Showing posts with label marriage. Show all posts
Showing posts with label marriage. Show all posts

On Submission

Since this topic has come up in the third yahoo group in a row now, I elaborated a little on the issue of submission. You can find the article in the "Good Wife" section, or just go there by clicking the link below.


On Submission.



Technorati Tags: , , ,

Powered by ScribeFire.

Lamech, First Man with Two Wives in the Bible

When people try to argue from a biblical perspective that polygamy is sin, they run into problems. First, marriage in the bible is always marriage, no matter how many wives are involved, since the bible doesn't provide a special definition of polygamy. So whatever is said in the bible about marriage applies to the concept of one man and his wife or wives, even if this perspective is unfamiliar to a lot of Christians nowadays. So calling polygamy "sin" means calling biblical marriage "sin", for the bible offers no distinction between the two "forms" of marriage.

And once people have realized that Jesus doesn't address marriage at all in Matthew 19, but divorce, thus rather than condemning polygamy confirming the fact that divorce is not an option for a believer (unless the wife commits adultery), and if someone takes another wife, the rights of the first wife he is not to diminish (Exo 21:10), they often argue that nevertheless, polygamy is bad because the first polygamist mentioned in the bible, Lamech of the line of Cain, was a bad man, a sinner, therefore polygamy is a bad thing, a sin.

Let us give the argument the benefit of the doubt that Lamech's house is indeed the first polygamous family mentioned in the bible - scholars can never decide which of the books of the bible is indeed the historically oldest document, while they seem to have come to an understanding concerning the chronology of the biblical books by now -, and let us also lay aside for the moment the comment of Mr. Everett Fox, who, when translating the Five Books of Moses, stated in his commentary that the "saying" of Lamech (Gen 4:23-24) seemed "hopelessly obscure".

But let us instead follow the logic of the argument as such:
  • Lamech = first polygamist
  • Lamech = murderer (=bad)
  • polygamy = bad
  • polygamy = sin

If we follow this argument for the first marriage in the bible, the equation would teach us this:
  • Adam and Eve = first married couple
  • Adam and Eve = wife deceived, husband participates, thus causing the Fall (=bad)
  • marriage = bad
  • marriage = sin
If we follow this argument for the first pair of brothers in the bible, the equation would be as follows:
  • Abel and Cain = first two brothers
  • Able and Cain = first murder case in the bible (=bad)
  • having two sons = bad
  • having two sons = sin
So the logic of the Lamech argument dictates that not only polygamy, but also having two sons, and in fact, marrying at all are sinful and therefore to be avoided, just like the first argument against polygamy somehow ended in people having to call marriage as such a sin in order to remain consistent in their logic.

Oh well.


Technorati Tags: , , , , ,

Americans Discuss Morally Acceptable Issues

"(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - A large majority of adults in the United States believe four specific behaviours are unprincipled, according to a poll by Gallup released by USA Today. 91 per cent of respondents believe married men and women having an affair is morally wrong, while 90 per cent feel the same way about polygamy."
http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/15993

The problem with this last part about polygamy is that these same Americans polled are, by and large, professing Christians, and will need to overlook or redefine their own scripture in order to come to such a conclusion. It's been said many times recently that the bible is very clear about marriage, and I would agree completely with this statement, and yet somehow come to a different conclusion. I urge people to define the word "presupposition", and will leave it at that for now, and simply conclude that, if one were able to lay aside their own presuppositions, and read the Holy Bible from cover to cover, they would not come away with the idea that plural marriage is anything sinful or wicked in and of itself (but that it is as equally valid a form of marriage as is monogamy), and that plural marriage was not "done away with", except by fallen human reasoning.

Significantly, when it comes to homosexuality, which is a clear abomination to God (He says as much), the numbers are far more liberal, with it being basically 50/50. These are the same people who feel somehow that a biblically valid form of MARRIAGE is morally wrong. This is the result, no doubt, of a similar attitude towards Scripture, that of redefining and "doing away with" those parts that make us feel uncomfortable, or that we are ashamed of, because they don't quite fit with the "good opinion" of society in general. In other words, scripture has been compromised, sacrificed on the altar of humanism.


Technorati Tags: , , , , , , ,

Powered by ScribeFire.