-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
Origins of monogamy-ONLY view
- Thread starter PolyPride
- Start date
I'm going to be lazy this time around and refrain from writing down the source of all my (partial) knowledge on this subject, but it includes much of what has already been referenced in addition to several other sources. Many monogamy-only cultures have existed throughout the past, but today the world is clearly dominated by what is labeled Western Civilization, and it just as clearly can be traced back to the early Greek philosophers (age of Athens the city-state), who collectively not only invented statism, which plagues us all to this day, but the monogamy-only imperative. This was adopted by the Romans, who took over from Greece in their efforts to subjugate the Middle East/Western Asia and therefore pre-dates Christ's time on Earth. Our Lord was immersed in a world that featured Jews who did their best to ignore attempts to paganize them, but the paganization process was certainly in full swing even during His time. The Greek philosophers not only initiated the monogamy-only imperative that dominates the world stage today but knew it would be a hard pill to swallow and designed it as an incrementally-implemented strategy. Over time, it has come to be seen as the only valid option in polite society. As late as the 1940s, polygamy became a controversial issue in the formation of the modern State of Israel. Europe was adamantly opposed to supporting its creation, and when polled on the topic the number one reason cited for opposing Israeli statehood in Europe was their distaste for Jewish acceptance of polygamy. As a result and as a formal part of the negotiations to create Israel and Transjordan (intended to be a Palestinian nation), the top rabbi of the time declared polygamy unacceptable from that point forward for all Jews. Those already in plural families were permitted to continue as before.
Western Civilization has many positive things in its favor, but neither statism nor the monogamy imperative are among the positives.
Western Civilization has many positive things in its favor, but neither statism nor the monogamy imperative are among the positives.
Wasn't the Greeks also the promoters of democracy? Wouldn't the democratic mind set also promote the monogamy position because it wouldn't be right for those good-looking powerful rich guys to have access to more women than I have access to.
Yes, in many significant ways, Western Civilization is built on a bedrock of soft sandstone. The Founders of our country had to look much further and wider than just to the Greeks to come up with their conceptions of a democratic Republic (including to the 5 tribes of New York, by the way). Pure democracy only sounded good in the beginning because only a select few were considered worthy of participating. Once it gets opened up fully, it just becomes mob rule. It also leads to socialism, despotism, tyranny and totalitarianism, because the lazy will vote themselves unearned benefits. Monogamy-only is just relationship socialism with a dress on.
Plural relationships still thrive today. I had a brother-in-law, married with children, and it was a good loving household. No real issues. He also had a girlfriend on the side and would see her regularly. The brother-in-Law’s knew of her and had met her. Most of the extended family knew about her. But the wife acted like she knew nothing.
What I’m saying, plural relationships continue today in many forms, without the integrity of a long term relationship we support here.
Exactly, Biblical = covenant relationship that is not to be broken.
What you described is pretty much the norm in Latin America, except the wives know, and accept it as a given. The wives get the security and legal protections as well as status. The mistresses trade the security for the freedom of less obligations.
It all started when Israel was added to the Roman Empire. Afterwards, the Jews began to assimilate parts of Roman society, that did not contradict the 613 Laws of Moses. Since polygamy was not required, it was largely abandoned by the time of Christ and the Blessed Virgin Mary.
By the time of the Ascension of Christ, and later the Assumption of Mary, Christianity had been divided into three groups: (I) The Ebionites. (II) The Pauline Christians. (III) The Gnostics.
The Ebionites were Jewish Christians situated near the Temple in Jerusalem. They wanted everyone to convert Jewish, and follow the 613 Laws of Moses. They died off within a few centuries following the destruction of the Temple.
The Pauline Christians were most Gentile Christians living outside of Israel. Since they said only the Moral Law still applied, they could convert slaves, and assimilate even more Roman practices. By the time of the conversion of Constantine, most of Roman society, like monogamy, had been assimilated into Christianity.
When Constantine converted, the Church became the official religion of the Roman Empire, and began to do a u-turn on much of it's previous views. Pauline Christians went from some of them supporting anarchist pacifism to none of them supporting it. They started to abandon the last of the views that was left from Judaism, around this time.
St Jerome and St Augustine strengthened this divergence of early Christianity from Roman Christianity. St Augustine would later call the Synod of Hippo in 393 to deem which books were canonical and what books was not. Then in 397, at the Council of Carthage, his list became official for the whole church. The list was based on the Greek Old Testament and the Greek New Testament.
I've already explained what happened. I think I went over board on my explanation. But to put it simply, to assimilate with the Romans, Judaism and Christianity had to abandon polygamy, and Christianity did a better job of assimilating then the Jews. They even deemed what books were canonical: (I) The Jews at the Council of Jamnia, which was held between 70 to 90, where they renounced the Septuagint as true Christian, and was accused by early Christians of rewriting the Bible, such as changing virgin to young woman. (II) The Christians at the Council of Carthage I'm 397.
By the time of the Ascension of Christ, and later the Assumption of Mary, Christianity had been divided into three groups: (I) The Ebionites. (II) The Pauline Christians. (III) The Gnostics.
The Ebionites were Jewish Christians situated near the Temple in Jerusalem. They wanted everyone to convert Jewish, and follow the 613 Laws of Moses. They died off within a few centuries following the destruction of the Temple.
The Pauline Christians were most Gentile Christians living outside of Israel. Since they said only the Moral Law still applied, they could convert slaves, and assimilate even more Roman practices. By the time of the conversion of Constantine, most of Roman society, like monogamy, had been assimilated into Christianity.
When Constantine converted, the Church became the official religion of the Roman Empire, and began to do a u-turn on much of it's previous views. Pauline Christians went from some of them supporting anarchist pacifism to none of them supporting it. They started to abandon the last of the views that was left from Judaism, around this time.
St Jerome and St Augustine strengthened this divergence of early Christianity from Roman Christianity. St Augustine would later call the Synod of Hippo in 393 to deem which books were canonical and what books was not. Then in 397, at the Council of Carthage, his list became official for the whole church. The list was based on the Greek Old Testament and the Greek New Testament.
I've already explained what happened. I think I went over board on my explanation. But to put it simply, to assimilate with the Romans, Judaism and Christianity had to abandon polygamy, and Christianity did a better job of assimilating then the Jews. They even deemed what books were canonical: (I) The Jews at the Council of Jamnia, which was held between 70 to 90, where they renounced the Septuagint as true Christian, and was accused by early Christians of rewriting the Bible, such as changing virgin to young woman. (II) The Christians at the Council of Carthage I'm 397.
It might have started even earlier when Alexander conquered the region.
I’d say most of that is correct except the part where it had mostly died out by the time of Christ in Judaism or Christianity.
Check this thread out
https://biblicalfamilies.org/forum/...ia-acknowledges-poly.13723/page-5#post-184461
And I am always skeptical of that 613 laws of Moses thing, for the first thing they weren’t Moses’ laws.
They were....
And YaHWeH the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, speak unto the children of Israel.
So they came from God but belong to Moses....?
"Assumption of Mary", is not a Biblical concept.
No, Moses was just the deliverer.
I would have to go back to my research, but What I found was a number of things.
1. It was allowed in the Catholic Church, but the church kept losing priests and having to take care of the large families. They eventually demanded only monogamy, then celibacy for the same reasons.
2. Rabbi Gershom in 1000AD, banned it for 1000 years, until the rest of the world grew up.
3. It was banned in Utah because the federal govenrmetn was scared to death a cult would take over the USA.
I'll not go back to the romans (barbarians) before they were Rome.
Actually did a video teaching that touches on this based on 1 Timothy 4:1-3
You don't need to watch it, the concise facts are below...
Keeping it VERY short the roman law of bigamy was passed in 285AD
HOWEVER.... "the church" became monogamy only AFTER the council of trent which was a unique council in that it was the last council that involved Catholic (west) Orthodox (east) AND Protestant.
You don't need to watch it, the concise facts are below...
Keeping it VERY short the roman law of bigamy was passed in 285AD
HOWEVER.... "the church" became monogamy only AFTER the council of trent which was a unique council in that it was the last council that involved Catholic (west) Orthodox (east) AND Protestant.
I didn’t realize that it was that late in the game.
Although it's not very well indexed, Lew White in Fossilized Customs indicates that the RCC (based on the concept of power and control - wealthy dynastic houses with multiple wives tended to become a threat) outlawed the practice ultimately QUITE late in the game, circa the 9th century.
That proved successful, so the outlawing of marriage for priests followed.
And, as noted, and more readily documented, Rabbeinu Gershom instituted the t'kanah mandating only one wife for the Ahkenazi, with the understanding that "when christians and jew disagree - jews die," at the turn of the millenium. Originally for 500 years, it's harder to document how/when that was extended, although I have knowledgeable Jewish friends who claim it was always supposed to be for 1000 years. Either way...
That proved successful, so the outlawing of marriage for priests followed.
And, as noted, and more readily documented, Rabbeinu Gershom instituted the t'kanah mandating only one wife for the Ahkenazi, with the understanding that "when christians and jew disagree - jews die," at the turn of the millenium. Originally for 500 years, it's harder to document how/when that was extended, although I have knowledgeable Jewish friends who claim it was always supposed to be for 1000 years. Either way...
From my own personal study I can pinpoint numerous specific events that have propelled monogamy only namely...
Babylonian captivity the origin of the Pharisees and their rise to influence
Roman Law of Bigamy in 285ad
Constantine creating Christianity as an official religion of the Roman Empire
The council of Trent that fulfilled the prophesy of Apostle Paul in 1 Timothy 4