An to sum up the old testament, God seems pretty angry about the adultery and unfaithfulness that men have agains their wives. Check out Malachi 2:10-16 with the emphasis on 14-16. God’s desire is, and always has been for each man to have his own “one” wife. Not many. And he is angry and telling them to get back to the "wife of youth.” the wife of your youth” term is scattered all over. It seems to me that God’s ordained marriage institution is and always has been between one man and one woman. Yes, may people in the OT had multiple wives. But when you go back to God’s original plan for the human race, he made it 1/1.
[End Quote]
This *completely* ignores the versus I brought up that go against your assertions. 2 Chronicles 24, Joash takes wives chosen for him BY THE HIGH PRIEST and in the same breath it says that everything he did during the life of the high priest was pleasing in the sight of the Lord. 2 Samuel 12, when Nathan is correcting David the message from the Lord includes that not only did the Lord give David multiple wives but would have given him *more* had he simply asked! And does God portray himself as a sinner? Can he even sin? No! Why then does he claim Samaria and Jerusalem as his wives (plural) in Ezekiel 23? Song of Solomon, in it's ENTIRETY, is the Bible's premiere picture of romantic love and *isn't* to Solomon's first wife! Refusing to acknowledge a verse does not invalidate it, especially when the "proof" scriptures you use don't actually say polygamy is wrong. That's like being in a courtroom murder trial and saying the DNA evidence found under the victims nails and the matching scratches on the defendant don't matter because some other people have said the defendant is a stand up sort of guy!
Specifically getting back to your verses.
Gen 2:22-24. Yes, I did already cover this but I'll cover it again. Nothing in or around this verse condemns having wives past the first wife. It also comes before the establishment of the law, which allows for poly, and the verses that I referred to above (and others), which endorse poly. Furthermore, using the garden as justification and disregarding all other scripture is terribly flawed. If the garden was our only model for all things then being single wouldn't be a valid lifestyle either, which obviously it is. That's cherry picking. If someone wanted to show up to church naked because that's how they did it in the Garden that wouldn't be Kosher and you could provide scripture to back that up. Them then saying that doesn't count because it's after the garden and isn't how God set it up in the first place would be a silly argument.
Proverbs 5 - I *am* satisfied with the wife of my youth, and I have counseled people that do not have a strong or happy marriage that poly is not right, at least not yet, for them. If I never gain a second wife I will still be a happy man with a wonderful wife. Do you have more children because you are dissatisfied with the child you have, or because they are flawed? No, you have multiple children because you have more love to give and want more family to add to your already existing family.
Proverbs 12 - A worthy wife does in fact bring great credit and honor to her husband, so much more so can a second or third great wife.
Proverbs 18 - Yes, he who finds a wife finds what is good and receives favor from the Lord. It doesn't say "he who finds his one and only wife finds what is good and receives favor from the Lord but can't find another". If you find a bag of gold on the ground you are richer, doesn't mean you can't find another bag of gold and become even more rich.
Proverbs 31 - Again, doesn't mean a second wife isn't also worth more than rubies
I also think it's highly ironic that you're using Proverbs to argue against polygamy. Proverbs was a work of Solomon! Solomon! He obviously didn't think having multiple wives was a bad idea, so to read into his proverbs that he was saying that poly *is* a bad idea is literally laughable. And before you come back with him having multiple wives was his downfall, that is not accurate. Him disobeying the command to not take *foreign* wives and follow their gods was his downfall.
Ephesians: Feel free to disagree with me, I don't have a problem with that. I disagree with people's interpretations of scriptures all the time. Being dismissive of the actual translation doesn't make me inclined to ascribe too much credit to your interpretation. And anyway, I only spend time on that because people try to use it for hard and fast proof against polygamy, which is actually silly under it's own right. The church of Ephesus was a Greek church, meaning dollars to doughnuts none of the people there were polygamists. Which makes it even less a "condemnation of polygamy" and even more telling that he did make specific language choices in the original Greek. But since the actual translation of the actual words written by the actual people in question are irrelevant apparently I'll just move on.
Deuteronomy 24 - "a man is not supposed to go to war if he was just married, because he should stay home to be with his wife….singular." Yes, to give them time to bond and give the new wife a chance to conceive a child who would then be responsible (eventually) for taking care of her if the husband died. You sound like you think none of the men in the army of Israel would have had multiple wives or something, or that the exception for mustering to the army wouldn't apply to a man who had taken a second wife? Plus we have another very clear example of a "reserved time" after a marriage happens. Jacob spends the "bridal week" with Leah before he can marry Rachael. I mean personally I think Leah ended up with the short end of the stick anyway, and Jacob was kinda jerky to her a lot of times, but it does clearly show that a reservation of time for a marriage is not an exclusion of another one.
You kind of threw the term "mentor" back in my face (I could have just as easily said more experienced ladies) and again implied I have manipulated and cajoled Cherie into doing something or being okay with something she doesn't want to do, and that above all else I am offended by. I have probed Cherie's feelings deeply for any signs that she had reservations, made sure she fully understands she needs to voice concerns if she has any red flags about a potential, and done my absolute utmost to ensure I honor her and love her to the best of my honestly impressive capability. Once again I see "church leadership" jump to spurious conclusions about us poor, dumb, misguided, and wicked people (which is very much how it comes across) without actually talking to her about her thoughts or feelings on the subject. Do you think all of this research was just me? We literally worked hours upon hours together cross referencing the Strong's with other translations, checking and cross checking each other, and discussing the biblical, emotional, physical, and psychological ramifications. For Pete's sake I wasn't doing anything whatsoever to find an additional wife and Cherie found a poly minded courting group for us to join because, guess what, she does in fact want the benefits and relationships that poly brings.
As to why not the other way around, that's also in my research but wasn't related directly to the conversation so didn't include it in my notes. It's pretty clearly defined in three locations, Leviticus, Deuteronomy, and Romans. But is best summed up in Romans: 2 For example, when a woman marries, the law binds her to her husband as long as he is alive. But if he dies, the laws of marriage no longer apply to her. 3 So while her husband is alive, she would be committing adultery if she married another man. But if her husband dies, she is free from that law and does not commit adultery when she remarries." Which I'd point out is another case where the Bible does not ascribe to the modern concept of "what's good for the goose is good for the gander". Now let's say there was a family with 2 husbands and 1 wife. Even though these verses exist that doesn't mean I'd lambaste them about their belief and lifestyle. I would discuss it with them but I guarantee I wouldn't use terms like "makes me want to throw up". I'd apply the Romans 14 concept, make sure they gently knew my position, and love them anyway! That by the way is the attitude most people that disagree with us have. Heck, when Cherie shared her stance with her mom's group (which is largely Christian I might add) responses ranged from "That's cool but not my thing" to "I think that sounds great but my husband couldn't handle it, lol!", not "Ahhhhh burn the heretic!" which is the general feeling we get from the Sanhedrin (err, "Church leadership", my bad).
As to vows, we actually wrote our own vows and they did not actually include the "forsaking all others" part, but even if they did, we would have the ability to release each other from parts of vows made in ignorance if we chose. Free masons take vows before God that are steeped in things that do not line up with the Bible, so they should stick to those vows once they learn the truth more fully? And again that "idea you saw on tv" line is insultingly dismissive of the months (years actually at this point) of research, prayer, fasting, and studying we've done.
Revisiting 1st Timothy, again, there is way too much ambiguity in translation there to use that as justification against poly, and you're also ascribing "hard and fast rule" to what is guideline. By the writing of 1 Tim neither women nor single men can be elders or deacons, yet single men held the position in the early church and Phoebe is specifically called out by Paul as a Deacon and commended. This argument is another case of ignoring scripture when it's convenient but harping on the possible interpretations when it backs up the party line. You're even equating those attributes listed with holiness, when as has been stated being single is more holy! If that verse had been written to highlight the "most holy" people as leaders then it would be for us as it is for the Catholic church, and church leaders would have to be celibate. Once again I point out (as it was ignored before) that certain restrictions are given to certain people for reasons that *may not* apply to everyone, such as Samson's hair and prohibition against alcohol. Anyway, how many times have people spit venom and accusation at you because you chose to get married when the word says it's more holy to remain single? I'm guessing not many.
I know you mean to speak in love, but it very clearly comes across as arrogant and judgmental, that your notions are interpretations are clearly in the right no matter what and anything that would disagree with that is clearly wrong. We ran into that with the pastors at New Life too. I'd ask "What about this verse?" and was literally told that the verse I'd asked about didn't matter because they knew what was right. Ummmmm, k. I started this conversation to see if we would be accepted at Relevant and I'm glad I did, because the answer has been made abundantly clear. At this point, even if we are invited with words, there is no acceptance of our beliefs. We would go knowing that we were only there so we could be "fixed", and we're not broken, so aren't ok with that. Oh, and that flippant "How is porn by the way?" at the end of your message is one more way in which the point is driven home that everything I have been saying and showing in scripture is seen through the lens of "he just selfishly wants sex". I'll have you know I haven't looked at porn in years am only rarely even vaguely tempted too. The process of coming to accept the truth about polygamy (which is treated by leadership as a salvation issue but really shouldn't be) has brought a level of trust, acceptance, closeness, and desire between myself and Cherie that I would not ever want to give up. Not *in spite* of our views on polygamy, but because of them. Cherie knows deep in her heart that I desire, want, and love her, and that desire for another does not stop nor diminish my desire and love for her. I have put aside the lie that desire or love for someone besides Cherie is automatically a sin and in so doing have shaken off the shame that allowed the enemy leverage in that area of my life. When we were doing our meetings with New Life, Nick said that his heart "broke for your marriage", and Cherie and I looked at each other like, ummmm, our marriage is better than it's ever been, stronger than it's ever been, and easier than it's ever been. Leadership kept telling us "marriage is hard" and why would we want to add to that difficulty, and we were here thinking "Umm, our marriage isn't hard, it's the best thing in our lives. Why *wouldn't* we want more of that? Maybe it's you guys doing it wrong if it's so hard..."
Again, I know you mean to speak in love, but it sounds an awful lot like fear and wrath. I really hope we can still come to a place of agreeing to disagree. Blessings on you man, and I hope you're able to get some sleep.
