Y
YourNameHere
Guest
There is a lot of stuff in the Bible, for example, slavery. It does not mean that slavery is a good thing.
One man and one woman - the correct combo.
One man and one woman - the correct combo.
- Status
M
Mary888
Guest
I still don’t understand the logic of those who claim Jesus was not speaking about monogamy in Mathew 19. And if he said one thing, examples from the Old Testament are no longer valid if they contradict what he said. Christianity begins with Christ and the rest follows through him. And he is very direct in Mathew 19.
T
TULIPed
Guest
Aside from the many excellent arguments already made, Christians are required to follow the law of the land, and respect governing authorities - From Romans 13:
"Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. "
Polygamy is against the law - in every place on the globe that I can think of at least.
"Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. "
Polygamy is against the law - in every place on the globe that I can think of at least.
G
Gorgias
Guest
Well… to be fair, he could have stopped at one wife. He was greedy, and so he took a second wife.
Umm… Jacob? Monogamous? That would have come as a surprise to his two wives and two concubines, as you mentioned…
Moses had a second wife, although we don’t know if Zipporah had died by the time he married his Cushite wife.
M
midori
Guest
Haha, you’re right. I need to pay more attention.
But Jacob wasn’t greedy.
He said, “I want to marry Rachel.”
And her father said, “Sure, you can marry Rachel. Work for me for seven years, and you can marry Rachel.”
And Jacob works for seven years, and he’s married to Rachel— except when he wakes up in the morning, he realizes he’s actually married to Leah.
And Jacob’s like, “What’s up with this? I said I wanted to marry Rachel!”
And Labon’s all, “Oh? I’m sorry. I thought you knew. In our culture, a younger sister can’t get married before her elder sister. But if you work for me for seven more years, you can have Rachel, for realz this time.”
And Jacob does, and he marries Rachel.
That’s hardly greedy. If there was anyone who was greedy, it was Laban, who was looking to gain 14 years’ worth of free labor in exchange for his two daughters.
But Jacob wasn’t greedy.
He said, “I want to marry Rachel.”
And her father said, “Sure, you can marry Rachel. Work for me for seven years, and you can marry Rachel.”
And Jacob works for seven years, and he’s married to Rachel— except when he wakes up in the morning, he realizes he’s actually married to Leah.
And Jacob’s like, “What’s up with this? I said I wanted to marry Rachel!”
And Labon’s all, “Oh? I’m sorry. I thought you knew. In our culture, a younger sister can’t get married before her elder sister. But if you work for me for seven more years, you can have Rachel, for realz this time.”
And Jacob does, and he marries Rachel.
That’s hardly greedy. If there was anyone who was greedy, it was Laban, who was looking to gain 14 years’ worth of free labor in exchange for his two daughters.
T
tafan2
Guest
St John Paul II makes this same argument in his Theology of the Body, Jesus referred back to Genesis and stated definitively that the natural law is for monogamy. He says that any instances in the Old Testament of jewish polygamy are nothing more but symptoms of the fall.
J
Joe_5859
Guest
I believe it was Lamech of the line of Cain that was the first man mentioned in Scripture to have two wives (Genesis 4:19). And Lamech is the one who said: "I have slain a man for wounding me, a young man for striking me. If Cain is avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy-sevenfold.” In other words, his wickedness was like Cain’s on steroids.
So, yes, neither of them are the best role models.
It is interesting to me that the origin of polygamy is mentioned in the same breath as wickedness and sinfulness. In the beginning, it was not so.
A
ATraveller
Guest
Many countries in Africa and the Middle East allow it.
A
adgloriam
Guest
And that State where the Mormons went to…TULIPed:
Many countries in Africa and the Middle East allow it.
M
midori
Guest
[No message]
A
ATraveller
Guest
If you’re thinking of Utah, it’s illegal there too. It’s illegal in all US states.
Last edited:
P
poche
Guest
We have to look at this from the perspective of the magisterial teaching of the Catholic Church.
D
dochawk
Guest
Specifically, renouncing polygamy was a requirement by Congress for statehood, and someone promptly had a vision baking polygamy.
P
poche
Guest
It is not just the Bible. It is the magisterial teaching of the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church has taught this and so it is.
J
John_Martin
Guest
"O Polite Friend o’mine, it is because of your Hardness of Heart that you have excuses for changing and increasing count of Sex Partners; But I say to you, from the beginning it was not so; from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’ ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate. You are wondering how much is ‘allowed’, what one can get away with; the real question is ‘what does God will? Not what may I crave.’ "
Be Bold; be the mouth of Jesus in your answer.
John Martin
C
Cathoholic
Guest
VeryBlessed . . .
Celibacy unbiblical? - #13 by Cathoholic
Celibacy unbiblical? Apologetics
Celibacy unbiblical? Apologetics
God bless.
Cathoholic
Please feel free to follow these links . . . .
Celibacy unbiblical? - #13 by Cathoholic
Celibacy unbiblical? - #26 by Cathoholic
Hope this helps you VeryBlessed.
God bless.
Cathoholic
Last edited:
R
runningdude
Guest
Many Jews in the Old Testament were polytheistic, too (this also caused a lot of problems).
King Solomon was poligamistic. He built a pagan Temple, and ended up losing his father’s kingdom. Abraham poligamistic, and was asked to sacrifice his son.
Israel was polytheistic, and had to wander the desert for forty years.
Nowhere is polygamy portrayed in a good way. Jesus even straight up calls a woman out for having many husbands (John 4:17).
It would be very misleading to say biblical reference to historical polygamy (and it’s consequences) were any sort of endorsement of it’s continued practice.
King Solomon was poligamistic. He built a pagan Temple, and ended up losing his father’s kingdom. Abraham poligamistic, and was asked to sacrifice his son.
Israel was polytheistic, and had to wander the desert for forty years.
Nowhere is polygamy portrayed in a good way. Jesus even straight up calls a woman out for having many husbands (John 4:17).
It would be very misleading to say biblical reference to historical polygamy (and it’s consequences) were any sort of endorsement of it’s continued practice.
V
VeryBlessed
Guest
I’m actually deeply impressed with celibacy by priests. In my late 30s (still single & celibate), a priest & I were discussing celibacy, and he said something about it I’ve never forgotten. This is the gist of what he said.
I know I was made by God for a woman’s touch. Living without that introduces suffering into my life. That constant source of suffering sensitizes me to the various types of suffering happening in the lives of my parishioners. So even if church leadership were to suddenly allow priests to marry, I would not, because I wouldn’t be as good a priest.
God bless our amazing priests!! And praise God for the good he can bring forth out of suffering…!
I know I was made by God for a woman’s touch. Living without that introduces suffering into my life. That constant source of suffering sensitizes me to the various types of suffering happening in the lives of my parishioners. So even if church leadership were to suddenly allow priests to marry, I would not, because I wouldn’t be as good a priest.
God bless our amazing priests!! And praise God for the good he can bring forth out of suffering…!
Last edited:
G
Gabika50
Guest
Polygamy did not work well for the FLDS group.
A
AgnosticBoy
Guest
I’m not a Catholic but I’ll offer some reasons why the Catholic position is inaccurate on polygamy. I assume your friend knows this which is why he may believe it despite what you may have already told him.
Catholics:
The Catholic position, or at least a common one, is that polygamy was allowed for a time. In the NT, Jesus restored God’s original plan for marriage which was for marriage to be monogamous. Matthew 19 is a common reference to support this position.
Non-Catholic:
First off, your friend may ask for proof of a dispensation for polygamy. And when you have no evidence in terms of biblical reference to offer, then you’ll be left with a weak position. Matthew 19 doesn’t help your case because it only explains why God allowed divorce; it does not say why or IF he “allowed” polygamy (as opposed to accepting it like all other moral standards). Secondly, the passage only restricts a man from marrying another wife only when there’s a divorce involved. It says nothing about the scenario where a man keeps his 1st wife and adds another.
1 Corinthians 7, is tricky because it is a mix between Paul’s personal standard and God’s commands. The two are very different in that the former doesn’t have to be followed while the latter does. The part where Paul says for each man to have his “own wife” to avoid immorality is part of his personal advice because right before then and later on in the same chapter he says it’s good to remain unmarried. So we know based on Paul’s words that having your “own wife” is not the only way to avoid immorality. The reason I wouldn’t rule polygamy out here is because again having your “own wife” is not the only way as I showed based on Paul’s words to also remain “unmarried”. But just in case someone wants to draw a distinction in that Paul at least states to remain unmarried and doesn’t say to get into polygamy there are two responses to that:
- Paul being silent on the polygamy option does not logically justify the conclusion that he’s against it! To argue such is a fallacy called ‘argument from silence’.
- You can also look to other biblical passages to determine all of the other moral marital options that one can engage in to avoid “immorality”. Polygamy is among those moral options.
Last edited:
- Status