• 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.

When bringing up the subject of PM, what's the first verse you would use?

Daniel DeLuca said:
Matt 5:31-32 pretty much sums up the fact that she is still married to her husband in God's eyes, even if he goes out and marries another woman or cheats on his wife. I like to intentionally misquote that part about whoever marries her that is divorced, and then correct myself. I will say, "Whoever marries her that is divorced whose husband has not remarried, oh wait...it doesn't say that. OK whoever marries her that is divorced whose husband has not committed fornication, oh wait! It doesn't say that either. Whoever marries her that is divorced commits adultery with her. No if's and's or but's!" Then I bring up Rom 7:2 I Cor 7:39 and also I Cor 7:10-11, which make it clear that the woman is still bound to her husband as long as he is still alive. I used that in an email exchange with my pastor. The only thing he could come back with, is an assertion that I was on the wrong track, but no specifics.
Click to expand...

I have to agree with your pastor. mainly because you are confusing to me. Your comment has nothing to do with my comment.

In reality, having to deal with a divorced woman in your life is a personal issue better handled between you and God. If you don't like it don't deal with it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Cap said:
I have to agree with your pastor. mainly because you are confusing to me. Your comment has nothing to do with my comment.

In reality, having to deal with a divorced woman in your life is a personal issue better handled between you and God. If you don't like it don't deal with it.
Click to expand...
I have dealt with some of the more difficult cases out on YouTube. Some of those folks out there have seen our refutations and have come up with responses, but there is no denying that if she is still married to her husband in the eyes of God, then in God's eyes, when he marries someone else, he becomes a polygamist, but that does not free her to marry someone else. Nonetheless, my response is based entirely on the New Testament.

Honestly, I would have liked it if Jesus gave some exceptions, like if her husband tried to kill her, or if he committed some horrible crime like rape, or murder or child molesting, but unfortunately, He didn't. Now, I would also disagree with anyone who suggests that she should divorce her second husband and go back to her first husband. That does not undo the adultery that was committed, and it goes against Deut 24:1-4.
 
I get where you're coming from @Daniel DeLuca, and I like that you've found a completely new-testament-based argument. I agree it's rather hard to follow at first though, and because it relies on more than one logical step there are various points that people could dispute, so needs to be worded carefully and used in the right context. It's a useful argument but probably not the best place to start, in my mind.

From my perspective, I agree with this:
frederick said:
The first verse I always use is the one relevant to the discussion. If it don't fit, don't force it.
Click to expand...

For children, I don't introduce it as such, it's just plainly obvious whenever reading the life of Abraham, David or anyone. If you never try to twist scripture to make it appear that these people were wrong, then children just see the truth plainly and they have no faulty reasoning that needs to be fixed through scriptural arguments.
 
2 Chronicles 24:2-3
[2] And Joash did that which was right in the sight of the Lord all the days of Jehoiada the priest. [3] And Jehoiada took for him two wives; and he begat sons and daughters.
 
ZecAustin said:
Oh wow, I want the "Bearded for her Pleasure" shirt. His site he's in Porter, Ok. Maybe @Verifyveritas76 might be able to find something out.
Click to expand...
I was surprised that you didn't notice that the wearer of the "Bearded for her Pleasure" shirt was clean-shaven!
 
Slumberfreeze said:
With low expectations for the outcome.

ha ha

I kid.

ok not really.

<snip>I am so thankful that the bible is so weird.
Click to expand...

You and me, both, brother. I agree with all those like you who assert that the proper verse is the one that fits the situation and the person -- and the "weirdness" of Scripture lends itself to walking hand-in-hand into unfamiliar (i.e., weird) territory. For the most part, those who have knee-jerk reactions have a familiarity with the Bible limited to the 40 verses read throughout the year in the slice of the liturgy each Sunday that allows for congregants to be read to from Divine Word. Every approved verse has been properly vetted for lack of controversy.

andrew said:
@Slumberfreeze is on point as usual!

@Cap, one of the reasons I like David is because that "man after God's own heart, perfect in (almost) all his ways" thing is not time bound, and the idea that God gave multiple wives to David and would have given him more on demand takes it out of the "God tolerated sin" zone. God gave the wives, and God doesn't change, amIrite?...
Click to expand...

I'm always a sucker for anyone who references Groundhog Day, @andrew.

I'm also thankful that you redirected the comment about God supposedly tolerating polygamy. To repeat that is to assist others in making an argument that isn't supported in Scripture. They have read 'toleration' back into Scripture through their own condemnation bias.

ZecAustin said:
This is one of the great things about taking your kids to retreats, you don't have to bring it up or even explain it. And they don't seem to question it. My step-daughter was 11 when she came for the first time and we had to remind her that there were polygynists there afterwards and even then she just didn't seem that phased.
Click to expand...

Please forgive me, @ZecAustin, for glomming onto this very salient point of yours. I simply had faith that getting my loved ones to conferences would be the single most transformative action in regard to lessening opposition to Biblical polygyny. The only family member who started off more opposed than wife Kristin was our youngest daughter, Holly Hannah. She was virulently in opposition. The drive down to last year's summer conference near Knoxville featured regular volcanic eruptions, which continued sporadically after our arrival at the lodge. Until . . . she met a girl she thought was cool. I couldn't tell at first if she had just quieted down due to being highly occupied in social interaction. Eventually, though, we headed home, and we hadn't been in the car 5 minutes before Holly Hannah exclaimed, "Dad, can we come back next year? Or is there a polygamy meeting we can go to sooner than that?" Yes, it probably primarily had to do with finding a friend (part of Nathan B's entourage), but what she quickly disclosed was that having someone she could relate to rather quickly then led to a willingness to give the other teenagers a chance -- which led to discovering that they didn't have horns and tails but were not only similar to her in most all ways but perhaps having polygamous parents, the teenagers were generally more mature, more kind, more friendly and possessed of more integrity than the kind of kids she was generally accustomed to hanging out with at her junior-senior high school.

So sometimes the perfect verse is just whatever refrain comes up when a friend shares an earbud on an iPod.
 
mystic said:
The models and the designs are photoshopped together. So one learns to ignore the models.
Click to expand...
Oh, sure, of course they're photoshopped, but I still found it amusing. They have bearded models -- even bearded male models, so it's funny they didn't use one to promote a shirt with that particular message!
 
I like to bring up David and Moses.
David because everybody knows, Moses because most people don't know (he had a few wives).
 
2 Samuel 12:8, because it's a preemptive strike against the ploygyny was only tolerated by G-d. You can't argue that Polygyny was only tolerated when the first shot is a Prophet relaying a message from G-d saying if the wives you had werent enough, I would have given you more.
 
Last edited:
Kevin said:
2 Samuel 12:8, because it's a preemptive strike against the ploygyny was only tolerated by G-d. You can't argue that Polygyny was only tolerated when the first shot is a Prophet replaying a message from G-d saying if the wives you had werent enough, I would have given you more

Thats the same verse that sold me on the idea. I originally was grouping it with divorce where it was allowed because of the hardness of men's hearts but polygamy is not spoke of like that. In fact, in 2 Samuel God said he would have given more. Not one time did God tell someone to divorce his wife because God puts a high value on covenant.
Click to expand...
 
Keith Martin said:
They have read 'toleration' back into Scripture through their own condemnation bias.
Click to expand...
Keith, did you coin this term "condemnation bias"? I love it.
This is going in my toolset.

Keith Martin said:
...-- which led to discovering that they didn't have horns and tails but were not only similar to her in most all ways but perhaps having polygamous parents, the teenagers were generally more mature, more kind, more friendly and possessed of more integrity than the kind of kids she was generally accustomed to hanging out with at her junior-senior high school....
Click to expand...
poetry

************* Re t-shirts ****
Funny the model of the "bearded for her pleasure" T is shorn like a newborn babe...

Interesting the guy's page says Nazarene Israelites are they like Nazarene Judaism (basically Messianic except deny divinity of Yeshua)?
 
My husband's friend bought my husband this shirt, since he knows about our beliefs. My husband did get a conversation going with the auto mechanic who was fixing our car. It says at the top of the shirt, "I Tried Polygamy in Utah." It's the name of a microbeer.
 

Attachments

  • 20181012_133306.jpg
    20181012_133306.jpg
    2.1 MB · Views: 18
FollowingHim said:
I get where you're coming from @Daniel DeLuca, and I like that you've found a completely new-testament-based argument. I agree it's rather hard to follow at first though, and because it relies on more than one logical step there are various points that people could dispute, so needs to be worded carefully and used in the right context. It's a useful argument but probably not the best place to start, in my mind.

From my perspective, I agree with this:


For children, I don't introduce it as such, it's just plainly obvious whenever reading the life of Abraham, David or anyone. If you never try to twist scripture to make it appear that these people were wrong, then children just see the truth plainly and they have no faulty reasoning that needs to be fixed through scriptural arguments.
Click to expand...

One of the things I like about this approach is the fact the Divorce and remarriage is already a controversial issue. Just yesterday, we had someone in our Sunday Morning Fellowship bring up a discussion he had with other believers, where they were debating Divorce and Remarriage, and he kept using the word "spouse". I pointed out that those passages are gender specific. The leader tried to argue that the reason for that is because women did not have as much power back then as they do today. I shot back that I don't think this is the reason why. I work at the same company that this guy works for and I had lunch with him a while back. I am going to try to get together with him again, so I can discuss this with him. I plan on skirting the issue of polygamy, and just leave him with the realization that his friends are adding to Scripture where it is unwarranted, and let him know that when he figures out why those passages are gender specific, that what he will discover is something that a lot of people in the church don't like. I also plan on bringing up the word translated "woman" in Matt 5:28, as a clue, so he can reach his own conclusions, and I will follow up with him. Interestingly enough, he was recently ordained as a deacon, even though he doesn't have any children.
 
I left the Sunday Morning Fellowship class early yesterday, because I had to get my trombone out, and get read for the service, but we were finishing up Matt 18, and I don't know if they started into Matt 19 without me or not. I am getting nervous about this, because I will stick my neck out, if I have to. Telling folks online that when Jesus said "two", he could have been referring to a couple and a new wife, is not so threatening, but telling folks that I fellowship with, that polygamy is acceptable, has much more inherent risk associated with it. I love it when people post that Jesus emphasized "two", because He mentioned the word twice, when in reality, what He emphasized, was becoming one, and joined together, and let not man separate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top