Christian Forums

"If you can say yes...stop looking for the approval of men."

I said yes to Jesus many years ago.

I thought we were participating in lively debate (although at times it has been less than friendly or appropriate - myself included).

I stopped seeking the approval of men quite some time ago...I could have easily conformed to the standard church doctrines when I became aware of the truths in the scriptures...would have actually saved me a considerable amount of time and trouble...but then again life would be boring without a challenge from time to time... : )

Quote from: Scarecrow on Sun Oct 31, 2010 - 18:59:42
"If you can say yes...stop looking for the approval of men."

I said yes to Jesus many years ago.

I thought we were participating in lively debate (although at times it has been less than friendly or appropriate - myself included).

I stopped seeking the approval of men quite some time ago...I could have easily conformed to the standard church doctrines when I became aware of the truths in the scriptures...would have actually saved me a considerable amount of time and trouble...but then again life would be boring without a challenge from time to time... : )

Then continue to build on that relationship with Jesus.

When you trust God first...there is nothing anyone can say or do that will perturb you; trust only the grace of God in and for yourself.....and in and for others.  When you do this...Jesus will have an unhindered way in your life; the only impression left by such a child of God, will be that of a strong calm sanity that God gives those who trust in Him.

By the way...my divorce was final around 3 years ago.  One wife was tough enough...my heart goes out to anyone that feels led to have more.  I wonder sometimes if it is the love of God that is holding you with your husband of (?) wives...or your strong belief in plural marriages; one that you will not let fail.

God Bless...

"I wonder sometimes if it is the love of God that is holding you with your husband of (?) wives...or your strong belief in plural marriages; one that you will not let fail."

I started questioning a number of things I had heard from the pulpit when I noticed they contradicted what I was reading in my Bible. Statements like "I don't think God really hated Esau" "Abraham being willing to sacrifice Isaac proves that Abraham believed in resurrection" "we are all judged by the same standards" (teachers are said to be held to a higher standard) "Jesus was called the Son of God because God created him"...etc...etc...

It is my desire to study the Word of God and see how God deals with things, not how men tell me God deals with things according to their predetermined doctrine.

David was the tipping point for me. David had many wives but was only accused of adultery with Bathsheba, the wife of another man. That caused me to study adultery. Then I learned what adultery actually is according to the Bible, and it is difficult for me to now trust the Christian or Catholic doctrines because they are both false and contrary to the Word of God. The Catholics actually teach much more accurately on marriage and divorce then the Christians do, but the overall doctrine of the Christians is more accurate then the Catholics.

I have been in contact with individuals that are extremely well trained in theology. The ones I tend to gravitate toward are Reformed Calvinists, and I have actually met some that understand Biblical polygyny so I have hope that the truths will be more accurately taught soon. I hope to be a part of a new ministry that is forming, and with some training perhaps even teach someday...who knows...wherever the Lord leads I will follow...don't want to end up in a big fish... : )

The bible instructs that we are to love only one neighbor, not two. 
"thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself" Lev 19:18  Notice it doesn't say neighbors, but neighbor, singular. 

And it was only lawful for the Israelite to tell only his son and his grandson, but not more than one son and one grandson, of the work that God did in Egypt.  Notice:
And that thou mayest tell in the ears of thy son, and of thy son's son, what things I have wrought in Egypt, and my signs which I have done among them; that ye may know how that I [am] the LORD.  Exodus 10:2

** It does not say "thy sons" or "thy son's sons" but thy SON and thy son's SON.  Any more than that would be sin. 

And when we do the Lord's supper, we may only use one cup.  For it does not says CUPS, but rather cup, singular:
And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave [it] to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; Matt 26:27

If the arguments presented by the Monogamites is true, then these must be true as well. 

Quote from: Scarecrow on Sun Oct 31, 2010 - 20:04:39I have been in contact with individuals that are extremely well trained in theology. The ones I tend to gravitate toward are Reformed Calvinists, and I have actually met some that understand Biblical polygyny so I have hope that the truths will be more accurately taught soon. I hope to be a part of a new ministry that is forming, and with some training perhaps even teach someday...who knows...wherever the Lord leads I will follow...don't want to end up in a big fish... : )[/color]

Just be careful of anything...and I mean anything that takes one away from the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ...and on to life style or on to ones self (satan will have a field day).  Paul's message was clear.........I preach my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and Him crucified; nothing else mattered to Paul.  It was the Grace of Jesus, the compassion of Jesus, the mercy of Jesus, the cross of Jesus, the love of Jesus!

If you want to be part of a ministry that will glorify God....stay with Jesus.

God Bless...

Thank you for your concern. Your prayers are always welcome too...can't ever get enough of those... : )

Quote from: Scarecrow on Sun Oct 31, 2010 - 20:59:20
Thank you for your concern. Your prayers are always welcome too...can't ever get enough of those... : )

Praying for you...

Quote from: Scarecrow on Sun Oct 31, 2010 - 10:58:40
OK...ok...ok...I'll delve off topic for just a bit... : )

"There were no individual rights. Everything was done for edification."

There are always individual rights and individual relationships unless we are nothing more than a rock garden.

Act 5:1-4 But a man named Ananias, with his wife Sapphira, sold a piece of property, and with his wife's knowledge he kept back for himself some of the proceeds and brought only a part of it and laid it at the apostles' feet. But Peter said, "Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and to keep back for yourself part of the proceeds of the land? While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not at your disposal? Why is it that you have contrived this deed in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God."

Ananias had the right to keep the property for himself (an individual right to own property) and not sell it. Even after he sold it it still remained up to him what to do with the proceeds (an individual right to distribute assets as one sees fit) . Where he sinned was to pledge all the proceeds to the church but then hold some back. He was never obligated to sell his land much less give any of the proceeds to the church if he chose to sell it.

"Individuality is a human concept, not a concept in the body of Christ."

When God breathed His spirit into Adam did he create an individual man or a church? God created an individual man with a unique soul. When God created Eve from the rib of Adam He was not doubling the size of the church He was creating an individual to be a help meet to Adam.

"In the body of Christ we lose our individuality as a drop of water does when it joins a large body of water."

While we become a member of the "body" metaphorically speaking, the last thing we lose is our individuality or identity. In fact we are told that we will each receive a stone with a name on it that only we will know; it doesn't get much more personal and individualized than that.

Revelations 2:17 He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To the one who conquers I will give some of the hidden manna, and I will give him a white stone, with a new name written on the stone that no one knows except the one who receives it.'

"Our goal must be the edification of the body, not the edification of ourselves individuality."

Agreed, but to do so does not require that we give up our individuality or our relationship with the lord, I would only expect to hear something like that from a "our church is the only way to get to heaven cult" like the Catholics, Jehovah's Witnesses, etc... What we do on an individual and congregate basis should edify the church, which is the group of individuals that comprise the body of Christ. In edifying the church we will be edified by the Lord. Jesus spelled this out when He pointed to the Pharisees praying, fasting, and giving to receive the praises of men. We should do so in secret because our Father sees the things done in secret and knows our hearts.

Romans 2:28-29 For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God.

"Do you think Jesus had a relationship with Peter because Peter was Peter?  Or because Peter was one of the disciples of Christ?  Would Jesus have had that relationship with Peter if he wasn't one of His disciples?"

The relationship that Jesus had with Peter was unique, just as the relationship that Jesus has with me is unique. Each individual that has a relationship with Jesus does so on a unique and individual basis because they are unique individuals. The body doesn't save us, our relationship with Christ alone saves us. We are saved by faith alone, through grace alone and that not of our own doing lest any man should boast. The body is simply a collection or grouping of those saved by faith.

"All things are to be done for the edification of the body of Christ.  Nowhere can we find that all things are to be done for the edification of the individual.  Individuality is a thing of the flesh, not of the Spirit of God."

God didn't create us to be a bunch of robots to wander around simply looking for things to do to edify the church. Our behavior while we live our lives is to become more Christ like as our relationship with the Lord grows thus edifying the church. Because of our faith our works will edify the church more and more as we grow in the Lord. When we become saved we are not a finished product, we are just beginning.

God manifests Himself to us in three distinct forms (persons) which we refer to as the trinity; God Himself displays individuality and we were created in His express image. Individuality is a prerequisite for a relationship with the Lord, and since we are created as individuals we have the opportunity to join in relationship with him should He call us into a relationship with Him.

"So did Jesus die for just certain particular people, or for the whole world?"

Jesus died for the sins of the world, but not all will receive the salvation brought about by His sacrifice. We are all sinners and deserving of death, yet God has chosen to show favor to His elect (predestined) and redeem them.

Revelation 17:8 The beast that you saw was, and is not, and is about to rise from the bottomless pit and go to destruction. And the dwellers on earth whose names have not been written in the book of life from the foundation of the world will marvel to see the beast, because it was and is not and is to come.

This is not a Calvinistic doctrine, it is straight from the pages of scriptures. An analogy that might help people understand God's grace to His elect is that of a lame duck President. You will often see Presidents pardoning certain criminals at the end of their term in office. Because a President shows favor to certain individuals is he therefore obligated to pardon all the criminals? Certainly not. Because he chose to pardon certain individuals and not all of them does that make him an unjust President? Certainly not; neither is God obligated to pardon any of us or unjust by not doing so, but rather has chosen to show grace and mercy to those He has chosen.

John 6:44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.

John 6:37 All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out.

Unless we are called by God to come into a relationship with Jesus we cannot enter a relationship with Him. When we are called we will come to Him, irresistible grace.

"Either way, even Calvinists do not teach that polygamy is acceptable among Christians."

I'm a Calvinist and I teach that it is acceptable, there are others too. I would agree with a statement that most Calvinists do not teach that polygyny is acceptable, but we're working on them... ; )

Since parts of this discussion is off topic, I started a new thread in General Discussion called "Bought At A Price."  If you want, we can continue there.

   

Quote from: Memphis Dwight on Sun Oct 31, 2010 - 20:18:35
The bible instructs that we are to love only one neighbor, not two. 
"thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself" Lev 19:18  Notice it doesn't say neighbors, but neighbor, singular. 

And it was only lawful for the Israelite to tell only his son and his grandson, but not more than one son and one grandson, of the work that God did in Egypt.  Notice:
And that thou mayest tell in the ears of thy son, and of thy son's son, what things I have wrought in Egypt, and my signs which I have done among them; that ye may know how that I [am] the LORD.  Exodus 10:2

** It does not say "thy sons" or "thy son's sons" but thy SON and thy son's SON.  Any more than that would be sin. 

And when we do the Lord's supper, we may only use one cup.  For it does not says CUPS, but rather cup, singular:
And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave [it] to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; Matt 26:27

If the arguments presented by the Monogamites is true, then these must be true as well. 

Seriously, is this your argument for polygamy?

That's sad, memphis.  Sad.

You didn't respond to my question about your friend who married his second wife and honeymooned in AR... Wondering how that is all working out for them?

Phoebe, you don't know?  That was not my argument for polygamy.  That was to show the silliness of your argument.  I thought you would have been able to see the tongue-in-cheek of it.  Guess I was wrong. 

But seriously.  That is what your Monogamite doctrine boils down to.  It is about taking a place in the bible and saying "SEE!  It says WIFE, not WIVES.  HEEEE HAW!"

Jeff is doing fine.  They just had a little girl. 

"The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1878 that plurality of wives (polygamy), as originally permitted by the Mormon religion, violated criminal law and was not defensible as an exercise of religious liberty.

Interesting that you should mention Augustine.  Because both he and another of the early church fathers records that polygyny was happening in the first few centuries of the church.  And then we know that it was not until 1022 that the RCC outlawed it due to inheritance issues so it was practiced by christians for at least the first thousand years of christianity. 

The practice of polygyny has NEVER stopped. False religious doctrines and governments controlled by men with agendas that are anything but godly have tried for centuries to control and eliminate polygyny. These attacks are nothing less than satanic because plural marriage IS a picture of the bride of Christ with many members.

In Acts Chapter 5 we see wisdom that those who suppress polygyny might be wise to consider:

Gamaliel, a teacher of the law held in honor by all the people, stood up and gave orders to put the men outside for a little while. And he said to them, "Men of Israel, take care what you are about to do with these men. For before these days Theudas rose up, claiming to be somebody, and a number of men, about four hundred, joined him. He was killed, and all who followed him were dispersed and came to nothing. After him Judas the Galilean rose up in the days of the census and drew away some of the people after him. He too perished, and all who followed him were scattered. So in the present case I tell you, keep away from these men and let them alone, for if this plan or this undertaking is of man, it will fail; but if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them. You might even be found opposing God!"

Wisdom leads us to the conclusion that hindering what God has not prohibited man from partaking in can actually be seen by God as opposing Him.

Quote from: Scarecrow on Sun Oct 31, 2010 - 17:21:54
"To call anyone who believes in faithfullness to their wife sexually repressed is rediculous."

Agreed, but faithfulness is meeting your obligations and honoring your covenant, it has nothing to do with having more than one wife being sinful.

Also, I was not the one to start making false accusations against the character of others...

"My husband is 100% faithful and believe me, he is not sexually repressed in anyway. Faithfullness to each other in marriage, is a crucial and essential part of any godly marriage. Betrayal of one spouse by having sex with another, is the worst thing that can be done to the other.It tales away the oneness and intimacy that should only be shared with the two who have become one,and disobeys the Christian treaching of faithfullness in marriage and keeping the marriage bed pure."

Actually the only thing that having more than one wife takes away from is the false doctrine ("Christian teaching") of monogamy.

"As far as I know it is only a tiny number of mormons who teach that more that one 'wife' is allowed, but mormonism is a cult anyway."

That is why I am here...to provide a little education to the misinformed Christian masses...I'm not a Mormon and never have been, and neither are the myriad of others that understand the truths of Biblical Marriage. You might be surprised to learn that polygamy is found in 78% of the cultures of the world, it is the monogamists that are a mere 22% minority. Welcome to reality and the real world.

  Strange that I have never ever heard of a single Christian having more than one woman, or believing that it is OK to have more than one woman, until I came to this forum. Since then, I believe that there have been only 3 men here who have believed that, and I have been on this forum for over 2 years. I am from the UK, have been a believer for over 30 years,and have never ever heard it either taught or practised here. It simply isnt CHristian teaching. Paul tells us to each have our own spouse, perfectly clearly. Still people will do what they want to do because that is what human beings are like.

"Strange that I have never ever heard of a single Christian having more than one woman, or believing that it is OK to have more than one woman, until I came to this forum."

Perhaps you should frequent more than one forum. There are thousands....here is one where you will find hundreds of Christian men that believe in Biblical Marriage:

http://www.biblicalfamilies.org/forum2/index.php

Enjoy! : )

Quote from: Memphis Dwight on Mon Nov 01, 2010 - 07:36:08
Phoebe, you don't know?  That was not my argument for polygamy.  That was to show the silliness of your argument.  I thought you would have been able to see the tongue-in-cheek of it.  Guess I was wrong. 

But seriously.  That is what your Monogamite doctrine boils down to.  It is about taking a place in the bible and saying "SEE!  It says WIFE, not WIVES.  HEEEE HAW!"

Jeff is doing fine.  They just had a little girl. 

So, you posted this thread to mock Christ-followers?

Nice, memphis.

You choose to ignore the arguments with more validity.  Of course.  Otherwise you would have to acknowledge them and deal with them and change your beliefs and how you live for Christ.


Sad that Jeff has fathered another daughter to be sold into polygamous bondage.

Why is guys with multiple wives? 

Gal 3:28  There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Seems women would have the same option in Scripture.  Never know which one ya might think was a better partner.

I don't think MD answered my question about what age is appropriate for marriage.

Quote from: Memphis Dwight on Mon Nov 01, 2010 - 08:04:41
Interesting that you should mention Augustine.  Because both he and another of the early church fathers records that polygyny was happening in the first few centuries of the church.  And then we know that it was not until 1022 that the RCC outlawed it due to inheritance issues so it was practiced by christians for at least the first thousand years of christianity.  

Just because it "was happening" does not make it something God desires and approves for His Christ-followers.  THAT'S a bad argument.

You want to use Augustine as an example?  Let's do.  Let's discuss Augustine's misogynist ways, shall we?

• It was Augustine who introduced this idea of "original sin" to point a finger at the woman.

• It was Augustine who told his priests to shun the company of women.

• It was Augustine who bellieved that women were morally and mentally inferior to men.

•It was Augustine who believed that women's bodies were an obstacle to exercise of reason.

• It was Augustine who depicted women as temptation—easily tempted into evil.


Some of our early "church fathers"  (which is not synonymous with godly or anything else, merely that they were leaders in the early churches, however flawed they were)  could not even agree that women were completely human!  We've come a long way, baby, but we obviously still have a long way to go.

QuoteAugustine elevated the hatred of women and sex to a level unsurpassed before.  To him, women's inferiority to men was so obvious that he felt that he had to ask the question: "Why was woman created at all?"  His own answer to this question is a fine example of Christian misogyny:

"I don't see what sort of help woman was created to provide man with, if one excludes procreation. If woman is not given to man for help in bearing children, for what help could she be? To till the earth together? If help were needed for that, man would have been a better help for man. The same goes for comfort in solitude. How much more pleasure is it for life and conversation when two friends live together than when a man and a woman cohabitate?"

Thus, Augustine concluded that woman was created purely for procreation and for nothing else. Furthermore, it was sexual pleasure that carried the original sin from generation to generation.   Now sex between husband and wife, Augustine taught, for any other purpose except procreation is mortally sinful and should be avoided. Sex for procreation, while still sinful, is pardonable.

...

Augustine had laid down a completely misogynous theology: women are created purely for procreation, yet the act of procreation itself, when a man come together with a woman, is sinful. The only use of a woman that Augustine was willing to concede necessarily involved sin! Furthermore, the blame for present state of mankind falls squarely on the woman, for it was Eve who allowed herself to be tempted by Satan.

As a misogynist, Augustine practiced what he preached. His friend Possidius described his conduct thus: "No woman ever set foot in his house, he never spoke to a woman except in the presence of a third person or outside the parlour, he made no exceptions, not even for his elder sister and his nieces, all three of them nuns."

~The Position of Women:The Teachings of the Theologians

Yeah, Augustine is a good one to use as support for polygamy.  


[edited for typos]

Quote from: Scarecrow on Mon Nov 01, 2010 - 08:53:42
"Strange that I have never ever heard of a single Christian having more than one woman, or believing that it is OK to have more than one woman, until I came to this forum."

Perhaps you should frequent more than one forum. There are thousands....here is one where you will find hundreds of Christian men that believe in Biblical Marriage:

http://www.biblicalfamilies.org/forum2/index.php

Enjoy! : )

I have been on more than one forum, and of course we can all find a tiny percentage of those who are totally out of balance to agree with what we ourselves want to do if we really want to.

Quote from: Memphis Dwight on Mon Nov 01, 2010 - 07:36:08
Phoebe, you don't know?  That was not my argument for polygamy.  That was to show the silliness of your argument.  I thought you would have been able to see the tongue-in-cheek of it.  Guess I was wrong. 

But seriously.  That is what your Monogamite doctrine boils down to.  It is about taking a place in the bible and saying "SEE!  It says WIFE, not WIVES.  HEEEE HAW!"

Jeff is doing fine.  They just had a little girl. 

  Shame the child is illegitimate.

Quote from: Eagle on Mon Nov 01, 2010 - 09:38:52
Why is guys with multiple wives? 

Gal 3:28  There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Seems women would have the same option in Scripture.  Never know which one ya might think was a better partner.

yes, the day that those like MD agrees that women can also have more than one man, I may take him more seriously. Wonder how he would feel if his wife asked to bring another man into the house!!!!!

I love it that God calls us to be faithful to our spouse. A marriage without faithfullness is nothing at all. Faithfullness and sexual purity is the bedrock of the marriage covenant. If a man cannot be faithful, as God tells us,he should never be married at all. This whole thing is about a  tiny number of men who want to have sex with several women, who desperately try it justify it. It can never be justified, and one day they will find this out.

Quote from: chosenone on Mon Nov 01, 2010 - 10:55:34

Quote from: Memphis Dwight on Mon Nov 01, 2010 - 07:36:08
Phoebe, you don't know?  That was not my argument for polygamy.  That was to show the silliness of your argument.  I thought you would have been able to see the tongue-in-cheek of it.  Guess I was wrong. 

But seriously.  That is what your Monogamite doctrine boils down to.  It is about taking a place in the bible and saying "SEE!  It says WIFE, not WIVES.  HEEEE HAW!"

Jeff is doing fine.  They just had a little girl. 

  Shame the child is illegitimate.

No, the child's legitimate, but the parents aren't.

Marc,   We agree on this page 

"Just because it "was happening" does not make it something God desires and approves for His Christ-followers."

I guess my God is bigger than your god...mine knows how to very clearly tell me what is sinful.

Quote from: Scarecrow on Mon Nov 01, 2010 - 12:28:35
"Just because it "was happening" does not make it something God desires and approves for His Christ-followers."

I guess my God is bigger than your god...mine knows how to very clearly tell me what is sinful.

You think your god is bigger than mine?  Because you think He allows multiple sex partners?   

See, that seems to the part polygamists missed.  God moved forward from the Old Law because He people did not grasp the idea of pleasing Him rather than pleasing self, and sent a Redeemer for all those things we do wrong, wrong that does not just violate the letter of the Law but also violates the spirit/Spirit of the law of Christ.  You want a legalistic "polygamy is sin", but God wants a faithful, monogamous heart.  Polygamy violates the Spirit of God.  It violates covenants of faithfulness.  It violates the witness of Christ to the world.  It violates the bodies and souls of women.

Like wayward-thinking Islamists/Muslims, you want your 72 virgins, only in the Name of Christ.  And you want them NOW, not in the hereafter.  I really don't see much difference.  All about self, and satisfying self-desires.

Trying to make multiple sex partners acceptable in God's Eyes...  Having sex with multiple women while the Spirit of Christ indwells me... Don't think I would hang my spiritual hat there.

All of self, and not much of Thee.

"You think your god is bigger than mine?  Because you think He allows multiple sex partners?   Rolling on floor laughing"

Nope...didn't say that, but keep rolling... : ) I said that my God is capable of specifying what is sinful, apparently yours is not.

"God moved forward from the Old Law"

Apparently He forgot to tell Jesus:

Luke 16:17 But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one dot of the Law to become void.

"God wants a faithful, monogamous heart."

I have read five different translations of the Bible and somehow managed to miss that particular passage, any possibility you could save me the trouble of looking it up and point me to the chapter and verse.

"Polygamy violates the Spirit of God."

Missed that verse too...

"It violates covenants of faithfulness."

Missed that verse too...

"It violates the witness of Christ to the world."

Missed that one too...

"It violates the bodies and souls of women."

Missed that one too...

"Like wayward-thinking Islamists/Muslims, you want your 72 virgins, only in the Name of Christ."

No I have my hands full with the few that I have.

"And you want them NOW, not in the hereafter."

Well I have a few now but that is quite sufficient, thank you.

"I really don't see much difference.  All about self, and satisfying self-desires."

Not at all. If you think that is all there is to it then you have been gravely misled.

"Trying to make multiple sex partners acceptable in God's Eyes..."

If you mean multiple wives, well then yes, it is acceptable in God's eyes. There are numerous examples of men with multiple wives in the scriptures that God Himself praised, many of them were even Kings and Judges.

"Having sex with multiple women while the Spirit of Christ indwells me... Don't think I would hang my spiritual hat there."

Nobody is requiring you to.

"All of self, and not much of Thee."

Quite the contrary. A man that has more than one wife will have to make considerable sacrifices of his resources to tend to his wives. Monogamy actually promotes feminism and materialism which are both rampant among the Christian community.

If nothing else you have a fairly good start on a new radical doctrine...good luck with that...

Hey!! MD I think we have a winner here for the most likely reply to match the title of your post "bad arguments against polygyny"

scarecrow - You will have to stop posting in blue and learn to use the

Quotequotes

before I will respond to you.

"Promise?"

Pregnant and giving birth at the age of 10 in Spain...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39975331/ns/world_news-europe/

My first thought when I saw this article was how did a girl that young manage to deliver a full term healthy baby...amazing!

Quoteyes, the day that those like MD agrees that women can also have more than one man, I may take him more seriously. Wonder how he would feel if his wife asked to bring another man into the house!!!!!

I love it that God calls us to be faithful to our spouse. A marriage without faithfullness is nothing at all. Faithfullness and sexual purity is the bedrock of the marriage covenant. If a man cannot be faithful, as God tells us,he should never be married at all. This whole thing is about a  tiny number of men who want to have sex with several women, who desperately try it justify it. It can never be justified, and one day they will find this out.

But the scriptures in several places indicate that a woman cannot be married to more than one man or else she is an adulteress. 

For the married woman is bound by law to her  husband while he is living; but if her husband dies, she is released from the law  concerning the husband. So then, if while her husband is living she is joined to another man, she shall be called an adulteress; but if her husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is not an adulteress though she is joined to another man.   Romans 7:2-3

There is no corresponding passage that states that a married man cannot be married to more than one woman.

CHOSENONE, by whose authority is Jeff's daughter illegitimate (a bastard)?  Your's or God's?  If you say by God's authority, book chapter and verse.. please ?

"But the scriptures in several places indicate that a woman cannot be married to more than one man or else she is an adulteress."

Agreed...but then we must consider this:

1 Corinthians 5:12-13
For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. "Purge the evil person from among you." 

If a woman is part of a religious system that states she may not have more than one husband then she should follow her religion accordingly. If a woman is not a part of any such religion then she is free to marry whom ever she chooses, it is none of our business as Christians. This is also an argument which supports polygyny. If your church does not believe that its scriptures allow a man to have more than one wife then so be it; but if my church happens to understand that scriptures allow men to have more than one wife you have no business telling me what doctrine I am to follow. I am free to choose to follow whichever doctrine I believe best reflects the scriptures.

It is forced monogamy that is nothing less that a religious system using the government to force its doctrine upon the masses. You WILL see this changing soon, the bigamy laws will not stand for much longer.

Quote from: Memphis Dwight on Fri Nov 05, 2010 - 11:01:43

Quoteyes, the day that those like MD agrees that women can also have more than one man, I may take him more seriously. Wonder how he would feel if his wife asked to bring another man into the house!!!!!

I love it that God calls us to be faithful to our spouse. A marriage without faithfullness is nothing at all. Faithfullness and sexual purity is the bedrock of the marriage covenant. If a man cannot be faithful, as God tells us,he should never be married at all. This whole thing is about a  tiny number of men who want to have sex with several women, who desperately try it justify it. It can never be justified, and one day they will find this out.

But the scriptures in several places indicate that a woman cannot be married to more than one man or else she is an adulteress. 

For the married woman is bound by law to her  husband while he is living; but if her husband dies, she is released from the law  concerning the husband. So then, if while her husband is living she is joined to another man, she shall be called an adulteress; but if her husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is not an adulteress though she is joined to another man.   Romans 7:2-3

There is no corresponding passage that states that a married man cannot be married to more than one woman.

This is about the local law, not about God's Law.

But nice try.

So, did memphis ever answer my question about what he thinks should be the accepted age of marriage for a 'woman'?


I slogged through his posts just now and didn't see an answer. I do need a shower, though.