Polygamy in the Bible

[Tim Rutledge]

Br. V. If you had mega bucks, and say it was not against the law, would you have 2 wives? If no.. why not?

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

None of them. It wasn't the bride's house.

I've read historical accounts of this before, maybe T Burk can help me out here. The bridesmaids would light the way to the bride's house for the groom and groomsmen.

So the 5 without lit lamps were not able to participate in the procession to the bride's home, and had to go out and purchase oil for their lamps. By the time they caught up, the wedding was in progress, and the bridesmaids weren't allowed in.

How's this?

SKETCHES OF JEWISH SOCIAL LIFE
By Alfred Edersheim, D. D., Ph. D.
Chapter 9 - Mothers, Daughters, and Wives in Israel

The marriage followed after a longer or shorter interval, the limits of which, however, were fixed by law. The ceremony itself consisted in leading the bride into the house of the bridegroom, with certain formalities, mostly dating from very ancient times…..

It deserves notice, that at the marriage in Cana there is no mention of "the friends of the bridegroom," or, as we would call them, the groomsmen. This was in strict accordance with Jewish custom, for groomsmen were customary in Judaea, but not in Galilee (Cheth. 25 a). This also casts light upon the locality where Joh_3:29 was spoken, in which "the friend of the bridegroom" is mentioned. But this expression is quite different from that of "children of the bridechamber," which occurs in Mat_9:15, where the scene is once more laid in Galilee. The term "children of the bridechamber" is simply a translation of the Rabbinical "bene Chuppah," and means the guests invited to the bridal. In Judaea there were at every marriage two groomsmen or "friends of the bridegroom"--one for the bridegroom, the other for his bride. Before marriage, they acted as a kind of intermediaries between the couple; at the wedding they offered gifts, waited upon the bride and bridegroom, and attended them to the bridal chamber, being also, as it were, the guarantors of the bride's virgin chastity. Hence, when St. Paul tells the Corinthians (2Co_11:2): "I am jealous over you with godly jealousy; for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ," he speaks, as it were, in the character of groomsman or "bridegroom's friend," who had acted as such at the spiritual union of Christ with the Corinthian Church. And we know that it was specially the duty of the "friend of the bridegroom" so to present to him his bride. Similarly it was his also, after marriage, to maintain proper terms between the couple, and more particularly to defend the good fame of the bride against all imputations. It may interest some to know that his custom also was traced up to highest authority. Thus, in the spiritual union of Israel with their God, Moses is spoken of as "the friend of the bridegroom" who leads out the bride (Exo_19:17); while Jehovah, as the bridegroom, meets His Church at Sinai (Psa_68:7; Pirke di R. El. 41)....

[LUKE2447]

Originally Posted by Dora

Hello? Isn't that what I just said???

you referred to one part of abuse I was referring to the whole of comparisons that one can make of reasons for failed relationships. It all comes down to the same things. Polygamy is no worse or better in itself. It may be better for certain people and not for others.

Originally Posted by Dora

One fact does not negate the other. Go buy yourself a few slaves and trade a few goats for another wife!

Dora, respectfully you are not being fair in your assumption..... many of those same women would be homeless.. destitute with no inheritance for their children had a good and godly man not accepted responsibility for her in many of these cultures and give her a home... Dora honestly you speak from a WESTERN mindset rather than a global mindset... In the days of Christ.... and all the way through scripture this was an accepted marriage arrangement and in MANY cultures today it is a favored arrangement....

While I will concede that this is not an acceptable form of marriage in the Western World.... and should not be entered into because of the western society that we live in.. you will not concede that it not forbidden of God and it is not called Unholy and it is not a SIN

Originally Posted by TK Burk

How's this?

SKETCHES OF JEWISH SOCIAL LIFE
By Alfred Edersheim, D. D., Ph. D.
Chapter 9 - Mothers, Daughters, and Wives in Israel

The marriage followed after a longer or shorter interval, the limits of which, however, were fixed by law. The ceremony itself consisted in leading the bride into the house of the bridegroom, with certain formalities, mostly dating from very ancient times…..

It deserves notice, that at the marriage in Cana there is no mention of "the friends of the bridegroom," or, as we would call them, the groomsmen. This was in strict accordance with Jewish custom, for groomsmen were customary in Judaea, but not in Galilee (Cheth. 25 a). This also casts light upon the locality where Joh_3:29 was spoken, in which "the friend of the bridegroom" is mentioned. But this expression is quite different from that of "children of the bridechamber," which occurs in Mat_9:15, where the scene is once more laid in Galilee. The term "children of the bridechamber" is simply a translation of the Rabbinical "bene Chuppah," and means the guests invited to the bridal. In Judaea there were at every marriage two groomsmen or "friends of the bridegroom"--one for the bridegroom, the other for his bride. Before marriage, they acted as a kind of intermediaries between the couple; at the wedding they offered gifts, waited upon the bride and bridegroom, and attended them to the bridal chamber, being also, as it were, the guarantors of the bride's virgin chastity. Hence, when St. Paul tells the Corinthians (2Co_11:2): "I am jealous over you with godly jealousy; for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ," he speaks, as it were, in the character of groomsman or "bridegroom's friend," who had acted as such at the spiritual union of Christ with the Corinthian Church. And we know that it was specially the duty of the "friend of the bridegroom" so to present to him his bride. Similarly it was his also, after marriage, to maintain proper terms between the couple, and more particularly to defend the good fame of the bride against all imputations. It may interest some to know that his custom also was traced up to highest authority. Thus, in the spiritual union of Israel with their God, Moses is spoken of as "the friend of the bridegroom" who leads out the bride (Exo_19:17); while Jehovah, as the bridegroom, meets His Church at Sinai (Psa_68:7; Pirke di R. El. 41)....

We've all read it before brother.. it makes for good preaching....

[Tim Rutledge]

Originally Posted by Dr. Vaughn

Dora, respectfully you are not being fair in your assumption..... many of those same women would be homeless.. destitute with no inheritance for their children had a good and godly man not accepted responsibility for her in many of these cultures and give her a home... Dora honestly you speak from a WESTERN mindset rather than a global mindset... In the days of Christ.... and all the way through scripture this was an accepted marriage arrangement and in MANY cultures today it is a favored arrangement....

While I will concede that this is not an acceptable form of marriage in the Western World.... and should not be entered into because of the western society that we live in.. you will not concede that it not forbidden of God and it is not called Unholy and it is not a SIN

In our society and culture polygamy would be a sin.

Originally Posted by Tim Rutledge

Br. V. If you had mega bucks, and say it was not against the law, would you have 2 wives? If no.. why not?

Because it is Illegal

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by Dr. Vaughn

"Slaves obey your Masters"

"Masters be fair to your slaves"

I know.

God instituted laws in the OT, and regulated the practice. In the NT, Christians were told how to behave and interact in certain circumstances. But that is not the same as an endorsement of slavery by God. The Christian thing to do, if you are held captive or owned by another person is to be obedient and godly, within the scope of your circumstances. But that doesn't mean God approves of slavery.

The scriptures in the NT seem to highlight potential conflicts that can arise, and tell Christians how to deal with them, master and slave alike. This is a great scripture:

I Timothy 6:1 Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honor, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed.
I Timothy 6:2 And they that have believing masters, let them not despise them, because they are brethren; but rather do them service, because they are faithful and beloved, partakers of the benefit. These things teach and exhort.

I Timothy 6:6 But godliness with contentment is great gain.

[Tim Rutledge]

Originally Posted by Tim Rutledge

In our society and culture polygamy would be a sin.

Doth thou concedeth.

[Dora]

Polyamory??? What of that? still no answer...