Biblical Polygyny chat & forums.

online dating service

REGISTER | MAIL/PROFILE | HELP | NOW ONLINE | SEARCH | RATING | FORUMS | SUCCESS STORIES

Posted In Forum:

Home

login

Show ALL Forums

Author

Thread: Biblical Polygyny

Joined: 8/27/2005

Msg: 174 (view)

Biblical Polygyny Posted: 12/29/2005 5:55:48 PM
The point of it being subjective, even moreso forces us to look at it as a whole. Not just one or two or three isolated places. Where the Bible is silent, in one section, but in another section something is allowed under normal circumstances, then it's reasonable to conclude that in the normal circumstances where there is uncertainty or silence, it is probably allowed. The point is to be in "tune" with the mind of the Author of the Book. By looking at the whole story, and all the metaphors and examples and stories and lessons and laws for and against all the different things, you can be able to grasp the concept that plural marriage is a positive, in the Mind of the Author of the Bible.

Joined: 8/27/2005

Msg: 163 (view)

Christian Marriage is a two for one deal Posted: 12/24/2005 5:19:34 PM
Ambiguous decision? Brain flip Scientists have discovered that your brain responds emotionally and illogically when faced with making a decision from little information, according to a report from LiveScience. The California Institute of Technology conducted a study into ambiguous decision-making, or decisions made without certainty of the outcome or an idea of the probability of success. In the experiment, test subjects were asked to make ambiguous decisions while their brains were scanned using a functional magnetic resonance imager (fMRI), according to the report. The brain scans showed that the decisions were often accompanied by activation of the amygdala, an area of the brain found to closely associated with fear. There is a lot of fear of the unknown, in relation to plural marriage. Most people have limiited information on the subject, as well as limited knowledge or understanding of the Bible. This many times causes irrational and illogical responses to something they consider threatening for one reason or another. Dr TePeS

Joined: 8/27/2005

Msg: 5 (view)

How can any human enter into something with no beginning and no end? Posted: 12/23/2005 5:47:01 PM
What goes up must come down... what came out, goes back in. In Christianity, the people who return to God, or be "redeemed", were part of Him before Time, and having passed through the fires of time, and after 'participating' in the purpose of expressing the fullness of who HE is, they will return to the source. To some He will say, "I never knew you". Some are pre-destinated, or IN Him from the beginning, and some have no part of Him, 'in them'.

Joined: 8/27/2005

Msg: 161 (view)

Christian Biblical Marriage Posted: 12/22/2005 10:13:40 PM
This is Similar to all the news stories,celebrating the ability of gays to be considered "married". This is what roman monogamy has led to. This is what the Roman empire led to also. This is what sodom and Gommorah de-volved to. polygyny de-volved to enforced monogamy, which led into the ever narrowing perversion of "homo"-gamy. ============= Isaiah Chapter 4 1 Seven women will take hold of one man on that day, saying: "We will eat our own food and wear our own clothing; Only let your name be given us, put an end to our disgrace!" 2 On that day, The branch of the LORD will be luster and glory, and the fruit of the earth will be honor and splendor for the survivors of Israel. 3 He who remains in Zion and he that is left in Jerusalem Will be called holy: every one marked down for life in Jerusalem. When the Lord washes away the filth of the daughters of Zion, And purges Jerusalem's blood from her midst with a blast of searing judgment, Then will the LORD create, over the whole site of Mount Zion and over her place of assembly, A smoking cloud by day and a light of flaming fire by night. ==================== This Quote from the Bible, is describing the upcoming 1000 year reign of the "Messiah", on the earth. Notice that it describes 7 women with one husband. When they say they want his "name", that means ownership(marriage/adoption). They give up their own surname, and adopt his name, or he adopts them into himself, by giving them his name. Marriage is an adoption. Becoming a Christian is also an adoption. The christian becomes... a CHRIST-ian. They take on the name and servanthood and are adopted as sons and daughters of God. The nation of israel was not adopted, but the gentile (bride) is adopted. The haughty and proud women of the earth, will be forced to abandon their anti-authority (anti-God) attitudes and lives, and to take away their shame and reproach, they will gladly accept a good husband and share him among themselves. This is an example of the "RETURN" to Godliness. One example also comes to mind: Remember the situation of Abraham being out in the desert by himself, away from the big cities, with just himself and his (probably gigantic) family. We know he was quite rich, and self sufficient and Independent. He was out in the desert practicing polygyny, while his extended family member, Lot, was in the city practicing.... monogamy. Hmm.. Lot had 1 wife only. It is possible that the largely "homosexualized" city of sodom and gommorohy had de-volved to a state of monogamy and homogamy. Keeping that in mind, Lots wife, turned and looked back, because that showed that she really did love and enjoy that life there. She really didn't want to leave it. In her mind, they were right, and there were ok, God is a loving God, he wouldn't really destroy them would he? They were just only practicing love anyway right? And what the evil pervert Abraham out there in the desert with all those wives and concubines and illegitmate children. In her mind, Abraham should be the one punished, for making those poor subjugated women be forced to serve him, and she even had heard a horrible unbelievable rumor that some of his favorite wives, even called him "lord" or "ruler". I wonder how many women from now, if they were in her place, would identify with Sarah more, or with Lots wife? It's a good question to ask ourselves... Which side of the fence would we be on if we were in that place. TePeStErAtIoN

Joined: 8/27/2005

Msg: 155 (view)

Christian Biblical Marriage Posted: 12/22/2005 5:21:21 PM
Most have been answered. There are a few possible ones that haven't been answered, but usually only the more knowledgable know to ask them. All of the AmAtEuR questions have been answered, professionally. If there remains confusion, doubt, insecurity, fear, or exasperation, Dr TePeS is here to help.

Joined: 8/27/2005

Msg: 153 (view)

Christian Biblical Marriage Posted: 12/22/2005 5:16:23 PM
Name one that hasn't been thoroughly and accurately answered.

Joined: 8/27/2005

Msg: 151 (view)

Christian Biblical Marriage Posted: 12/22/2005 5:10:14 PM
Are there any disagreements to what king TePeS has said? Never......?

Joined: 8/27/2005

Msg: 142 (view)

Christian Biblical Marriage Posted: 12/21/2005 9:59:09 AM
It's interesting, to see the correction of the difference between gyny and gamy, while at the same time referring to me as a "bigamist". A bigamist is someone who has a marriage license with two or more wives at the same time, legally. Since I don't participate in Gov. regulated marriage, then Bigamy would be something that couldn't apply to me. So really, paw's statement was applicable, because polyGAMY can be applied to a male having more than one female, or a female with more than one male.. Either way is applicable, depending on the context of the discussion. But what was not applicable, is the word bigAMY, because there are no Bigamists in here, and if there were, no one would admit to it, because they would go to jail. Bigamy is Illegal, but polygamy is not, and polygyny, and polyandry is not. People are doing it all over the place, by the millions, both andry and gyny. The 10 virgins parable is a good "contemporary"(www.dictionary.com) example where there was a parable/story told to a group of people who could better understand a spiritual concept, by paralelling it with a natural physical example. The reason it was such a good example for those being told this parable, is because that was considered to be quite "normal" and appropriate and customary, and appealed to the base understanding of the listeners who were from a Hebrew patriarchial polygynous background. Just like the story of the prodigal son. That story was an example of a common occurance that the people could "RELATE" to, because everyone probably knew of, or knew someone who knew someone else who's son did a similar thing. The stories Jesus would tell, were associated with things that his "target" audience would be able to identify with and understand more intimately. The story of a husband with ten wives, was quite a powerful imagery to them, because that would mean a true reversion back to their original social structure, and ability to have large families again and be raised out of slavery and out bondage to an enemy Gov. It might be similar to a native american "messiah" figure, coming to all the tribes here in the US, and giving them parables of the ten buffalo who were hunted by the brave, but he only caught 5. He would be using an example that takes them back to the roots and basic fundamentals of their ideal culture and ideas. Jesus Didn't use such an example dealing with animals, because He would not have been able to get His idea across as effectively. He was in fact using an example of marriage which was in opposition to the whole mentality of the Roman culture, which was monogamous. If He had wanted to fit in with the romans and their monogamous culture, then he would have indeed used the example of one husband with two women and he would be ending up with one of them. He said 10, because then there is no way to get around the fact that he is talking about a plural marriage. He wanted to make that very clear. That story appealed to the masses, because it was "a little piece of home" to them, and fit right in with their ideas of how family life ought to be, and also showed that He was identifying with them, in opposition to the Roman monogamy system. Why else would the Jews and early (true) Christians be persecuted for practicing plural marraige, until Catholicism finally stamped it out after a few cenruries AD? Questions, comments, concerns, complaints, recommendations.... TePeSt

Joined: 8/27/2005

Msg: 120 (view)

Biblical Polygyny Posted: 12/20/2005 3:19:20 PM
One Church, with many members. It says right there that it's the same as a natural relationship. You have to do some serious wiggling to get out of facing the fact of it after all the explanations I've given you. Regarding the customs of the day, that was a time of Israel being ruled over by a corrupt and degenerate government. The Romans were monogamous, and enforced it. That's like saying that it's wrong to make bricks without straw, because the Egyptians forbade the Hebrews from using it to make bricks. The Hebrews were polygamous, even while in Egypt, the average family had a minimum of around 30 to 40 children. They were becoming too numerous and bordering on outnumbering their slave masters. I know about the culture that was present during the time of Christ. Given the fact that you raise the issue, I would assume that you would be somewhat knowledgable about it, and if you are, then you would know that it's relevant, because they weren't in compliance with Jewish culture at that time anyway. That's what they were waiting for their messiah for. To be returned to their original ways. That's what He's going to do. And polygyny just happens to be one thing that will become once again standard and normal. It would be an honor to be considered on the level of such people as King David and others..... They were operationg under only penalty of law, and didn't have the luxury of a Holy spiritual indwelling which gave them greater ability to follow the law. They did the best they could, and that's why they had animal sacrifices, because they couldn't be perfect. King TePeS has OvErRuLeD

Joined: 8/27/2005

Msg: 118 (view)

Biblical Polygyny Posted: 12/20/2005 2:45:57 PM
have you run out of excuses to deny the validity of Biblical plural marriage?

Joined: 8/27/2005

Msg: 117 (view)

Biblical Polygyny Posted: 12/20/2005 2:44:57 PM
That is the point. In life, the more honest you are, and true to Christianity, the harder it can be. The easier way is to be a liar and a cheater and thief and step on whoever you have to, to get ahead, and use people. You missed the point.

Joined: 8/27/2005

Msg: 115 (view)

Biblical Polygyny Posted: 12/20/2005 2:06:30 PM
This is very interesting, becasue it is designed this way because by keeping family and marriage in close association with each other, the wealth of the family is maintained and protected. When Roman Catholocism began breaking up families and forcing their priests and nuns to leave their families and sign over their properties to the "church", they were going in direct opposition to the Bible. Just the same as when they disallowed cousins to marry each other. There is no Biblical law against cousins marrying. God is very very family oriented. He does not want His people to be poor and destitute on this earth. If people truly followed His ways and provisions which He set up and established for the highest level of fulfillment for man and woman, then all those who truly follow HIM, should be wealthy. (if they can find others who do the same, that's the hard part now.) If there are times of extreme persecution, then of course that would be nullified, such as after the death of Christ. That's when Romanism started going after the family, and weakening it and limiting its ability to retain and build independence and wealth. That's the root of all of this. The socially engineered political control over keeping families from gaining true independence. Only the talented or unusually intelligent are able to make it to be truly free, and independent in life, and maintain their integrity of living a clean and honest Christian life. Otherwise, it is very difficult for the average person, and in some ways impossible, to dig out of the pit of poverty. There is a solution, and it's called Christian plural marriage. Let me know if I've missed, or seem to have missed any points or questions. DRTEPES

Joined: 8/27/2005

Msg: 113 (view)

Biblical Polygyny Posted: 12/20/2005 1:55:18 PM
[I see that you mentioned Ephesians so I'm assuming you take note of whats written in the NT..] lord TePeS says: The OT and NT are like the two wings of an eagle. You need both to be able to fly. They're not in opposition to each other, they only balance each other out. [Now using these scriptures one would conclude that though the church is made up of many members (both male and female) it is only one church. Is christ married to more than one church?? If christ is only married to one (the bride of revelation), then this is the only true biblical pattern for our marriages..] This is exactly correct. Christ is married to a many membered "bride(Lambs book of life)" They are all ONE in HIM. As long as they are IN HIM. Eph 5:23 For the husband is the head of his wife *AS Christ is the head of the church.* It is He who is the Savior of the body. The parallel is exactly right on target. Husband is head of his "WIFE". Singularly mentioned. And Christ is head of his of the "CHURCH". Singluarly mentioned. We are all very aware that the "Church" has many members, because God is a polygamous(spiritually by nature) God. He is capable of that. Each person doesn't have their own individual God. He is able to be God over everyone. He made man to be able to be capable of being over many also(physically polygamous in nature). That's called Patriarchy. In fact, the original word in the language, does not differentiate between wife or wives. It can be either plural or singular, but I don't like to get into original translation wars. There are too many ways to show the facts without getting out the microscope. But by getting out the microscope, and really breaking things down, the facts of what i'm saying are much more profound. Most people wouldn't have the interest to get into those things, and the audience would fall asleep. King David and Solomon or any other man who has more than one wife, is ONE with those wives, and they are united into one-ness by one husband. That is how they are one with each other, but only as long as they are one with the husband. The Church members are of the same body, owned by God, and the wives are each owned by their husband. This goes even more into an ownership issue. A person will be owned by someone. Spiritually or physically. They have a choice. The trend now days though is the "lukewarm(Laodicean)" way of approaching marriage and Christianity. People like to be able to go from one "husband" to the next, or one version of God, to the next. Women mostly dont like the idea of being the "property" or owned by their husband. Same with many lukewarm Church members. They don't want to accept the FULL truth and be fully owned(in submission), to the real truth and facts of who the HUSBAND is. Basically, as I keep saying, female and male is an example of Christ and the Church. He made a duplication of the relationship, here on earth. When you can see a group of women behaving properly and cooperating and co-existing together peacefully, under the headship of their shared husband, then you will see exactly what God had in mind for how he wishes for all of mankind to behave when they relate to HIM. Instead of breaking off into diferent groups and saying "He's our Husband and not yours, etc. Or we know Him better than you or etc. Everyone knows HIM at different levels, but He should still be their "spiritual" Owner/Ruler/King/Husband, individually. It's like a pyramid. on the Bottom, widest numerically is children, the next step up is the wife or wives, and then next up is the husband, always getting narrower up toward the top. Then the very top of the pyramid is the head of the man which is God. That's the heirarchy of Judeo-Christian family structure which God established on this earth and those who Wrote the BIBLE, understood this, and that's why they incorporated this into their own lives. They were not Ignorant, and anyone who calls the writers of the BIBLE ignorant is a fool. The writers of the Bible were extremely intelligent and close to God throughout their lives. God cannot be close to individuals who are doing things that He hates. Dr TePeS

Joined: 8/27/2005

Msg: 110 (view)

Biblical Polygyny Posted: 12/20/2005 1:18:08 PM
2Sa 12:7 And Nathan said to David, Thou art the man. Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, I anointed thee king over Israel, and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul; 2Sa 12:8 And I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's WIVES* into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and #####IF THAT HAD BEEN TOO LITTLE, I would MOREOVER have given unto thee such and such things.##### 2Sa 12:9 Wherefore hast thou despised the commandment of the LORD, to do evil in his sight? thou hast killed Uriah the Hittite with the sword, and hast taken his wife to be thy wife, and hast slain him with the sword of the children of Ammon. This story, gives a very clear example of good and bad related to marriage. God told David, that the wives that he had given to him were a gift. If David had wanted more then he only had needed to ask for it. Meaning if he had wanted more wives, then God would have been happy to give it to him. Since King David decided to take the wife of another man, then he was commiting adultery. So God not only punished David, but he also punished his WIVES. The whole family was punished for the sin of their headship. God did not punish all of Davids wives, but he only caused 10 to be violated. Then King David did not divorce those wives, after they were raped, but he "put them away". They were still his wives though. So even after King David did the sin of adultery and murder, God still did not take his wives away from him, and even went to the next step which was to cause the wife who he had stolen, to bear the Prophet and wisest man who ever lived, Solomon. My opinion is that it was probably meant to be for David to have Bathsheba as a wife, but it was not in the right time, and he tried to make things happen in his own time. A prophet is predestinated to be born, and Solomon was meant to be born through David, by Bathsheba. David probably had the understanding, desire and perception that Bathsheba was supposed to be his wife, but instead of waiting to let God arrange that, David took matters into his own hands, which resulted in the punishment to him and many of his wives. I hope I was thorough in answering your questions. ThOrOuTePeS

Joined: 8/27/2005

Msg: 108 (view)

Biblical Polygyny Posted: 12/20/2005 1:01:50 PM
You won't find any reference to any type of "legal or illegal" marriage in the Bible. Marriage is not meant to be a government institution, just the same as school and education shouldn't be dictated and handled by the gov. However, what you will find, is that during a period of time, the only paper related to marriage, was called a "bill of divorcement", which was when a husband was allowed to divorce a wife, and he had to give her a piece of paper which then proved that she was allowed to have a new husband. That right to divorce was revoked, and reversed, and things were returned to their original status, of no divorce, when Jesus came and returned things to their original, regarding marriage. So there is no Biblical place to find marriage being legally sanctioned by any human institution, because marriage is between man, woman/s and God. Regarding that particular passage that says that a man would cleave to his wife and they would be one flesh. That is exactly right. When a man and his wife come together, they become one flesh. You have to keep in mind the spiritual parallel here. Each individual Christian believer, must become one spirit with God, and He has many millions, maybe billions of spiritual mates/wives/subjects/sons/daughters. A male is not the same as a female. He is made different, he is made in the Image of God. Woman was made from a part of man. She is made to serve him. A man can have many help-mates. God has many millions of servants. There is a connection there. You might be incorrrectly equating male and female as being designed and limited in the same ways. "he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body? For it is said, 'The two will become one flesh'" (1 Cor.6:16, NIV; cp. Eph.5:31). Thus if a man unites himself with a prostitute he becomes "one flesh" with the prostitute. We see that a man may technically, therefore, become "one flesh" with whoever or whatever he engages in the act with. It's more of a question of what is clean or not clean. Within marriage, to become one flesh with a husband/wife/s is fine and good. A man can be one flesh with a goat, but that's not allowed. A man can be one flesh with a thousand wives, just like Solomon, and since it is within the marraige covenant, between man/God/woman, then it is perfectly pure and HOLY. As a side note. Another way of looking at it from some views on the "one flesh" subject, is that being one flesh might indicate the result of male and female mixture which results in a baby being born. That produces an offspring which is the combination of that man and woman, which would truly make them "one flesh" by having a flesh creation which is made between them. TePeSeRaToR

Joined: 8/27/2005

Msg: 105 (view)

Biblical Polygyny Posted: 12/20/2005 11:59:42 AM
[the other hand scriptures state that if man's law conflicts with Yahweh's law, man's laws are null and void.] ======================= BIBLICAL POLYGYNY IS "*NOT*" ILLEGAL IN THE USA. I"ll give an example and then explain. If, in the USA, 50 gay men were to decide to buy a building, and call themselves "partners", and all move in together and have big orgies every night, that would be perfectly legal and probably would even be a big happy celebration for the news media. They might even be considered heroes. But if one man decides he wants to have an extra 1, 2, 3 or more wives, then he would be considered an evil pervert. This shows that the world of right and wrong is flipped upside down. It's completely the opposite of the Bible, and the rules that are supposed to be followed. It's not illegal to have more than one wife in the US, many women and men have more than one husband or wife. All a person needs to do, is just be sure that they don't have a Government issued Legal marriage License on paper. It's not illegal for a man and two or more women living in one house, and the only time there is a conflict with the laws of the land, is if he tried to register more than one of them as his wife. So it's simple, there's not conflict with the laws of the land. Just don't try to have more than one marriage license at a time, but you can still make your oaths of commitement with as many wives as you want, and as many want to with you. Regarding why Abraham "waited so long", I thought that I had already explained that. You might need to go back and read it again, but the fact is, that we don't know how many wives/concubines he had. He may have had 500 already before he had the son of "the promise", through Sarah. Dr TePeSeRaTiOn

Joined: 8/27/2005

Msg: 100 (view)

Biblical Polygyny Posted: 12/19/2005 10:37:37 PM
STUDENT says: Posted: 12/19/2005 640 PM So are you proposing to have concubines or marrying these women?? Bountifull in BC Canada has Polythingy happening, but whether its bountifull in women I would not know.. ==================== lord TePeS says: Hehe, that's a good pun. Well, The issue isn't really "where" the wife is found. Regarding having concubines. Once again, you're not putting yourself into the context of the time that they lived in. It's important to look at the Bible from a historical perspective, and not just a spiritual and biological perspective. During that time, God was the Ruler over a nation on earth. They were a conquering people, who killed and cut the heads off of their enemies, and they took the women to be their concubines, and killed their babies and husbands. That was an army controlled by God Himself, with God even leading the charge many times with His own bloody sword. The God of the Bible is not a pansy santa clause type of person. He's not a benevolent chubby guy up there either, who doesn't care what everone does, as long as there not naughty and are nice. They had concubines mostly who were from other areas. We are Gentiles, and we are a mixture already. None of us are of pure blood or concerned so much with maintaining that so strictly as the nation of Israel was "commanded" to do. The term concubine can't really apply to a gentile, because were not trying to maintain some pure blood line and protecting inheritances which should be reserved for the pure breed of our race. ===================================== ======================================= STUDENT says: seriouslyfunnylady Apparently there is some contention that Hagar was Abraham's wife: ======================================= king TePeS says: (Genesis 16:3-4) And Sarai Abram's wife took Hagar her maid the Egyptian, after Abram had dwelt ten years in the land of Canaan, and gave her to her husband Abram to be his -->*WIFE<--. And he went in unto Hagar, and she conceived: and when she saw that she had conceived, her mistress was despised in her eyes. The Biblical term used here for Hagar is "WIFE". That is because a concubine is a wife. But she was on a lower level of rights as far as inheritances and etc. Once again, we dont have concubines among gentiles, because a concubine was simply of a different culture, religion and blood line. Moses wrote this book, and Moses called Hagar Abrahams wife. Please feel free to argue with Moses regarding whether a concubine is a wife or not. The main thing here, is that we have only one word for wife. In that time, place and language, a concubine is a "type" of wife. ============= ============== STUDENT says: Again I say, Sister wife is saying that once a woman sleeps with a man, that under the eyes of God they are married. Yet others talk about Abraham's concubines. Obviously not considered wives. ========= teacher TePeS says: You would have to go into the subject of what constitutes marriage. That is very interesting, and can take several hours to scratch the surface of all the dynamics between the parallels between spiritual and physical marriage. To simplify, and this can be verified by self study of "the BIBLE", not only a few select websites that express their variety of opinions. But here is the basic realities of it Biblically. If a man sleeps with a woman who is not a virgin, and he has no intention of marrying her, and if she has no intention or she pretends to him or herself that she will marry him, then that is considered fornication, because he is lying with a harlot*. That is not marriage, that is fornication. When a man and woman come together and make oaths to each other with their words of commitement between each other and to God, then they have achieved step one of becoming husband and wife. After that, the only thing left is the physical union. Once they do that, then in Gods eyes, they are considered man and wife. Not just because of the fact that they exchanged fluids(natural), but also because they exchanged vows(spiritual{words=vibrations which never end}) that were not only between themselves and some human claiming to represent God, but they made the vows to God Himself. That is marriage. The DISPLAYED INTENTION, verbal or unspoken, made between man and woman for becoming husband and wife, which is then sealed in heaven, then they are betrothed. Then when they become one physically, they complete that union, by the blood act, and they become one spiritually and then physically. There are detailed explanations given in the Bible which explain more about all the various situations that would occur and the responsibilities that go with that. Once again you have to keep in mind the time and culture and situation of them being Israelis, versus us being Gentiles. Discernment is necessary, to be able to sort out fact from fiction when dealing with these things. That comes from a combination of Spirit and logic. ======================= ========================== STUDENT says: Alive in Christ I don’t believe polygamy was ever what God wanted. Look what happened to Abraham when he took Hagar as a wife. =========================================== master TePeS says: (Proverbs 30:21-23) For three things the earth is disquieted, and for four which it cannot bear: For a servant when he reigneth; and a fool when he is filled with meat; For an odious woman when she is married; and an HANDMAID that is HEIR to her mistress. Hagar fits three of these four categories. The Bible does not tell women to strive to be like "Hagar". It tells them to be like Sarah. Hagar was the perpetuator of the end of the happy and harmonious home that Sarah was hoping to build with Abraham and Hagar. That's why Sarah introduced Hagar into the family. Unfortunately, Hagar had the wrong attitude. That was not the fault of Abraham or Sarah. There was no flaw in the system. It was a flaw in Hagar herself. That's why you will not find any positive reference toward Hagar. Hagar was a Jezebel type of mentality woman. She was a selfish and jealous type, and also she took advantage of the privelege and trust she was given by being part of their family. The lesson here was not that plural marriage failed, but it was that the Egyptian woman was not a true follower of the Israeli customs and did not regard their rules of conduct and attitude and mentality. In fact she came from Egypt, which was a monogamous culture, and so therein arises her perverted inclination to try to think in terms of competitiveness toward other women, instead of the right attitude of cooperation and teamwork. This is typical of the Denominational churches now, who all claim to be the "RIGHT" ONE, and they have the truth, but the other ones dont. Meaning they have Christ, but the others don't. They are daughters of the Whore Rome, which is why they are called harlots. They are rebellious to real Biblical truth, and the husband they claim to serve, is in fact not even the real one. They follow the traditions and false doctrine of their mother, and their mother claims the headship of the family. That's another story, don't let me get going on that. For further questions, comments, concerns, observations, requests or complaints, feel free to. SwOrD TePeS hAs AsUnDeRed!!!!!!!

Joined: 8/27/2005

Msg: 95 (view)

Biblical Polygyny Posted: 12/19/2005 5:04:28 PM
Abraham had an unknown number of concubines, and also we don't in fact know how many wives he had. """"but to the sons of Abraham's concubines, Abraham gave gifts. He sent them away from Isaac his son, while he yet lived, eastward, to the east country. (WEB) But unto the sons of the concubines, that Abraham had, Abraham gave gifts. And he sent them away from Isaac his son, while he yet lived, eastward, unto the east country. (ASV) But to the sons of his other women he gave offerings, and sent them away, while he was still living, into the east country. (BBE)""" Many times, just as the birth of daughters are not mentioned, also the number of wives is not always given, or their names or how many children they had. We can assume that Abraham had many children. However, here is the key factor in this. The promise was to come through "SARAH". She was the key component. The promised son to whom the primary inheritance rights and blessings were to be conferred, were to go through Sarah. It was not Abraham alone who had the importance in this, but Sarah his wife also had some special signifigance in Gods eyes. Why that it, I'm not sure what it was about her that set her apart, just the same as I don't know all the reasont Abraham was set apart. In conclusion to your question, we don't know that they waited, for all we know, he may have already had 500 kids by the time he had his "promised" son. Jesus himself had other brothers and sisters, because Mary had other children after that birth. Also, we don't even know how many wives Joseph had;). master TePeS has.

Joined: 8/27/2005

Msg: 91 (view)

Biblical Polygyny Posted: 12/19/2005 4:06:31 PM
Biblical Polygyny Posted: 12/19/2005 1019 PM Didn't Sarah give Hagar to Abraham to concieve a son? (That would make her Abrahams wife according to the earlier statement). Then Sarah asked Abraham to send Hagar away after the birth of Isaac. God told Abraham to listen to Sarah. This doesn't mesh with what I am hearing in this thread, First it sounds like Hagar should have been considered Abraham's wife....Second Sarah sounds like she was jealous ====================================== Exactly. Sarah urged Abraham to take a second wife so that he would have fulfillment. By re-reading the story carefully, one would understand that the source of jealousy was not due to Abraham having a second wife, but due to the fact that there was a mix up over inheritance rights. Although Hagars son was older, it was Sarahs son who was to be granted the main rights of inheritance, (the promise) etc. The problem was not due to 2 females fighting over "exclusivity" rights to their husband, but it was due to the usurpation of the younger son gaining the first place, over the elder. This same story is also duplicated in the story of esau and jacob. The younger supplants the elder. This is a type of the supplanting of "Israel" the nation, as a wife to God, being "put away" for a time and God taking a "bride" out of the gentiles. Israel was not and will never be Divorced by God, but they have been put away for a time of repentance. Abraham did NOT divorce Hagar, he simply had her to go live somewhere else, away from his main family group. God Himself said that he woudl make a great nation from the offspring of Abraham and Hagar. There is a big difference between a husband "putting away" a wife, and a wife being "divorced". "Put away = temporary separation", "divorce" = Death(permanent separation). Hagar was the wife of Abraham, and from re-reading that story, you will see that she is referred by God as being his wife. The difference between a wife and a concubine, was only inheritance rights. A concubine is a wife, but her children do not get the same benefits and inheritance rights as a wife. It was Hagar who had the jealousy, because she was the one who wanted her son to get the higher inheritance. ======================= nevercanezzer Biblical Polygyny Posted: 12/19/2005 1019 PM King Linead55..quite nicey argued out..I guess I could do as good as job for the OT for arguing that a king must have slaves also. ========================= You won't find any place where an Israeli king had "slaves". The word slave during that time didn't mean the same as what you think of when u think of slaves like in the early history of the US, or other places who treat slaves like animals. Under the economic system of Israel, there were strict rules about how to treat other "people" who were in servanthood for whatever reason. I wouldn't go around promoting people to try to find slaves, because were not in that type of economy, or governorship. Having a wife, or wives, is not equal to having slaves. What it does, is the opposite. It provides freedom to all involved. Much more financial strength, which equals more time for family growth and activities and development of talents, and skills. It is a slave master relationship as far as the authority factor, but Christians also consider themselves "slaves" to God. And the Jews also are along those same lines, and many other religions promote a complete subjection to some form of rules or idealogy. Children are not slaves to their parents, but the parents do rule the children. Wives are not slaves to the husband, but he does rule over them, and they are supposed to obey. Christianity is not a democracy type of institution or organization. It's not a partnership. It is a "dictatorship". So is marriage. You can have bad or good dictatorships. It depends on the dictator. That's why it's so critical for the woman to make sure she finds a truly God fearing husband, because that is the Boss she will have too. If he's his own boss, then she's dealing with an animal as her boss. I hope that explains things more for you. lord TePeS has.

Joined: 8/27/2005

Msg: 88 (view)

Biblical Polygyny Posted: 12/19/2005 2:45:48 PM
Man was made for God. Woman was made for man. Children are the result of man and woman doing what they were designed to do. Everyone wants/needs fulfillment. That's the key to all the problems. If the fulfillment need is in its' correct form, then there will be true happiness and harmony with mankind, nature and God. It's when the fulfillment need becomes perverted, that unhappiness and disharmony and anarchy take over. A "correct" (healthy mentally/spiritually) man, has the desire to expand, the desire to disseminate or propagate all that he is. God gave him that desire, for the purpose of God living through those offspring which the man produces. In that way, Man is fulfilling God, because God is a spirit, and the way He lives and experiences His fulfillment, is through His sons spritually, as man does with his children in a physical sense. A woman produces one egg at a time normally, but the man produces many millions. That is Gods design and nature. Woman was made to perpetuate the fulfillment of man, just like man was made to perpetuate the fulfillment of God. Woman should be fulfilled by fulfilling man, and man should be fulfilled by fulfilling/perpetuating God(liness). We don't limit God to how many children or how great or powerful His Kingdom is. A wife has no right to limit her man from the same thing. Her goal should be the maximum elevation of the physical and spiritual level of herself, her husband and their kids and their family. Meaning maximum fullfillment of what is within them on earth. One woman with many husbands would not be able to logically perpetuate them all, or provide maximum fulfillment for them in all aspects. The male is made to be dominant. When the female tries to be dominant over her male, she is out of the natural order, and it is perversion. A man can only have one master, and that is God, A woman can only have one master and that is her husband(who should be ruled by God). God can be the master of many. Man is made in the "image of God". Man is designed to be a king. God is King of kings, and Lord of lords. Men who "serve" under the Kingship and Lordship of the Ultimate King or Lord, can themselves be granted the privelege of Adoption and Sonship, which makes them themselves kings and lords. Eve was made "for" Adam, to be a help-mate to him. The more help-mates a person has, the more profound and great their achievements can be. A woman having more than one husband, is the same as a man having more than one God. All the ten commandments that apply to a man obeying God, also apply to a woman in subjection to her husband. Your question is along the same lines of asking, why can't two men be married. Their desire to do that, shows that their need for fulfillment has become perverted, and there is something wrong somewhere. It wouldn't work, and it has never worked in history. However, Plural marriage has worked and does work. This is very simple. I don't want to make a book on here, but I hope that the question was answered. If you're not asking from a Biblically "subjective" point of view, then what is explained from a Biblical obediance point of view, will be meaningless. king TePeS has spoken. So let it be written, So let it be done.

Joined: 8/27/2005

Msg: 83 (view)

Biblical Polygyny Posted: 12/19/2005 1:41:04 PM
It's nice to hear some common sense finally. First of all, to talk to non-Bible believers, (OT or NT) on this subject, is a waste of time, because their fallacious sense of moral guidance comes from "withinnnnn". They don't care what God wants or expects, allows or disallows. In fact, the reality of it is, if they met God/Yahshua/Jesus/Jehovah/Elohim/ etc, they wouldn't like Him, and He wouldn't like them. Abraham was one of the very few men who ever lived on earth who actually DID meet God face to face in real life. Abraham was called the "friend of God", an honor not given to anyone else. If Abraham was commiting adultery/fornication by having wives and concubines(which he did have, and an unknown number at that), then God would have told him to his face. God Blessed Abraham, as well as the other most prominent collectors of Jewels(wives) in their crowns. God does not change. He didn't modernize. He didn't listen to madonnas new slut song (pardon the insult to the female pig) and decide He's been missing out on some insights. The restrictions given to certain elders of the church (NT), had specific reasons which were related more to public relations and less exacerbation of the pagan empire which ruled over Israel and much of the world at that time. It was pagan Rome which outlawed and banned plural marriage, and that was hundreds of years AD. There were many reasons for PAGAN ROME to do that. If someone wanted to study about it, they might be surprised at how interesting the subject is. The main point is, that the Bible is not a constitution. It doesn't have amendments. Wrong is wrong, whether the punishment is immediate, corporal(bodily), or whether the punishment of a person is reserved for their soul, after death. If a Holy God will not have plural marriage now, or in His reign during the upcoming millennium(Isaiah 4), then He would not have allowed it under His smaller scale rulership over the nation of Israel. God was King, Prophet and Lord over Israel, at different times. During all of those times, and among all the strict rules that He made for them, not one time did he ever scold anyone who practiced plural marriage. In fact It was considered to be a blessing to have a large family and the teamwork and cooperation and working together and ability of the women to come into such submission to their husband (ruler), was highly beneficial. You will never read about there being any jealousy related to a wife jealous of the husband having another wife, but you will find that the women had the right mentality, and their sense of loss or sadness was from not being able to have children. So what was their solution? The same as this woman who wants to have a baby, and so is posting on this website. The Bible tells women to "be like Sarah, who wore modest clothing and etc, and loved her husband so much she called him her lord". Yes it says "lord". Which means ownership/rulership. This woman is doing "exactly" what the Bible said for a good wife to do. I admire her, and she should be commended. For any questions, comments, concerns, complaints, observations or requests, feel free to message Dr TePeS. drtepes55@yahoo.com

Show ALL Forums