Religions are fairy tales for adults. Should we encourage them to grow up?

God's LAW on marriage is the point, not the many different ways marriages were formed. The Bible describes lots of sins committed by people, and shows how those sins led to various disasters too, as God doesn't ignore sin.Polygamy was always a sin although many people in early Israel practiced it. It was David and Solomon's sins that brought on God's judgment in dividing the kingdom after Solomon, into Israel in the north and Judah in the south. Many evil kings are also described after that, also God's judgment. Eventually the Assyrians destroyed the northern kingdom and then the Babylonian empire under Nebuchadnezzar destroyed the southern kingdom and took the people into captivity. This was all God's judgment against the nations for their various sins which included Solomon's polygamies in particular, largely because they led him into committing idolatries with their gods.Sometimes money is exchanged for marriage in many cultures. The dowry for instance was a western arrangement, paid by the father of the bride, the opposite of the man buying the woman.But all that is irrelevant to God's law which Jesus described as a man leaving his parents and cleaving only to his wife. One man, one woman. That's always been the Christian view of marriage, and polygamy in the Bible was always treated as a violation of God's law.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Kim Davis' council, on her behalf, have asked the Oath Kreepers to stand down. The message on the Kreepers web site says they will comply and have asked their loonies to not go to Kentucky. Despite their own delusions of reality, someone at Liberty Council understands the Kreepers are just bad news.pffew Oath KreepersEdited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

wrong poly.

quote:

---

And he said to Jeroboam, Take thee ten pieces: for thus saith the LORD, the God of Israel, Behold, I will rend the kingdom out of the hand of Solomon, and will give ten tribes to thee: (But he shall have one tribe for my servant David's sake, and for Jerusalem's sake, the city which I have chosen out of all the tribes of Israel Because that they have forsaken me, and have worshipped Ashtoreth the goddess of the Zidonians, Chemosh the god of the Moabites, and Milcom the god of the children of Ammon, and have not walked in my ways, to do that which is right in mine eyes, and to keep my statutes and my judgments, as did David his father. Howbeit I will not take the whole kingdom out of his hand: but I will make him prince all the days of his life for David my servant's sake, whom I chose, because he kept my commandments and my statutes: But I will take the kingdom out of his son's hand, and will give it unto thee, even ten tribes. And unto his son will I give one tribe, that David my servant may have a light alway before me in Jerusalem, the city which I have chosen me to put my name there. And I will take thee, and thou shalt reign according to all that thy soul desireth, and shalt be king over Israel.

​

1 Kings 11

---

the judgments on israel and judah in the bible are almost always because of idolatry and polytheism, and not because of marriage. there is at least one situation where dowry is required to be paid, and it's from the (potential) husband to the father:

quote:

---

And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife. If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him, he shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins.

​

Exodus 22:16-17

---

cf;

quote:

---

If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.

​

Deuteronomy 22:28-29

---

the law seems to allow for men to have two wives, and even describes how to handle disputes of inheritance between them.

quote:

---

If a man have two wives, one beloved, and another hated, and they have born him children, both the beloved and the hated; and if the firstborn son be hers that was hated: Then it shall be, when he maketh his sons to inherit that which he hath, that he may not make the son of the beloved firstborn before the son of the hated, which is indeed the firstborn: But he shall acknowledge the son of the hated for the firstborn, by giving him a double portion of all that he hath: for he is the beginning of his strength; the right of the firstborn is his.

​

Deuteronomy 21:15-17

---

i'm new to this thread. were these brought up before?

Yes, it doesn't say the polygamy itself was the cause of judgment but the idolatrous results of it. Nevertheless we've always understood that polygamy is a sin even though practiced by early Israelites, and this is because of Genesis 2:24 which Jesus referred to, as reported in Matthew 19: 5 and 6, and Mark 10:8, which Paul also repeats in 1 Corinthians 6:16 and Ephesians 5:31, all emphasizing that TWO become ONE FLESH. There is also a verse somewhere that I can't find right now that says that a person is not an adulterer if he or she remarries after the death of the spouse but otherwise is considered to be an adulterer.I assume, however, that the polygamies were also part of God's judgment just because sin is the cause of judgment: the wages of sin is death.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

no, not really. i mean, yes, solomon had a lot of wives. but the judgment is on the whole kingdom. and besides, there are clear cases of where marriage (even single, solitary, one-man-one-woman marriage) brings about idolatry (ie: ahab and jezebaal). that part of the bible is much more concerned with foreign wives than multiple wives. well, thing is, i didn't even reference the early israelites. though much of that narrative is fictional anyways, it's clear that in some sense you're correct and that things that happen in genesis can't be read as the bible condoning those things.no, i specifically stuck to what the law actually says about marriage.keep in mind also that genesis 2/3 is part of that same pattern. it is adam's marriage to eve that brings about his disobedience to yahweh. yes, and it's clear that jesus is interpreting the law, the way that a rabbi might. and that's fine -- christianity has a clear perspective on what marriage should be, and the early church fathers all roundly condemned polygamy. my statements are only meant to criticize what you describe the law as saying. clearly the law allows for polygyny. the law does not describe it as a sin, though. seriously. find me the commandment somewhere between genesis 1:1 and deuteronomy 34:12 that says that a man shall not take two wives. i know paul says this, but the law does not command death for every sin. i think paul's statement is more along the lines of death being a product of sin in general, as death was allowed to take hold of man upon his exit from eden, and removal from the tree of life. so i think you're misreading, here.Edited by arachnophilia, : No reason given.

Of course. So what? You are bringing up a bunch of totally irrelevant stuff. The Bible SAYS that Solomon's wives "turned his heart" to their gods away from the God of Israel. That's the subject here. The rest is superfluous. Forget it then, there's no point in talking to someone who thinks any part of the Bible is fiction. THAT'S THE ONLY POINT I WAS MAKING. I was answering whoever claimed that the Bible's view of marriage includes polygamy as a legitimate option. It doesn't. The Bible is full of sinners and although it doesn't always identify a sin as a sin, just telling us what this or that person did, it's not hard to figure it out from many other passages. Much of the meaning of the Bible is to be inferred from context. It doesn't have to say a man can't have two wives when it's said clearly elsewhere that marriage makes one flesh of two, a man and a woman.When the Bible says the wages of sin is death it doesn't always mean IMMEDIATE death for cryin out loud, it just means it puts another nail in your coffin.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Yeah, it's too much to expect the Bible to just come out and tell us what's right and what's wrong. Hey, does that sound like the sort of thing God would do? Nuh-uh. But if we read between the lines ...Only trouble is, people reading between the lines have ended up with even more diverse ideas than people just reading the text.

It's about the cleaving, not whom you cleave with.

quote:

---

Because that they have forsaken me, and have worshipped Ashtoreth the goddess of the Zidonians, Chemosh the god of the Moabites, and Milcom the god of the children of Ammon, and have not walked in my ways,

---

"they" being israel. it's not a judgment on the king -- the king is dying and his kingdom is being handed over. it's a judgment on the kingdom, for what the kingdom as a whole was doing. according to the law, it does. according to jesus, maybe it doesn't, and according to later church fathers, it doesn't. shocking that these things don't always agree, i know. but the part of the law i mentioned above shows clearly that men are allowed to have multiple wives, and even describes how to handle disputes among them. i mean, yeah, it kind of does. there are whole sections of the law that deal with sexual morality, particularly with the intent to contrast israel with their neighbors. there are whole chapters devoted to who can't have sex with. seems like a glaring omission.

arachnophiliaYou should know that facts really fuck up that faith thing.Faith will not let facts screw up her faith. She, as can be plainly seem, has invested many years into her foolish beliefs and there is no way such a mind can return to normal after that king of self-indoctrination.Her mind is a disgrace to any thinking person.Regards
DLEdited by Greatest I am, : No reason given.

there's no need to be mean about it.

But in Message 342 you said that:

quote:

---

you can't cancel out one part of scripture by another.

---

Or, ironic, for that matter.

I am not being mean. I am stating the facts as I see them.She has associated me with Satan so I think my speaking the truth is kosher.Regards
DL

She associates all of us with Satan but we love her anyway.