Search This Blog

Translate

Showing posts with label Polygamy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Polygamy. Show all posts

Friday, November 01, 2013

I can see clearly now . . .


 

"I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else." — C. S. Lewis


Dear friends, faithful prayer and financial partners,

Paul has captured the spiritual plight of our generation when he wrote that,
“The god of this world has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.” (2 Corinthians 4:4)

Sadly, the truth is that modern secularism has failed miserably to deliver the promised utopia of freedom and liberating spirituality that it has so passionately championed. Instead, we have been handed a culture of death both from war abroad and the abortion industry nationally. 

Our personal freedom has been corroded with an ill-defined political correctness that insists on equal rights for all except those that dissent. Our youth has been and are harassed daily to conform to worldly standards that even the most flagrant of sinners would have blushed at in times past. Heterosexual and indeed traditional marriage unions in general are considered just one ‘moral’ choice among others—yes, others, as in homosexual unions, and believe it or not, there is a strong from this ungodly crowd to legalize polygamy and even polyandrous (two men/one woman) government sanctioned relationships.


May I ask, where is there freedom in sex addition or liberty in the shackles of politically correct speech? 

This great Apostle to the Gentiles also cues us in on why modern secularism has failed us so miserably.
For [he writes] although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles. Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen. (Romans 1:21-25)

Now, I challenge you to take the front page of any national newspaper or tune into the headlines of any international news broadcast and place either of these two Biblical references side by side with what the media gives us 24/7 and tell me that there is not a parallel there.
Sadly, in my opinion, we have become a nation of secular Hindus—more interested ecology  and animal rights than we are with pleasing God; not understanding that the fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.
But then, I am preaching to the choir, aren't I? And, we all know that is not good enough; we must also act. If we can agree upon this, then my next question is, Why then are so many Christians willing to sit on the sidelines and  let the few carry the banner and wage the war?

Truly, the harvest is plenteous. We need, therefore, to pray that the Lord of the Harvest will send forth laborers into the harvest field. 


I am yours for the journey,
Jim R/~

P.S. I've sent my passport particulars to begin the visa process for Russia. At present, we have received some, but not nearly enough to pay the expenses.You are a vital part of this ministry. So, please keep us on your prayer list. 

Sunday, November 07, 2010

One Final Word, Hopefully, About Polygamy.


When God created Adam, then formed Eve from his DNA as the first woman as a helpmate for him, God pronounced it very good. (Genesis 1: 31) Jesus continues the theme in Matthew 19: 4-6, and says,

“Haven’t you read that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female. For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

He then further clarifies his position with,

“Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

Now, my question is, “If God had not intended for man to practice monogamy, why then did Jesus add, ‘and [he that] marries another woman commits adultery.’”

The only logical reason is that he was already married, and to marry another woman would be to commit adultery—otherwise, it would not have been adultery. If the polygamous were right, marrying a hundred more wives would not constitute adultery. Just what part of “marries another woman” do the polygamous not get?

Now, furthermore and without going into great detail, since I have already dealt with the issue ad nausea, the usage of New Testament Greek in each of the 8 cases that the word is used in the New Testament clearly indicates the singular—at least the consensus of Greek scholars are committed to that translation of the use of the word μιᾶς as singular, meaning ‘one’ in the context of all 8 instances that the word in that form is used in the New Testament.[1]

So, when Paul continues the theme with his restrictions on plural marriages in his list of qualifications for elders and bishops in 1 Timothy 1: 1-13 and Titus 1: 1-9; why would we consider any other meaning than ‘one’?

1 Timothy 3:2 δεῖ οὖν τὸν ἐπίσκοπον ἀνεπίλημπτον εἶναι, μις γυναικὸς ἄνδρα, νηφάλιον σώφρονα κόσμιον φιλόξενον διδακτικόν—which, in English reads: The overseer therefore must be without reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, sensible, modest, hospitable, good at teaching. Note, this is the same word, why make an exception?

Titus 1:6 εἴ τίς ἐστιν ἀνέγκλητος, μιᾶς γυναικὸς ἀνήρ, τέκνα ἔχων πιστά, μὴ ἐν κατηγορίᾳ ἀσωτίας ἢ ἀνυπότακτα—which in English reads: “[I]f anyone is blameless, the husband of one wife, having children who believe, who are not accused of loose or unruly behavior.” Note, this is the same word, why make an exception?

Let's look at some other examples:

"But because of immoralities, each man is to have his own wife, and each woman is to have her own husband. The husband must fulfill his duty to his wife, and likewise also the wife to her husband." - 1 Corinthians 7:2-3 NASB (Contextually, a plurality is not suggested here.)

1 Corinthians chapter 7 discusses marriage and it is always in the context of "wife" (singular) and "husband" (singular). It does not make sense for the singular words to be used, if it is possible to have more than one wife. If it were acceptable to God to have more than one wife, then the word "wives" would have to have been used here. The wording of 1 Corinthians chapter 7 completely excludes the possibility of polygamy, in my opinion—unless, one applies a strange new hermeneutics.

Ephesians chapter 5 (verses 22-33) discuss marriage. Here again we do see the plural "wives" used. However, it is used because Paul is writing to the overall category of husbands and wives.

"Wives be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord." - Ephesians 5:22 NASB

"Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her," - Ephesians 5:25 NASB

Notice that in verse 23 his message becomes more personal:

"For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body." - Ephesians 5:23 NASB

Then I pointed out:

"Let us rejoice and be glad and give the glory to Him, for the marriage of the Lamb has come and His bride [the church] has made herself [not themselves] ready." - Revelation 19:7 NASB

Friend, since none of these indicates a plurality—unless you use an Old Testament polygamous paradigm as your hermeneutical tool. I choose to accept the contextual and New Testament linguistic approach.

Again, since in my opinion, the overwhelming use of the Greek points in the solid direction of monogamy and since we can easily deduct this from the context of the other examples, why should we make the only other exception that of relating to wives? It just does not make sense to me, otherwise.

In times past—as I have mention previously, God winked at such practices but he now calls all men to repentance.

Now, for a brief historical survey, it should be noted that polygamy as a part of Jewish the lifestyle had largely fallen out of practice during New Testament times, due largely some feel because it was proscribed by Roman law. However, it took until the year 1000 CE for the practice to be officially banned in a synod called by Rabbeinu Gershom.

Furthermore, polygamy among Christians in general never gained any significant traction. Christian theologians have bickered among themselves over the issue for centuries; although, polygamous marriages were virtually unheard of in the primitive church or for the first two centuries thereafter—the exception being, of course, that of a polygamous convert who embraced Christianity.

Ideally, it can be argued that monogamy is not only Biblical, but also as the Catholic Church has declared: 

"[P]olygamy is not in accord with the moral law. [Conjugal] communion is radically contradicted by polygamy; this, in fact, directly negates the plan of God which was revealed from the beginning, because it is contrary to the equal personal dignity of men and women who in matrimony give themselves with a love that is total and therefore unique and exclusive."[2]

If any man is contentious, all I can say, as Paul said, is that we have no other such custom, neither do the churches of God. 1 Corinthians 11: 16




[1] As pointed out, the indelible use of the word in the following instance is a prime example of how the word applies in each of these circumstances:

Luke 14:18 καὶ ἤρξαντο ἀπὸ μιᾶς πάντες παραιτεῖσθαι. ὁ πρῶτος εἶπεν αὐτῷ• ἀγρὸν ἠγόρασα καὶ ἔχω ἀνάγκην ἐξελθὼν ἰδεῖν αὐτόν• ἐρωτῶ σε, ἔχε με παρῃτημένον.

They all as one began to make excuses. "The first said to him, 'I have bought a field, and I must go and see it. Please have me excused.’…” Note: “I have bought one field, only—not two or three, only one …”

Luke 17:34 λέγω ὑμῖν, ταύτῃ τῇ νυκτὶ ἔσονται δύο ἐπὶ κλίνης μιᾶς, ὁ εἷς παραλημφθήσεται καὶ ὁ ἕτερος ἀφεθήσεται•

I tell you, in that night there will be two people in one bed. The one will be taken, and the other will be left. Note: “two in one bed, one taken, one left”

Luke 22:59 καὶ διαστάσης ὡσεὶ ὥρας μιᾶς ἄλλος τις διϊσχυρίζετο λέγων• ἐπ' ἀληθείας καὶ οὗτος μετ' αὐτοῦ ἦν, καὶ γὰρ Γαλιλαῖός ἐστιν.

After about one hour passed, another confidently affirmed, saying, "Truly this man also was with him, for he is a Galilean!"
Adjective: Genitive Singular Feminine
"Note: “About an hour …”

Acts 24:21 ἢ περὶ μιᾶς ταύτης φωνῆς ἧς ἐκέκραξα ἐν αὐτοῖς ἑστὼς ὅτι περὶ ἀναστάσεως νεκρῶν ἐγὼ κρίνομαι σήμερον ἐφ' ὑμῶν.

“[U]nless it is for this one thing that I cried standing among them, 'Concerning the resurrection of the dead I am being judged before you today!'"
Adjective: Genitive Singular Feminine
"Note: “I am being judged for one thing only — not two or three, only one!”

Hebrews 12:16 μή τις πόρνος ἢ βέβηλος ὡς Ἠσαῦ, ὃς ἀντὶ βρώσεως μιᾶς ἀπέδετο τὰ πρωτοτόκια ἑαυτοῦ.

[Le]st there be any sexually immoral person, or profane person, like  Esau, who sold his birthright for one meal. "Note: “One meal” not two.
[2]  Catholic Cathechism, para. 2387 April 05, 2009, Vatican website


Friday, October 29, 2010

Monogamy In A New Testament Context

My dear friend, please don’t confuse the issue with the genitive—that’s not the point; the translation and context is, however. So, I have gone over some of what I have written you and hopefully improve the clarity.
 
As I said, there are 8 occurrences of the word μιᾶς in the New Testament. Here they are with their meanings (pay particular attention to the context of each):
 
Luke 14:18 καὶ ρξαντοπ μις πάντες παραιτεσθαι. πρτος επεν ατγρν γόρασα κα χω νάγκην ξελθν δεν ατόν• ρωτ σε, χε με παρτημένον.
 
They all as one began to make excuses. "The first said to him, 'I have bought a field, and I must go and see it. Please have me excused.'
Adjective: Genitive Singular Feminine
"Note: “I have bought one field, only—not two or three, only one …”
 
Luke 17:34 λέγω ὑμν, ταύτ τ νυκτ σονται δύο π κλίνης μις, ες παραλημφθήσεται κα τερος φεθήσεται•
 
I tell you, in that night there will be two people in one bed. The one will be taken, and the other will be left.
Adjective: Genitive Singular Feminine
"Note: “two in one bed, one taken, one left”
 
Luke 22:59 καὶ διαστάσης σε ρας μις λλος τις διϊσχυρίζετο λέγων• π' ληθείας κα οτος μετ' ατο ν, κα γρ Γαλιλαός στιν.
 
After about one hour passed, another confidently affirmed, saying, "Truly this man also was with him, for he is a Galilean!"
Adjective: Genitive Singular Feminine
"Note: “About an hour …”
Acts 24:21 ἢ περ μις ταύτης φωνς ς κέκραξα ν ατος στς τι περ ναστάσεως νεκρν γ κρίνομαι σήμερον φ' μν.
 
“[U]nless it is for this one thing that I cried standing among them, 'Concerning the resurrection of the dead I am being judged before you today!'"
Adjective: Genitive Singular Feminine
"Note: “I am being judged for one thing only — not two or three, only one!”
 
Hebrews 12:16 μή τις πόρνος ἢ βέβηλος ς σα, ς ντ βρώσεως μις πέδετο τ πρωτοτόκια αυτο.
 
[Le]st there be any sexually immoral person, or profane person, like
Esau, who sold his birthright for one meal.
Adjective: Genitive Singular Feminine
"Note: “One meal” not two
1 Timothy 3:2 δεῖ ον τν πίσκοπον νεπίλημπτον εναι, μις γυναικς νδρα, νηφάλιον σώφρονα κόσμιον φιλόξενον διδακτικόν,
 
The overseer therefore must be without reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, sensible, modest, hospitable, good at teaching;
Adjective: Genitive Singular Feminine
"Note: “Same word, why the exception?”
 
Titus 1:6 εἴ τίς στιν νέγκλητος, μιᾶς γυναικς νήρ, τέκνα χων πιστά, μ ν κατηγορί σωτίας νυπότακτα.
 
if anyone is blameless, the husband of one wife, having children who believe, who are not accused of loose or unruly behavior.
Adjective: Genitive Singular Feminine
"Note: “Same word, why the exception?”
 
Let's look at some other examples:
 
"But because of immoralities, each man is to have his own wife, and each woman is to have her own husband. The husband must fulfill his duty to his wife, and likewise also the wife to her husband." - 1 Corinthians 7:2-3 NASB (Contextually, a plurality is not suggested here.)
 
1 Corinthians chapter 7 discusses marriage and it is always in the context of "wife" (singular) and "husband" (singular). It does not make sense for the singular words to be used, if it is possible to have more than one wife. If it were acceptable to God to have more than one wife, then the word "wives" would have to have been used here. The wording of 1 Corinthians chapter 7 completely excludes the possibility of polygamy, in my opinion—unless, one applies a strange new hermeneutics.
 
Ephesians chapter 5 (verses 22-33) discuss marriage. Here again we do see the plural "wives" used. However, it is used because Paul is writing to the overall category of husbands and wives.
 
"Wives be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord." - Ephesians 5:22 NASB
 
"Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her," - Ephesians 5:25 NASB
 
Notice that in verse 23 his message becomes more personal:
 
"For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body." - Ephesians 5:23 NASB
Then I pointed out:
 
"Let us rejoice and be glad and give the glory to Him, for the marriage of the Lamb has come and His bride [the church] has made herself [not themselves] ready." - Revelation 19:7 NASB
 
Friend, since none of these indicates a plurality—unless you choose use an Old Testament polygamous paradigm as your hermeneutical tool. I choose to accept the contextual and New Testament linguistical approach.
 
Again, since in my opinion, the overwhelming use of the Greek points in the solid direction of monogamy and since we can easily deduct this from the context of the other examples, why should we make the only other exception that of relating to wives? It just does not make sense to me. Friend, in times past, God winked at such practices (my words here, not Jesus’ because I know that he was addressing the issue of divorce here) but he now calls all men to repentance.
 
May God bless you,
             
Jim

P.S. And as far as I can determine, the use of the μία form is just as singular, no matter how you slice it as it regards marriage.

Thursday, October 28, 2010

Does The New Testament Teach Monogamy?



The following question was sent to me by a proponent of polygamy to answer true or false. Kind of like asking the question of whether or not you have stopped beating your wife. So, although, I was tempted to answer it as both true and false, I thought it would be better to go into detail a little more.

T/F The word mia can mean first or one or other. (See Strong’s Concordance).

Answers

Actually, there are 8 occurrences of the word in the New Testament. Here they are with their meanings (pay particular attention to the context of each):

Luke 14:18 κα ρξαντο π μις πάντες παραιτεσθαι. πρτος επεν ατγρν γόρασα κα χω νάγκην ξελθν δεν ατόν• ρωτ σε, χε με παρτημένον.

They all as one began to make excuses. "The first said to him, 'I have bought a field, and I must go and see it. Please have me excused.'
Adjective: Genitive Singular Feminine

Luke 17:34 λέγω μν, ταύτ τ νυκτ σονται δύο π κλίνης μις, ες παραλημφθήσεται κα τερος φεθήσεται•

I tell you, in that night there will be two people in one bed. The one will be taken, and the other will be left.
Adjective: Genitive Singular Feminine

Luke 22:59 κα διαστάσης σε ρας μις λλος τις διϊσχυρίζετο λέγων• π' ληθείας κα οτος μετ' ατο ν, κα γρ Γαλιλαός στιν.

After about one hour passed, another confidently affirmed, saying, "Truly this man also was with him, for he is a Galilean!"
Adjective: Genitive Singular Feminine

Acts 24:21 περ μις ταύτης φωνς ς κέκραξα ν ατος στς τι περ ναστάσεως νεκρν γ κρίνομαι σήμερον φ' μν.

“[u]nless it is for this one thing that I cried standing among them, 'Concerning the resurrection of the dead I am being judged before you today!'"
Adjective: Genitive Singular Feminine

1 Timothy 3:2 δε ον τν πίσκοπον νεπίλημπτον εναι, μις γυναικς νδρα, νηφάλιον σώφρονα κόσμιον φιλόξενον διδακτικόν,

The overseer therefore must be without reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, sensible, modest, hospitable, good at teaching;
Adjective: Genitive Singular Feminine

1 Timothy 3:12 διάκονοι στωσαν μις γυναικς νδρες, τέκνων καλς προϊστάμενοι κα τν δίων οκων.

Let servants be husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.
Adjective: Genitive Singular Feminine

Titus 1:6 ε τίς στιν νέγκλητος, μις γυναικς νήρ, τέκνα χων πιστά, μ ν κατηγορί σωτίας νυπότακτα.

“[I]f anyone is blameless, the husband of one wife, having children who believe, who are not accused of loose or unruly behavior.
Adjective: Genitive Singular Feminine

Hebrews 12:16 μή τις πόρνος βέβηλος ς σα, ς ντ βρώσεως μις πέδετο τ πρωτοτόκια αυτο.

[L]est there be any sexually immoral person, or profane person, like Esau, who sold his birthright for one meal.
Adjective: Genitive Singular Feminine

Since none, of these indicates a plurality. And, if that be the case as we can easily deduct from the context, why should we make the only other exception that of relating to wives?

You and I both know that there are no examples of Christian (or Jewish) polygamy in the New Testament. So how do we find out what the New Testament says about polygamy? We take a look at what the New Testament says about marriage. What we'll find is that the New Testament ALWAYS describes marriage as between ONE man and ONE woman. It never allows for more than one wife.

Let's look at some examples:

"But because of immoralities, each man is to have his own wife, and each woman is to have her own husband. The husband must fulfill his duty to his wife, and likewise also the wife to her husband." - 1 Corinthians 7:2-3 NASB

1 Corinthians chapter 7 discusses marriage and it is always in the context of "wife" (singular) and "husband" (singular). It does not make sense for the singular words to be used, if it is possible to have more than one wife. If it were acceptable to God to have more than one wife, then the word "wives" would have to have been used here. The wording of 1 Corinthians chapter 7 completely excludes the possibility of polygamy.

Ephesians chapter 5 (verses 22-33) discuss marriage. Here again we do see the plural "wives" used. However, it is used because Paul is writing to the overall category of husbands and wives.

"Wives be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord." - Ephesians 5:22 NASB

"Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her," - Ephesians 5:25 NASB

Notice that in verse 23 his message becomes more personal:

"For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body." - Ephesians 5:23 NASB

When Paul speaks to individuals, it is husband and wife. ONE man and ONE woman. That is marriage. But there is something even more important here. The relationship of husband and wife in marrige is the same as the relationship between Christ and His church.

"Let us rejoice and be glad and give the glory to Him, for the marriage of the Lamb has come and His bride [the church] has made herself [not themselves] ready." - Revelation 19:7 NASB

Take care,

Jim