Fiscus105:



Cain you mentioned, what was his gender ? And you should tell us his behaviour wen he was alive?

Don't mind that dishonest individual.

Where in the bible can it be infered that Adam had daughters before Cain?

Do you know why he said that?

It is because he believes what Jesus said when he was asked about divorce by his disciples to be a disapproval of polygyny.

Jesus said: ''...at the beginning, it was not so, for this reason, a mam would keave his home and cleave to his wife and the two shall become one.''

He, like most christians, believe that by that, God had an ideal pattern for marriage and that it is only between one man and one woman. Then I told him no, that is not what Jesus meant by that verse. I also shocked him by providing him parts of the bible to show that Jesus could never have meant it the way he and many other christians understand it.

I showed him Gen 4 vs 13-15. That passage clearly shows that the ''in the beginning, he made them male and female'' Jesus said, does not mean he made only Adam and Eve and they were the only people that existed up till when Cain and Abel were born. At best, it can mean he created two genders, and not a single man and single woman. If he meant only one man and one woman only, then at the time of Abel's death and god pronounced judgement on Cain, then the entire number of people would be just 4: Adam, Eve, Cain and Abel. But no, Cain told god: ''if OTHER SEE ME, they would kill me''. The God, the all knowing, did not say no, he is wrong; He said: ''I will put a mark on you so that ANYONE who sees you, will not kill you.

So, I shocked him with proofs from the bible that his ubderstanding, and indeed the understanding of many christians, of the place jesus said what he said, is flawed.

He could not take it, like many people of faith cannot take it when evidence has been presented to them, that they have been believing the wrong thing all these while. So, instead of accepting the truth I provided him, he decided to bring up a strange interpretation of the genesis passage above and insinuated that Adam and Eve had other daughters before Cain and Abel were born. And as you can see, his attempt at running away from the truth, failed woefully as his interpretation is obviously not only ridiculous, but also implausible. This is the end result for all things insincere.

Lurker4Long:
Algerian and Ugandan MI-28s.

Together with the Egyptian Apaches and Kamovs, the best attack helicopters on the continent, in my opinion.

And the rooivalk? how does it comoare to these ones?

Fujiyama:


^^^
The people you referred to do not know the issues...and they do not care to know.

The powers that be in Nigeria had their reasons for treating history (especially African history) and civics with a mixture of contempt and fear. Governing conscious, skeptical, informed citizens is very hard work for military (and civilian) dictators...because when people know the truth, it sets them free and that's very bad for 'business'. Far better to have ignorant (yet highly opinionated) people who will be extremely useful idiots...as can be seen time and again on this thread.

The poster you quoted asked a very simple - yet very important question...and the answer changes the discussion completely. But our aggressive friends on this thread do not want to see the light. These posters (some of whom also absolutely love the US and the UK) do not know the history of how the UK premier and the US president in the 1980s favoured a meaningless, hypocritical policy of so-called constructive engagement of the apartheid regime...these two Western leaders strongly opposed sanctions against Botha's South Africa...on the grounds that sanctions would hurt ordinary South Africans. So why didn't Reagan and Thatcher engage in "constructive dialogue" with Castro's Cuba instead of imposing a trade embargo that lasted nearly half a century?

These posters do not know that Israel's Kibbutz Beit Alfa (a state owned factory) sold anti-riot vehicles to Botha's government for the suppression of restive black South Africans in the townships.

There is a reason why South Africa is hostile. They bear the scars of what Israel did to their country in the last century. But our friends on this thread do not know...and they do not care to know.

Absolutely!

Fujiyama:


^^^
The answer to your last question is yes. Israel had close relationships with various apartheid governments for decades. It isn't a stretch to say apartheid South Africa provided a lifeline to the israeli arms industry...and South Africa hasn't forgotten this...as they shouldn't.

Ignore the several reckless comments about South Africa on this thread. Some of those posting have not bothered to check their history. One fellow quoted you...just to insult you for asking valid questions. That should give you an idea of the people you are dealing with.

@Beremx

You can see, I am not the only one who told you this. He is absolutely right. If you want to know the truth about a thing, you would prefer to know it from those who actually know those things, right?

The people telling you otherwise, just don't know the issues. The only idea of South Africa they have, is zenophobia; so, they think they do not have anything in common with the South Africans.

alpharoyalty:
South Africans are weird people.
Their own level of weirdness is out of this world.

you are too young to understand the issues

Beremx:
May her soul rest in peace. Amen

I want to ask why South Africa hates Israel very much? What's the reason behind the hatred? Did Israel support Apartheid against South Africa?

South Africa does not hate Israel. The reason South Africa takes the position they are taking on the Israeli/Palestinian issue is because, unlike the rest of the world who overwhelmingly support the Palestinian course, you can see that from the number of countries that voted at the UN for the numerous resolutions condemning Israel's actions in Gaza and the West bank, unlike the rest of us, South Africa knows what it is like to live under occupation, oppression and apartheid.

And yes, Israel was very friendly with the apartheid regime in South Africa, they even helped the apartheid government to build nuclear bomb which they dismantled when apartheid ended. When the whole world placed sanctions on the apartheid government, Israel continued to trade with the apartheid government. When Desmond Tutu went to Gaza, he said what he saw reminded him of the situation in the townships under apartheid. Now, remember, this is a man who knows what apartheid looks like, He saw it himself! So, when he says that is what he saw in Gaza, then it is because it is whT he saw!

Israel does what it does because just like the white minority rule in South Africa, they are afraid the Arabs would outnumber them especially if the refugees are allowed to return and the state would be appropriately called a Jewish state anymore.

These are links to back-up my claim:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/may/23/israel-south-africa-nuclear-weapons

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/reviews/capsule-review/2010-08-25/unspoken-alliance-israels-secret-relationship-apartheid-south

https://solidarity.net.au/highlights/tutu-fighter-apartheid-south-africa-palestine/

https://press.un.org/en/2016/sc12657.doc.htm

https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/10/1142847

SIRTee15:


When God made his covenant with the Israelites, were they one nation or two nations.
When did they become 2 nations, before the covenant or after the covenant.
Your answer lies in your honest answer of above.

which of my questions is this meant to be an answer to?

[quote author=SIRTee15 post=126572797]

Have u answered the question I asked u?
In case you have forgotten...who got married to Christ first, myself or the church?

The question you have asked is the wrong question. The right question would be: Who among you and Paul in the bible became married to Jesus first? And the answer to that would be: Paul, of course; because he lived before you. If you asked who between you and a christian who will be born 1000years from now, is first married to Jesus? then the answer will be you; since you lived before that christian lived.

As for the church, well, you are the church, and the church is you. There is no difference! You are not separate entities. He who does not know this, knows nothing about who the christian is. #ChristianMysticism.

Show me anywhere in my post where I wrote polygamy is a sin.

wow! I never knew you never said polygamy is a sin. I am sorry for lumping you up with all the other deniers of the legitimacy and spiritual validity of polygamy in christianity.

Since I have given you the curtesy of answering your questions, can you now do me the curtesy of aswering mine? And please remember to ask the Holy spirit for wisdom that superceeds all human knowledge, since you all seem to think it is me that is trying to bring in my teachings into christianity. Remember, he promised you; this is the Holy spirit promising you that he will give you what to say when the time comes when you are confronted, like I am confeonting you now.

So, here is my request again:

Show me anything from the bible, or the sacred tradition, if you are of the christian faith that believes in the sacred tradition, that proves this big-fat lie of yours that polygamy was not God's 'original' plan and that it is gone with the okd teastament. This is a challenge, and you can ask the holy spirit to give you the words to say it (afterall, he promised that at times like this when you are confronted, what you will say will be given by the spirit), words which when taken into consideration by a fair mind, will only lead him to your conclusion, and words which when responded to by the unfair mind, will, obviously, reveal itself (the response) to be unfair.

remember that my position is that there is no 'original' plan for marriage, at least not one that excludes polygamy.

SIRTee15:


Who is this bebeto. Not only do u jump into irrational conclusion, u equally lack comprehension skills

Show me where I said polygamy is a sin

So, you now agree it is not a sin? That's good! It shows our effort here is not a waste.

Will God permit something that's a sin.

God did not 'permit' polygyny, He blesses it and for him, it is on par with monogamy, stop the lies already!

Polygamy wasn't God's original plan but he permitted it just like he allowed for divorce.

There is no 'original' plan of God for marriage, and no, the holy marriage called polygamy is not and can not be likened to divorce in any sense It is sacrelageous to do so! You do not have any evidence on this!

Polygamy and divorce were not part of that divine law so it's gone with the old testament.

Blatant lie again! Show me anything from the bible, or the sacred tradition, if you are of the christian faith that believes in the sacred tradition, that proves this big-fat lie of yours! This is a challenge, and you can ask the holy spirit to give you the words to say it (afterall, he promised that at times like this when you are confronted, what you will say will be given by the spirit), words which when taken into consideration by a fair mind, will only lead him to your conclusion, and words which when responded to by the unfair mind, will, obviously, reveal itself (the response) to be unfair.

The same way we don't offer animal sacrifice anymore.

Animal sacrifice is not and cannot be likened to polygyny in anyway! You people should listen to the gutter that comes out of your mouth! And by the way, animal sacrifice is still acceptable to your God even today, especially when it is offered not for.the forgiveness of sins, but IN THANKSGIVING There is no 'spiritual' difference between animal sacrifice and the money you pay in church. You not offering animals in Christianity today, has absolutely nothing to do with your God accepting or not accepting it; It is just part of man's thinking that the killing of animals is not particularly the best practice and so, he the killing of animals to only when you want to consume them.

SIRTee15:


When u slap people with truth borne out of facts...what u get is emotional response based on 'trust me bro, I'm saying the truth'

Pls allow me to LOL

Like you became emotional when confronted with evidence that polygyny is not an anathema to your lord and God.

So, answer this question: if polygyny is an abomination or an anathema to your God, why then did he describe himself as the husband of two women, Judah and Israel?

Don't ignore this question, have the gut to answer it. If you are sure you arw speaking the mind of your all wise and all knowing God, ask him to give you the wisdom to asnwer this question. Afterall, he told you that ''do not be worried about what to say when the time comes; for what to say will be given to you by the spirit'' Mark 13 vs 11.

It is that rare wisdom I really what to hear from you on this issue.

Dtruthspeaker:


You are just deceiving yourself. Clearly, Paul's statement shows that a man with one wife is preferable and more acceptable to God. Thus, anyone who wants to be close to God and and yet desires marriage, has seen a way.

Oh, I see, you are asking for biblical evidence to show that polygyny is NOT an anathema to Your Lord and God.

Well, I am happy to provide it, that's what I am competent at, it is what I do!

Speaking about Judah and Israel, the two kingdom, Your Lord and God, Jehovah or Jesus or Holy Ghost, said in Jeremiah 31 vs 31 and 32:

''Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord:''

The word ''anathema means: ''something that is strongly disliked or disapproved of''
(Cambridge Dictionary, 2023): https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/anathema

Now, if Polygyny is an anathema to your God, I am talking about you, Dtruthspeaker; if it is something he strongly dislike or strongly disapprove of, then he would not say of himself in that scripture, that he is the husband of two wives''.

And in marriage, the man is the figure of God, while the woman is the figure of the church, or the individual christian! #TheMysteryOfChristianMarriage.

Facts are stubborn things and evidence is so powerful that it violently threatens ignorance and the darkness in the minds of those who lie that the Christian god is opposed to Polygyny.

At this point, I think you are wishing you coukd edit the bible.

So, answer this question: if polygyny is an abomination or an anathema to your God, why then did he describe himself as the husband of two women, Judah and Israel?

Don't ignore this question, have the gut to answer it. If you are sure you arw speaking the mind of your all wise and all knowing God, ask him to give you the wisdom to asnwer this question. Afterall, he told you that ''do not be worried about what to say when the time comes; for what to say will be given to you by the spirit'' Mark 13 vs 11.

It is that rare wisdom I really what to hear from you on this issue.

Harrynight:


That would rather attractive Blessings for him bro,
Polygamy is WRONG, It's never God's will for man

While you are still coming to terms with it, I want you to see here that Your God described himself that he is the husband of two women. Jeremiah 31 vs 31-32. this is the mystery of christian marriage

My son in the lord, I want you to know that the idea of polygyny is not an anathema to your God, in fact, he gave David, a man after his own heart, his master's wife. 2 sam 12 vs 8. I did not write that scripture, my dear, You God was quoted by his prophet, Nathan. Nathan said " this is what the Lord said...I have given you your master's wives...if that weren't enough, I would have given you more'' There is nothing in that verse, not in tone or any other way, to show he just gave him his master's wives not because he, God, liked it, but just mthcew just gave him for giving sake. You passed WAEC English, right? that means you can get the writer's mood or implied meaning from a passage. I should not be lecturing you like I am teaching students preparing for WAEC.

SIRTee15:



This your exegesis is your personal opinion and at best an heresy.

It is not my opinion. go back and read 2 Cor 11 vs 1-3. it says:

"I wish you would tolerate me, even when I am a bit foolish. Please do! 2 I am jealous for you, just as God is; you are like a pure virgin whom I have promised in marriage to one man only, Christ himself. 3 I am afraid that[b] your minds [/b] will be corrupted and that you will abandon your full and pure devotion to Christ—in the same way that Eve was deceived by the snake's clever lies."

The bolded, which is plural, shows that he was not addressing the church as a single entity, BUT THE INDIVIDUAL CHRISTIANS AND THAT WHY HE USED THE PLURAL "MINDS"! IF HE WERE REFERING TO THE CHURCH AS A BODY IN VS 2, HE WON'T HAVE GONE ON TO USE THE PLURAL "MINDS". He would have used the singular!

[/quote]So Jesus will be married to many Christians as possible individually.[/quote]

Yes! And he is not going to, he already has, the moment you accept hum as your lord and saviour. You know nothing about christian mysticism! If did not know that, know it now, that the moment you accept jesus as your lord and god, he became your husband, and you, his wife! That is what the verse I quoted is saying. You all don't know the truth and when it is put before you, you cannot comprehend it.

When will these marriage take place, who will coordinate the union.
How will new Christians arrange their own individual wedding with Christ. In what way is this union conducted in physically.

It has already taken place the moment you accept him as your god.

My friend Christ is married to the church as the bridegroom and head of the church. It's an eternal union established once and for all. There are no repeated weddings for any other person. because there's only ONE CHURCH[/b

]

yes, he is married to the church and no one is disputing that. what we are saying is: if he is married to the church, it is first of all a consequence of him being married to you first of all! This is the depth of christian marriage, whuch you do not understand.

A wedding is conducted with a body only once not multiple times.
When u give your life to Christ, [b]u become a member of the church; and this establish your eternal union and oneness with Christ.

no, it is the other way around. if the church is sanctified, it is because you are! You do not know this is the reason why you are a baby in the lord.

For just as in one body we have many members, but all the members do not have the same function, in the same way we who are many are one body in Christ, and individually members belong to all the others [/i]
Romans 12:4–5

THIS VERSE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SUBJECT!

SIRTee15:



Polygamy was never God's original plan my friend.

It was permitted by God in man's fallen state and when his insatiable greed overwhelmed him. But God never intended polygamy for man.

If u want to know God's plan for man, either check the garden of Eden or the divine law brought by Jesus.
Show me which one of them sanctions polygamy.

Only God knows what they teach in church nowadays. So many ignorant Christians walking around blindly.

That Europeans sanction homosexualism doesn't change the fact it's a sin. I don't follow whites, I follow Jesus Christ.

Don't bring the wrath of God on yourself with the bolded.

ejimatic:
God allowed them at that time. By the time Jesus came one man one wife was mainted. Math i9 4-6 and it is non negotiable!

Big fat lie! You do not understand that passage

SIRTee15:


The oneness in spirit is very clear.
The CHURCH not churches is ONE with Christ.
There's only one church. Christ established only one church not churches.
When u give your life to Christ, u become a member of that ONE CHURCH joined to Christ.
So it's two becoming one.
Is it clear now?

Now explain how 2 become 1 as stated in the Jesus Christ can accommodate a 3rd party.

I can see you are still a baby in the lord with this understanding of yours.

But no, in that passage, Paul was not refering to the church as an institution. He was refering to the individual christian. How do I know this is the case?

Let me show you!

when you read further into vs 3, it says: "I am afraid that your minds will be corrupted and that you will abandon your full and pure devotion to Christ—in the same way that Eve was deceived by the snake's clever lies.

noticed he used the word "minds", that is plural. If he were refering to the church as an instoitution, he would not have used the word "minds", he would have used the singular "mind". but no, because he was refering to the individual christian is the reason he used the plural "minds".

The christian who does not understand that the reason the church is refered to as the bride of christ is first of all because the individuals who make up the institution called church as the brides of jesus, is nothing but a baby christian whose understanding of the deep things of god is very shallow, I do not care which title the person bears. 2 Cor 11 vs 3

SIRTee15:


Ok let's test this theory.
A married man and his wife is one flesh
A married man and a harlot is also one flesh.
Then is the wife one flesh with the harlot?
Are the three now o e flesh?

antiChristian has never made sense anytime he dabbles into bible exegesis.

No, it does not work that way!

Paul said "I am jealous for you, just as God is; you are like a pure virgin whom I have promised in marriage to one man only, Christ himself..2 Cor 11 vs 2. this goes to prove that you, the individual christian is married to jesus when he accepted him as his lord and savior and that from then on, he has a personal relationship with him despite the fact jesus may already be married, so to speak, to other people who have accepted him as their lord and saviour. Yet, when we speak of you being joined together with jesus, we speak of it in personal terms. So also, when we speak of the man being joined to any of his wives, it is a one on one thing. This is the mystery of Christian marriage, that the man is the figure of god and just as god can have several people being his wives by the virtue of accepting jesus as their lord and saviour, so also can the man have more than one wife. I am not the one who made all these up. your bible did; and if any born agaon does not know this, then he is still a baby in divine knowledge!

Daystar7:


Nigeria is a country with people of low IQ+...
He clearly doesn't know a thing about what he's talking about and your quote is talking about a Holy spirit inspired act. Where's the connect. Abeg no quote me again

If he could use a donkey to teach his 'elect', is it an "antichrist" he won't use? He died for the "antichrist". not for the donkey. That's why he said a sinner is worth more than billions of donkeys. Luke 12 vs 1-7

SIRTee15:


A man shall be united with his wife and they shall become ONE
What does that 2 become 1 mean to u.

It does not negate the fact that a man can have more than one man. In christian marriage, the man's marriage to all his wives is on individual bases. Just as your god is married to you, if you are a born again, and is also married to Pope Francis, Oyakhilome, Adeboye, Oyedepo, et al at the same time. In christian marriage, the man is the figure of God, while the woman is the figure of the church, the individual christian etc.

How do I know this?

LET ME SHOW YOU!

"I am jealous for you, just as God is; you are like a pure virgin whom I have promised in marriage to one man only, Christ himself. 2 Cor 11 vs 2. This is prove that when one gives his life to christ, he is married to christ. Christ is the groom and you the bride. For that reason, when he is your groom, he can simultaneously be the groom of another christian simultaneously. When you married him, you became one with him whole and entire even though before you became born again, he already had other brides in the Pope, Oyakhilome, Oyedepo and Adeboye since they accepted Jesus before you by the virtue of being older than you.

Daystar7:


You're moniker is Antichristian yet you're telling me that you know more than what's written in my bible...
God save me from humans cos what's this?
Where did your many brides come from? Why are you shameless. A bride and a groom and they had nothing to do with the 10 virgins.

even if he is "antichrist" literally, it doesn't mean he cannot know better than you.

Your bible says "whom shall I teach knowledge, whom shall I make to understand doctrine? by means of other tongues, I will teach these people." Isaiah chapter 28 vs 11. when Balaam the prophet erred in doctrine and stumbled in judgement, he had to be taught by his donkey. many examples of the gentiles teaching the chosen people abound in the bible.

equity1:
What makes you think that marrying many wives will make a man not to commit adultery.

polygamy is not intended to stop adultery any more than monogamy is meant to stop sexual immorality.

AfonjaConehead:


God's template and model remains one man,one wife.

It ain't as though he condemns whoever marries more than one wife..
Whoever feels he can take adequate and good care of more than one wife is free to do so but such cannot serve as God's minister in any capacity as stated by the verse you quoted.

There is still non evidence for this. In fact, the only evidence there is suggest that there is no "God's model" for marriage.

If you are going to refer to the passage in the new testament where Jesus said "... in the beginning he made them male and female..." to mean that he only wants a man to have not have more than one wife, then I will refer you back to the context of that discussion and show you that he was actually talking about divorce. And if you still want to insist that he meant one man one woman, then I will tell you that you are implying that Jesus is ignorant that at the beginning it was not only adam and eve that were 'made'.

Genesis chapter 4 "13And Cain said to the LORD, “This punishment is too hard for me to bear. 14You are driving me off the land and away from your presence. I will be a homeless wanderer on the earth, and anyone who finds me will kill me.”

15But the LORD answered, “No. If anyone kills you, seven lives will be taken in revenge.” So the LORD put a mark on Cain to warn anyone who met him not to kill him. 16And Cain went away from the LORD's presence and lived in a land called “Wandering,” which is east of Eden.

Going by your idea that jesus meant god made Adam and Eve at the beginning, then there should only be three people in the entire world now since Cain killed Abel. But no, when judgement was pronounced on him, he said if anyone finds him, they will kill him. So, who were the other people he was talking about when he said that?

And your god did not even dismiss his idea that there are other people out there. Instead he confirmed it by saying if anyone kills Cain, seven lives will be taking in revenge. So, your god knows it was not Adam and Eve he 'made' therefore, Jesus' response to his apostles there cannot and should not be taken the way you all take it. Can't you see that every argument you all bring up is being debunked left, right and centre? this certainly shows you are in the wrong here. Admit it and let this discussion end already!

in vs 17 of the same chapter, it says "Cain and his wife [/b]had a son and named him Enoch. [b]Then Cain built a city and named it after his son

First of all, the bible says Cain had a wife. So, I am going to ask, where did he see the wife to marry, I thought until now, they were only three in the world now since he had killed his brother.

Someone says Adam and Eve had other sons and daughters. And yes, there is evidence for it in the bible. Genesis chapter 5 vs 4 says he had other sons and daughters. But that's after cain and abel issue, not before or during the time when Abel was alive. Any one who disputes this has the responsibility to show us beyond any reasonable or theological doubt that what he says is true.

The "he made them male and female" jesus said is only indicating that God made 2 genders, male and female.

Padipadi:
I actually do.
Now go n read for your GCE, dear child.

I am long past that. Almost a PhD holder now.

AfonjaConehead:

You all are simply confused, honestly

I provided biblical passages to back-up my point and you are here saying I am confused?

Are you not a bible believing person again?

Eyinju112:

People have been taking two or more wives since the early Christian’s that 1 Timothy is a reminder that God doesn’t want or support two wives

Here is my response to the CJstarz on this very issue. Read it because you are going to benefit from it.


And here is the bible passage to back up what you have said:

''32 Iwould like you to be free from worry. An unmarried man concerns himself with the Lord's work, because he is trying to please the Lord. 33 But a married man concerns himself with worldly matters, because he wants to please his wife; 34 and so he is pulled in two directions. An unmarried woman or a virgin concerns herself with the Lord's work, because she wants to be dedicated both in body and spirit; but a married woman concerns herself with worldly matters, because she wants to please her husband.'' 1Cor 7 vs 32-34.

So, you were right when you said Paul gave that advice so that they can concentrate on their work in the vineyard. He does not want them to be pulled in two directions, like he said in the bolded. But those, like @Dtruthspeaker and @Vdestro, who want to remain ignorant, will ignore this and instead keep believing the lies he was told by those who know nothing about the authentic christian teachings, or the mind of God concerning the matter.

For Paul, marriage comes with a lot of headache; those who are married today can confirm this as well. That's why he said in vs 28 of the same chapter that he would ''rather spare you the everyday troubles that married people will have''

Anyone who says Paul telling pastors and bishops in 1 Timothy 3:2 that they should marry only one wife means he is condemning polygamy, is a big-fat liar! We have seen from the passage I quoted, which you also alluded to in your post that I am quoting that the reason Paul said that, was because he thinks marriage has alot of challenges which could distract one from the Opeus Dei, the work of god.

Now, we all know from his letters, that Paul is someone who is fanatical about evangelism and working in the lord's vineyard which is why he decided not to get married so that he won't have any excuse or distraction. He said ''of all the apostles, I work the hardest!'' 1Cor 15:10. To underline how much he is willing to put in to save every soul on earth, he said: ''Though I am free and belong to no one, I have made myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible.'' 1 Cor 9 vs 19. In vs 22-23 he said: ''I have become all things to all people so that by all possible means I might save some. 23 I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings.

Now the Paul that said what I quoted above, does anyone think even after telling the bishops in Timothy 3:2 that they should marry only one wife; think that same Paul will see someone who is married to more than one wife doing the work of a family man incredibly well, and also works in the vineyard and does the job even better than the so-called singles or 1 wife-men, do you think that same Paul will object to such a man holding the position of a bishop? You think Paul cares about anything else but the work of god? was he not the one who, when he was told he is not one of the original disciple of Jesus hence cannot be regarded as an apostle, told them that but he works the hardest among all the apostles and by so doing, he became an apostle ny the grace of god? 1 Cor 15:10.

Eyinju112:

People have been taking two or more wives since the early Christian’s that 1 Timothy is a reminder that God doesn’t want or support two wives

No, the reason Paul said that is not to condemn polygamy. How do I know this, I know this when I read 1 Cor 7: 32. It says: "I would like you to be free from worry. An unmarried man concerns himself with the Lord's work, because he is trying to please the Lord. 33 But a married man concerns himself with worldly matters, because he wants to please his wife; 34 and so he is pulled in two directions. An unmarried woman or a virgin concerns herself with the Lord's work, because she wants to be dedicated both in body and spirit; but a married woman concerns herself with worldly matters, because she wants to please her husband.

This is why he told Timothy that a bishop should have only one wife. He did not do that because he thinks polygamy is anti god.

phemmyfour:
He also gave Isrelites Kings, that wasn't his original plan. These are referred to as PERMISSIBLE will


1st Sam 8
They said to him, "You are old, and your sons do not walk in your ways; now appoint a king to lead [1] us, such as all the other nations have."
6
But when they said, "Give us a king to lead us," this displeased Samuel; so he prayed to the LORD.
7
And the LORD told him: "Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me as their king

Him giving David his wives is not in the same sense he gave them kings.

The man is the figure of God in a christian marriage. He can have more than one wife since God can have more than one individual as his bride. You, @Phemmyfour, are God's wife, if you are a born-again, and Oyedepo, Adeboye, etc, are also God's brides, if they are born-agains. Your describes himself as the husband of two wives. In Jeremiah 31: 31-32, it says He is the husband of Samaria and Judah. Hoe about that?
So, you can now see and agree that God did not give David his wives the same way he gave them kings.

I understand we are all ignorant with most of the things that exist so, I can forgive your ignorance on this issue and using an example that has nothing to do with the topic.

Padipadi:

Mtcheweeewwwwwwwwewweeeeeewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww!
So I v been talking to a child.
May your phone spoil for wasting my time.

You know nothing about human interpersonal relationship

luminouz:
@ Eyinju112

You be JW? You should told me all that to forestall this unnecessary shalaye na. I never try to debate anything with JWs...it's a futile task.

God bless you sister and have a nice week.

I was about to say that too.

Eyinju112:

I’m not under the mosaic law, the Israelites were. Jesus has come to redeem me, I am his follower. So quote me verses starting from mattew to revelation where God supports two wives

What has mosaic law got to do with any of this?

And you all make a very big mistake with the whole idea of ''it is in the okd testament, so it does not apply to you'', without even asking how and when yoh should put on that thinking cap.


And yes, there is a place in the New testament where it is indicated that among the christians during the time of the apostles, there were those who had more than on wife.

1 Timothy 3 vs 2-5, Paul said a bishop shall be the husband of one wife. This goes to show that there were people among them who were married to more than one wife. and there is also nothing in the entire bible that shows that Paul was showing disapproval of polygamy in that passage.

phemmyfour:
He also allow them to divorce. God called it permissible WILL. He overlooked their weaknesses and that is why today's Christians shouldn't use David or any of the Prophets as a standard. God himself already gave us a standard to follow

He did not 'overlook' polygamy, do not tell lies!

Your bible says all liars are of their father the devil! John 8:44.

If truly he just permitted, why then did he say he GAVE DAVID HIS MASTER'S WIVES... 2Samuel 12:8.

God also described himself as the husband of two wives in Jeremiah chapter 31 vs 31-32. Go have a look!

Eyinju112:


He is God. I am not God. He said fornicators will not enter into his kingdom. Even in law, law doesn’t permit two wives, our Nigerian law says you must divorce one before you can marry the other. So if you like carry cow and dowries to 9 women houses after your legal wife na nonsense you still do. In fact you can be jailed for 5 years if your legally wife press charges against you. God is not in support of two or more wives, in his eyes you’re still fornicating. I’m not forcing you to accept what I’ve said, they are bull shit to you, you can disregard it and don’t mention me hence. T for thanks

Lets look at the facts at least that's what they do in court the same court you just brought up.

2 Samuel 12:8 it says: ''and I gave thee thy master’s house and thy master’s wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things.''

If God considers polygyny a sin, he would not have said of himselves that he is the husband of two women, Judea and Samaria.

he said it here: ''31 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them (Judah and Samaria), saith the Lord''

You can pray to God to give you wisdom that is superior to the one I have displayed here so thay you can show from the merits of your arguements that you are correct and that I and all the others who say God is infact in support of polygyny and also blesses it, are wrong. And you can trust he will asnwer you! Because he said ''when you are confronted (like I am confronting you now), do not worry about what to say, for it will be given to you by the spirit of God...'' Matt 10:19; Mark 13:11

I would like to learn something new!