Is polygamy a sin?

[Karen]

And you know this...how?

And you presume this...how? We weren't there during that age and culture. We don't know this, and cannot know this.

You are right, it probably did not bother some of them.
Some of them made a tradeoff for the worse life they might have had in some other way.
But, yes, sad and tragic, in the spiritual, emotional, and relational aspects of marriage.

I am sure they did have relatively abundant food and clothing. They were "wives" of David, the king, and I am sure he physically provided for them.

 

[Marcia]

No you cannot go on record saying that. Read my first response in this thread.

These were posted on page 3:

Posted by lbaker
Is it a sin? No.

Les

and

Posted by npetreley
But my question was whether or not the Bible explicitly stated that it is a sin. It appears that the Bible does not.

And TinyTim said it was sin because it's illegal. Does that mean if it were legalized, it would not be a sin? That's the implication. So we have 2 and maybe 3 people here who say it is not a sin.

The Scripture you posted is dealing with the relationship between a man and a woman in marriage, as I have stated with the other Scripture you posted. I fail to see from that an argument either for or against polygamy.

I didn't use it to say it was for or against polygamy. You must not have read what I wrote, so I'm posting it again. I asked how do we apply NT principles of marriage to polygamy.

 

[rbell]

I'm using some deductive reasoning here:

-Ministers are held to a high standard of morality and conduct.

-"Husband of one wife" with reference to a pastor definitely rules out polygamy for them; thus,

-Monogamous marriage would be God's highest ideal for those that marry. We should not strive for less than His ideal. It seems to me that polygamy was a "concession" to earlier peoples.

 

[Marcia]

Okay, Webdog, here is what I posted for the 2 men, and maybe 3, on this thread who do not think polygamy is a sin:

In that case, does this mean that in a marriage of one man married to 3 women, let's say, the 3 women have authority over his body?


Quote:
The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does; and likewise also the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does.
1 Cor 7.4

Since polygamy is not a sin, according to several of you, then we should be able to apply all the NT teachings concerning marriage to a man with more than wife, right?

I am asking them to apply biblical principles of marriage to polygamy. That seems reasonable.

 

[npetreley]

Marcia, I think you're overreacting. I don't think anyone here is advocating polygamy. I certainly am not. I do not think it is God's original vision for marriage, and that's enough for me to say it's not a good thing. I was only asking if the Bible explicitly stated that it was a sin, and it looks like it doesn't.
​

 

[webdog]

I didn't use it to say it was for or against polygamy. You must not have read what I wrote, so I'm posting it again. I asked how do we apply NT principles of marriage to polygamy.

In the same way we apply NT wine making, dress and customs.

 

[lbaker]

"I am asking them to apply biblical principles of marriage to polygamy. That seems reasonable"

I agree, and by the way, I also agree that it would be sinful in the U.S. or any other country where it is illegal.

Here's a question for the board: suppose a missionary converts a man with four wives in a country where polygamy is legal and normal. Should he demand that the man divorce all but his original wife? I say not.

Les

 

[Karen]

Marcia, I think you're overreacting. I don't think anyone here is advocating polygamy. I certainly am not. I do not think it is God's original vision for marriage, and that's enough for me to say it's not a good thing. I was only asking if the Bible explicitly stated that it was a sin, and it looks like it doesn't.​

I disagree. I think that she is not overreacting. You can post anything strongly on the internet and get some kind of following. That seems to be happening with polygamy.
It is getting a wider, more respectful hearing than I ever would have believed. Many people are advocating polygamy and doing it in the name of properly interpreting Scripture. Just as wrong as only two people "shacking up".

 

[Karen]

Les,
As far as I can tell, the usual (and I think proper) response has been that you have to deal with the real situation you are in.
There would quite often be no point in a man divorcing such wives. They often would be doomed to a life of misery because they would have a hard time providing for themselves and any children in that kind of society.
In any case, the man could not be a leader in the church.

 

[Brother Bob]

ccrobinson;Brother Bob, I'm coming up on 11 years of marriage in September and I know better than to ask a question like that. How long have you been married? :smilewinkgrin:

Oct. 12th make me and my wife 45 years.

 

[npetreley]

I disagree. I think that she is not overreacting. You can post anything strongly on the internet and get some kind of following. That seems to be happening with polygamy.
It is getting a wider, more respectful hearing than I ever would have believed. Many people are advocating polygamy and doing it in the name of properly interpreting Scripture. Just as wrong as only two people "shacking up".

I agree with that. Maybe I just misunderstood her posts. I thought she was under the impression that we were advocating it here.

 

[chadnrachel]

Often people excuse polygamy quoting how that David & Solomon had so many wives. But this was NOT God's intention for marriage.

On a lighter note, it has been said that Solomon wished often, in his older life, that he would NOT have married so many woman and have so many concubines. The proof, he subconsciously wrote the Song of Solomon (S.O.S.). :smilewinkgrin:

 

[Marcia]

Marcia, I think you're overreacting. I don't think anyone here is advocating polygamy. I certainly am not. I do not think it is God's original vision for marriage, and that's enough for me to say it's not a good thing. I was only asking if the Bible explicitly stated that it was a sin, and it looks like it doesn't.​

I don't think I'm overreacting at all when men on this thread are taking it so lightly and actually joking about it.

As Karen pointed out, and as I said earlier, there are dozens of Christian sites advocating polygamy. In fact, I exchanged emails a few years ago with one guy who had such a site, debating him on the issue.

 

[Brother Bob]

Romans, chapter 7



"1": Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?

"2": For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.

"3": So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.

I think this Scripture alone is all you need to judge that polygamy is a sin period. You take this one and use Matt: also and polygamy is certainly a sin and adultery.

 

[LeBuick]

Oct. 12th make me and my wife 45 years.

Please pass my condolences along to your wife. What an example of strength she must be raying: :laugh: :wavey:

 

[tinytim]

Don't forget the example of Christ and the church = a husband and his wife

One Christ to One church.... This is one reason I believe in the collective church as opposed to local church only theology.

Christ is not a polygamist, married to many brides.... He has only 1 bride, the universal church.

 

[Karen]

Romans, chapter 7



"1": Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?

"2": For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.

"3": So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.

I think this Scripture alone is all you need to judge that polygamy is a sin period. You take this one and use Matt: also and polygamy is certainly a sin and adultery.

Brother Bob,
You are right. However, it is amazing how many will argue that passage only applies to women.

 

[npetreley]

I don't think I'm overreacting at all when men on this thread are taking it so lightly and actually joking about it.

As Karen pointed out, and as I said earlier, there are dozens of Christian sites advocating polygamy. In fact, I exchanged emails a few years ago with one guy who had such a site, debating him on the issue.

Sorry, I thought you were saying that we were advocating it here. I must have misread your post.

My jokes were just jokes, though. In fact, the only one that had to do with polygamy was self-deprecating in nature.

 

[webdog]

Christ is not a polygamist, married to many brides.... He has only 1 bride, the universal church.

...composed of many believers.

 

[webdog]

Brother Bob,
You are right. However, it is amazing how many will argue that passage only applies to women.

That passage doesn't apply just to women, but it applies to a husband and his bride. I fail to see where this condemns polygamy, however.