to women - it devalues them. It places them in a vulnerable position and subsequently the negative results trickle down to their children.

Countries and cultures that still condone the practice are NOT, I repeat NOT Christian countries. Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, etc. still engage in this practice. Mormons have created their own religion to enable this practice.

In cultures that practice polygamy, abuse of women is rampant. What religion is it where they practice female castration? Why would men want to strip women of their ability to enjoy sex? Could it be that they want to suppress their desire to have sex with partners other than their husbands? Just more examples of men coming up with great ideas like chastity belts, etc. Crazy stuff!!!

How can you say that polygamy is "ok" with God? I just can't wrap my brain around the idea that God is pleased with placing women in a situation where they are subjected to abuse, neglect, and where they are objectified like cattle. If slavery is wrong, it stands to reason that polygamy is also wrong.

When Jesus set forth His principles for living and how to treat your neighbor, OUT went the idea that a human being can be bought and sold or that one person's worth is greater or lesser than another's.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Dora

I can't for the life of me believe that so many of you guys buy into the idea that polygamy is NOT sin.

I also believe that owning slaves is sinful. Degrading human beings to the point of equating them to the value of so much livestock is dispicable.

Polygamy does the same thing to women - it devalues them. It places them in a vulnerable position and subsequently the negative results trickle down to their children.

Countries and cultures that still condone the practice are NOT, I repeat NOT Christian countries. Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, etc. still engage in this practice. Mormons have created their own religion to enable this practice.

In cultures that practice polygamy, abuse of women is rampant. What religion is it where they practice female castration? Why would men want to strip women of their ability to enjoy sex? Could it be that they want to suppress their desire to have sex with partners other than their husbands? Just more examples of men coming up with great ideas like chastity belts, etc. Crazy stuff!!!

How can you say that polygamy is "ok" with God? I just can't wrap my brain around the idea that God is pleased with placing women in a situation where they are subjected to abuse, neglect, and where they are objectified like cattle. If slavery is wrong, it stands to reason that polygamy is also wrong.

When Jesus set forth His principles for living and how to treat your neighbor, OUT went the idea that a human being can be bought and sold or that one person's worth is greater or lesser than another's.

Dora, when you say the word "polygamy" you picture in your head the abuse that women are enduring in Asia and Africa. When you say the word "slavery" you picture the horrendous abuse inflicted on slaves by America and many other nations in the slave trade.

"Biblical polygamy" and "biblical slavery" wasn't like these more recent institutions. In the Bible wives had far more rights and entitlements than the women in modern polygamous nations. In fact, if "biblical polygamy" were practiced in those nations they'd come light years forward in regards to respecting women and even a woman's right to conjugal enjoyment, ownership of property, etc. Remember, women in polygamous marriages in biblical times had their own servants and even had a right to own and operate their own trade, bringing a living into the family.

In addition, if principles of "biblical slavery" were observed the slave trade in early America wouldn't have been as terrible as it was and most slaves would have only experienced slavery as a gateway to citizenship and freedom. In a way, "biblical slavery", is more akin to what we might call "indentured servitude" today. Remember when poor English and the Irish imagrants would sell themselves into servitude for a period of time to gain passage to the new world and their eventual freedom? That is more in keeping with the institution of slavery.

You're comparing apples to oranges. If I believed for a minute that Abraham, Jacob, Moses, David, and others treated their wives like so many men treat their multiple wives in Asia and Africa today, I'd agree with you whole heartedly sis. But the Biblical institutions are far different from what we've seen practiced in our non-Hebraic cultures.

[TK Burk]

Would one of you brethren that believe polygamy is NOT a sin please explain this:

Matthew 19:8-9
(8) He saith unto them, Moses BECAUSE OF THE HARDNESS OF YOUR HEARTS SUFFERED YOU TO PUT AWAY YOUR WIVES: BUT FROM THE BEGINNING IT WAS NOT SO.
(9) And I SAY UNTO YOU, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

(1) What did the “hardness” of their “hearts” have to do with that Law being added?

(2) What did Jesus mean by “SUFFERED you”?

(3) How was Moses’ Law different than what was first taught?

(4) Was what Jesus said to them different than what was written by Moses?

(5) Does different mean God does change His will in certain circumstances?

(6) If Jesus’ position is different than Moses’, would it be sin to NOT do as Jesus commanded and instead do as Moses allowed?

(7) Since the New Covenant removes a “stony heart” and gives a Born Again believer a “fleshly heart,” if a man uses this Law to divorce his wife, would it be a sin?

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by TK Burk

Would one of you brethren that believe polygamy is NOT a sin please explain this:

Matthew 19:8-9
(8) He saith unto them, Moses BECAUSE OF THE HARDNESS OF YOUR HEARTS SUFFERED YOU TO PUT AWAY YOUR WIVES: BUT FROM THE BEGINNING IT WAS NOT SO.
(9) And I SAY UNTO YOU, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

(1) What did the “hardness” of their “hearts” have to do with that Law being added?

Because so many men would become bitter and desire to be separated from a wife, Moses expanded the stipulations of the writ of divorcement to spare the woman abuse at the hands of hard hearted and potentially abusive men.

(2) What did Jesus mean by “SUFFERED you”?

Jesus meant, "allowed you to divorce your wives".

(3) How was Moses’ Law different than what was first taught?

God never intended for the marriage contract to be broken.

(4) Was what Jesus said to them different than what was written by Moses?

Yes and no. The Law of God states....

Deuteronomy 24:1-4
1When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house.

Both Jesus and the Law of God allows for divorce. Christ stipulates that the only proper grounds of divorce is for sexual infidelity. This was the original intent of the law. The "uncleanness" was meant to indicate her infidelity. However, Moses allowed divorce for less serious infractions in his application of the Law. Christ doesn't give them anything new. Christ clarifies bringing into focus the true meaning behind the original intent of the Law.

(5) Does different mean God does change His will in certain circumstances?

No. Jesus brought clarification to that which "Moses" confused by his being too lenient.

(6) If Jesus’ position is different than Moses’, would it be sin to NOT do as Jesus commanded and instead do as Moses allowed?

Christ's position is more strict than that of "Moses'" (a fallible man), but not different from the Law of God itself. Again, Christ clarified the Law that Moses was lax upon. Since Christ brings into focus the original intent of the Law of God we should obey Christ over Moses' allowances.

(7) Since the New Covenant removes a “stony heart” and gives a Born Again believer a “fleshly heart,” if a man uses this Law to divorce his wife, would it be a sin?

Again, the issue isn't the Law, it was the allowances made by Moses in regards to this law. God never intended this law to be expanded to include the petty things they used as grounds for divorce.

You will notice that this passage is about divorce not polygamy. This reveals that God never intended a man to divorce his wife (or wives) for any other reason than adultery.