Polygamy for economic survival

[FollowingHim]

The fact is that God never commanded polygamy or divorce. Scripture says (Bible) He only permitted it because of the hardness of their hearts (Deut. 24:1; Matt. 19:8). Divorce was tolerated but never with God's approval. Jesus told the Jews, "Because of your hardness of heart, Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way" (Matthew 19:3-8).
Matt 5:31-32 “Furthermore it has been said, “Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce. But I say to you that whoever divorces his wife for any reason except sexual immorality causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a woman who is divorced commits adultery.” God hates divorce as well as polygamy, since it destroys marriage and the family (Mal. 2:16). Whatever the patriarchs or any Christian did wrong does not change the fact the Bible condemns it.

I'm shocked, to be frank. That's a very extreme example of attempting to find a proof-text for a preconceived idea. None of those passages has anything whatsoever to do with polygamy. But if you just deleted the word polygamy from the whole thing, it's a pretty good summary of the Bible's teaching on divorce.

You might as well say "The fact is that God never commanded polygamy or murder. Scripture says this is sinful (Exodus 20:13). Therefore you shouldn't be polygamous".

What is really sad is that the people coming up with such nonsense on polygamy are often extremely sound in most other areas, and actually have a high regard for scripture. Creation Ministries International for instance is very good at making a solidly Biblical argument on basically every single topic - until they hit polygamy and throw all their sound reasoning out the window to toe the party line.

 

[Wesley]

Here's a lovely example:

The fact is that God never commanded polygamy or divorce. Scripture says (Bible) He only permitted it because of the hardness of their hearts (Deut. 24:1; Matt. 19:8). Divorce was tolerated but never with God's approval. Jesus told the Jews, "Because of your hardness of heart, Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way" (Matthew 19:3-8).
Matt 5:31-32 “Furthermore it has been said, “Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce. But I say to you that whoever divorces his wife for any reason except sexual immorality causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a woman who is divorced commits adultery.” God hates divorce as well as polygamy, since it destroys marriage and the family (Mal. 2:16). Whatever the patriarchs or any Christian did wrong does not change the fact the Bible condemns it.

I've heard that line many, many times before. Matthew 19:9 is the primary passage that the Vatican uses to prohibit polygamy so of course I heard it a lot after my Catholic mother, and every priest, nun, brother, believer, protestant preacher, church elder, a seminary teacher and even a Catholic bishop in one case, that she could dig up started trying to coerce me to seeing things her way.

Her biggest problem with me is that I actually read, understand and consider opposing arguments when they are presented.

Let's look at that...

ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 19:9 1550 Stephanus New Testament (TR1550)
9 λεγω δε υμιν οτι ος αν απολυση την γυναικα αυτου ει μη επι πορνεια και γαμηση αλλην μοιχαται και ο απολελυμενην γαμησας μοιχαται

In between the words "ἀπολύσῃ" (release/divorce) and "γαμήσῃ" (marry) we have the word "και" (and/also).

The Greek word "και" is most commonly translated as either and or also. It can also be translated as even,indeed or but in some rare cases although those are not appropriate in Matthew 19:9 due to the fact that Christ was adding two things together rather than emphasizing one or countering one with another.

The biggest single flaw in their argument is that the English conjunction or is not among the possible translations.

If Matthew 19:9 could be reasonably translated as "If a man divorces his OR marries another woman then he commits adultery" then they would have a point. That translation is not supported by the Koine Greek text however since the Greek word "και" cannot be reasonably translated as or. It is not used in that context any other place in the Bible; nor is it used in the context of or in any other Koine Greek text that I have seen.

The problem that they encounter then is that the conjunction and is inclusive. A person must meet BOTH of the stipulated conditions, divorce and remarriage, in order to be guilty of adultery.

Even worse from their perspective, the Greek word "ἀπολύσῃ" is an action verb in this case rather than a noun or unclear part of speech. That means that in order to be guilty of adultery a man must be the one doing the divorcing not the one who is abandoned. A man who is abandoned does not fit the description given in the Greek word "ἀπολύσῃ" because it is an active word rather than a passive one. Thus if a first wife abandons her husband (and marries another man) over his interest in another woman then the sin of adultery that results from divorce and remarriage is hers rather than his. (Romans 7:2-3)

So in order to fit the description given in the verse, a man would have to decide that he and his wife have irreconcilable differences (other than sexual immorality on her part), divorce her against her will, AND remarry. In other words serial-monogamy is adultery but polygamy is not.

That's where the hypocrisy comes in with regard to at least the protestant churches. The Vatican is at least consistent with their legalism in that they prohibit both divorce and polygamy as though Matthew 19:9 said or instead of and. The protestant churches however will normally wink at divorcees who have abandoned families rather than excommunicating them as they do polygamists. That's a problem because the verse actually prohibits their version of serial-monogamy but does not prohibit polygamy. I do find it odd that the problem doesn't start until I want to stay married to my first wife while marrying a second woman rather than divorcing her for the second as the verse actually prohibits.

 

[Wesley]

on the note of moms... imagine some young man dating your daughter only to find he'll have 7 mother-in-laws who are keeping an eye on him!

At the very first BF retreat that I ever went to, back in the dark ages, I over-heard a young woman talking to another teenager say "Pedophilia? Ha! I've got four moms with shotguns that would blast the balls off of any man who touched one of their underage daughters."

 

[UntoldGlory]

Additionally, Jesus gives the same teaching, minus the "incriminating" reference to marrying another, in Matthew 5: "But I say that a man who divorces his wife, unless she has been unfaithful, causes her to commit adultery. And anyone who marries a divorced woman also commits adultery." (‭Matthew‬ ‭5‬:‭32‬ NLT), which shows that is the key point of the teaching.

 

[Shadowjak's Dancer]

That's where the hypocrisy comes in with regard to at least the protestant churches. The Vatican is at least consistent with their legalism in that they prohibit both divorce and polygamy as though Matthew 19:9 said or instead of and. The protestant churches however will normally wink at divorcees who have abandoned families rather than excommunicating them as they do polygamists. That's a problem because the verse actually prohibits their version of serial-monogamy but does not prohibit polygamy. I do find it odd that the problem doesn't start until I want to stay married to my first wife while marrying a second woman rather than divorcing her for the second as the verse actually prohibits.

In my experience, the reasoning behind this kind of thinking in protestant circles is that the divorcer made a mistake along the way, but in the end who doesn't, and isn't that why Christ died for us imperfect sinners? Whereas the polygamist is seen as living an unrepentant lifestyle

What really astounds me over all, however, is the vehemence of judgment against polygamists... even if we were to accept that it isn't 'God's ideal', or is downright sinful, where does the Church get off treating polygamists, it often seems to be the worst sinners of all? There are churches getting awfully comfortable with homosexuality and even using the name of the muslims' deity under the misguided notion that since there is only one God, we worship the same God. I've seen some pretty harsh penalties listed for such things in my Bible, but what's the prescribed penalty for polygamy? Where's the justification for the level of aggression and pariah statuses dished out?

I guess it must have to do with the notion that we are wolves in sheep's clothing trying to lure their little lambs into our den of horrors and depraved sin. Yet they send their kids by the busload to the public school system where they're given free condoms, lectures by planned parenthood, and brochures for 'party universities' where God and the Bible will be treated with contempt publicly, every single day.

 

[ylop]

I guess it must have to do with the notion that we are wolves in sheep's clothing trying to lure their little lambs into our den of horrors and depraved sin. Yet they send their kids by the busload to the public school system where they're given free condoms, lectures by planned parenthood, and brochures for 'party universities' where God and the Bible will be treated with contempt publicly, every single day.

This is all true and bothers me too.

And brings me to the conclusion: polygamy is only for those who have a strong internal motivation and have a low need for the external encouragement and affirmation of others.

 

[Wesley]

I guess it must have to do with the notion that we are wolves in sheep's clothing trying to lure their little lambs into our den of horrors and depraved sin. Yet they send their kids by the busload to the public school system where they're given free condoms, lectures by planned parenthood, and brochures for 'party universities' where God and the Bible will be treated with contempt publicly, every single day.

This is all true and bothers me too.

And brings me to the conclusion: polygamy is only for those who have a strong internal motivation and have a low need for the external encouragement and affirmation of others.

I don't know about that but I do know that the combination of the statement that only a few will find the pathway to Christ (Matthew 7:13-14) and the condemnation of legalism (Matthew 15:7-9, Mark 7:6-7) as well as the specific condemnation of using legalism to ban marriage (1 Timothy 4:1-3) does not give much hope for those who practice legalistic monogamy (as opposed to simply practicing monogamy).

So it really doesn't surprise me when such people are unconcerned about such things as how their children are being treated in school, etc.

 

[Shadowjak's Dancer]

So, back to the main thread of this topic: What sort of business models/family structures do people think would be optimal for healthy family and healthy & stable economic prosperity?

Diverse industries/fields? All eggs in one basket? TLC tv show, perhaps? 8^)

 

[Wesley]

So, back to the main thread of this topic: What sort of business models/family structures do people think would be optimal for healthy family and healthy & stable economic prosperity?

Diverse industries/fields? All eggs in one basket? TLC tv show, perhaps? 8^)

Honestly each one has advantages and disadvantages. It seems to me that each family would have to weigh the pros and cons of each method and decide for themselves which one is best.

Of course that's just my own opinion. That and twelve dollars will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks.

 

[Shadowjak's Dancer]

I think it also depends on what social structure one is dealing with. The USA is a lot different than South Africa, for example. Affirmative action plays out differently in different countries, etc.

Also, how much of the system is stable and can be relied upon as good infrastructure upon which to build a functioning economic family. Or should the family be able to use the available infrastructure and system while not being dependent upon it?

I would suggest the latter. Have the market sense to capitalize on what is available, but also the flexibility to endure economic volatility.

 

[Slumberfreeze]

Sow your seed in the morning, and at evening let your hands not be idle, for you do not know which will succeed, whether this or that, or whether both will do equally well.

She selects wool and flax
and works with eager hands.
14 She is like the merchant ships,
bringing her food from afar.
15 She gets up while it is still night;
she provides food for her family
and portions for her female servants.
16 She considers a field and buys it;
out of her earnings she plants a vineyard.
17 She sets about her work vigorously;
her arms are strong for her tasks.
18 She sees that her trading is profitable,
and her lamp does not go out at night.
19 In her hand she holds the distaff
and grasps the spindle with her fingers.


I see an Ecclesiastes husband with a day job and a side hustle, and Proverbs wife being a stay at home mom who works from home and has her fingers in a lot of diverse pursuits of profit.

I think scripture teaches the opposite of all eggs in one basket. The 'optimal' model for economic success seems to be every adult in the family practicing occupational sterilization as independent entrepreneurs, working at various schemes with all their might.

 

[Wesley]

...and Proverbs wife being a stay at home mom who works from home and has her fingers in a lot of diverse pursuits of profit...

If the mom is required to be a stay at home mom then how do you explain this verse?

Proverbs 31:16
16 She considers a field and buys it;
out of her earnings she plants a vineyard.

Where do the "earnings" come from? Due to soil treatments, arbor construction, labor costs, etc. planting the vineyard probably cost more than buying the field did so that's no small amount of "earnings" we're talking about there. For that matter where did the money to buy the field come from?

It doesn't say anything about her having to ask her husband for money and it specifies that the vineyard was planted out of her own earnings. So where did those earnings come from?

I think scripture teaches the opposite of all eggs in one basket. The 'optimal' model for economic success seems to be every adult in the family practicing occupational sterilization as independent entrepreneurs, working at various schemes with all their might.

What, exactly, does "occupational sterilization" mean?

 

[Slumberfreeze]

Eh... I wasn't exactly teaching a doctrine there. For me saying "I see" is analogous to "I picture it thus"

The reason that I envision a stay at home mom is because my wife does just that, she's good at it, she is exactly my idea of a wife of noble character, and I promise I'll take it poorly and completely out of context if anyone has anything negative to say about it.

But otherwise I get the picture that she works at least one of her jobs from home is that her pursuits are bookended in generating fabrics and making garments of them. I see that as a domestic sort of industry that requires much time and skill. She might also have a full time job on a sewing floor or something, that's just not how I picture it. Especially because I am mindful that it is the adulteress who has a problem keeping her feet at home. Not a doctrine or a rule, but a trend.

If someone else's wife of noble character works two jobs and only gets home after dark, that's their deal. I only really have definite opinions about women that I give my own last name to. Hopefully that is clear enough.

Occupational Sterilization = A reference to a euphemism wherein a man works until his metaphorical testes fall off.

 

[FollowingHim2]

She selects wool and flax
and works with eager hands.
14 She is like the merchant ships,
bringing her food from afar.
15 She gets up while it is still night;
she provides food for her family
and portions for her female servants.
16 She considers a field and buys it;
out of her earnings she plants a vineyard.
17 She sets about her work vigorously;
her arms are strong for her tasks.
18 She sees that her trading is profitable,
and her lamp does not go out at night.
19 In her hand she holds the distaff
and grasps the spindle with her fingers.

I've always found this passage interesting, because she's not doing all this on her own. She has female servants that she needs to provide for. I've often heard it said that a woman should aspire to be a proverbs 31 woman, and yet we're all expected to be that on our own. This woman didn't. She had people helping her.
The only way any woman could come close to being like this in my opinion is to have servants, or to have a sisterwife so they're a team and can help each other be the best wives they can be.

 

[UntoldGlory]

Just came across this in today's reading: 1 Chronicles 7:24 - He had a daughter named Sheerah. She built the towns of Lower and Upper Beth-horon and Uzzen-sheerah.

That's a pretty industrious lady right there!

 

[Shadowjak's Dancer]

Interesting notion FollowingHim2,

It is very similar to some perspectives that I've had of late concerning the prosperity of the Patriarch Abraham and others: a huge team. Abraham had much wealth, but he also had many servants, male and female. If my family and I had a strong model going, for example, and we had the ability to take other families on board, one or two at first, and then more as our capacity grew, one could easily have quite an economic powerhouse going on in a relatively short amount of time.

We've already discussed it in the terms of how much money could be saved and gained from one household with 4 adults working, paying for one rent, one tv, etc.

Imagine that multiplied by ten households all coming under one banner to use their combined economic strength to fund economic growth. If we're talking people who were in the trucking industry, for example, imagine what short a time everyone would be able to have their own rigs, and be making profit under their own name than for a company when the combined economic might is behind it.

Bank loans and interest rates could forever be a thing of the past.
Credit debt could disappear in a matter of months: FOR GOOD!

Whereas a single parent trying to do it all by him/herself... might never get beyond the loans and the credit debt, let alone have enough to pay for their kids to go to college, retire, or take the occasional vacation.

 

[Wesley]

I've always found this passage interesting, because she's not doing all this on her own. She has female servants that she needs to provide for. I've often heard it said that a woman should aspire to be a proverbs 31 woman, and yet we're all expected to be that on our own. This woman didn't. She had people helping her.

The only way any woman could come close to being like this in my opinion is to have servants, or to have a sisterwife so they're a team and can help each other be the best wives they can be.

And again I say, BF should have a 'Like' button.

 

[Wesley]

Eh... I wasn't exactly teaching a doctrine there. For me saying "I see" is analogous to "I picture it thus"

Then please forgive me for misunderstanding because that is the way that I perceived it.

The reason that I envision a stay at home mom is because my wife does just that, she's good at it, she is exactly my idea of a wife of noble character, and I promise I'll take it poorly and completely out of context if anyone has anything negative to say about it.

I can totally relate to that and would probably react similarly if anyone criticized my wife, her habits or the way that I run my family. We have no disputes here.

But otherwise I get the picture that she works at least one of her jobs from home is that her pursuits are bookended in generating fabrics and making garments of them. I see that as a domestic sort of industry that requires much time and skill. She might also have a full time job on a sewing floor or something, that's just not how I picture it. Especially because I am mindful that it is the adulteress who has a problem keeping her feet at home. Not a doctrine or a rule, but a trend.

I don't worry about that issue as much. If my wife wants to work outside the home, and is both willing and able to cope with the temptation, and the family situation permits it then I see no reason why she shouldn't. The temptation is different for women because they don't have the option of pursuing plural marriage as men do but there really isn't a difference between genders the necessity for facing whatever temptations arise in day-to-day life.

If someone else's wife of noble character works two jobs and only gets home after dark, that's their deal.

Agreed, each patriarch answers to Christ for how he runs his home, not to your or me.

I only really have definite opinions about women that I give my own last name to. Hopefully that is clear enough.

Once again, we agree.

Occupational Sterilization = A reference to a euphemism wherein a man works until his metaphorical testes fall off.

Thank you.

 

[Jack P.]

I'm just saying that caution is advised, especially when there are more hearts on the line. Risking my own heart is one thing, risking the hearts of my wife and children is a whole different thing, as a new wife doesn't just have to get along with me, but all of them as well![/quote]

Not a admit that I am not a well read man of any text. BUT life experience has taught me that if it is forced by man ( marriage, job, a purchase ) any thing it will fail. But if man will slow and listen then the Lord will provide and then it is a blessing from the heavens and will not fail. Every path o have started down that was "meant to be" the doors opened and the path was clear and easy to travel. On the other hand the path that is covered with obstacles and I forced my way through was doomed and to ultimately fail. So fast or slow ? GOD or man ? That is the question that should be ask

Jack P.
In His name

 

[Elisheba]

FollowingHim2

Love what you wrote! Women need other women to be this great. Heck we even need company when we go to the bathroom. lol