Anytime I hear people saying ''men are polygamous in nature'' and hence can be excused for sexual unfaithfulness, it makes me wonder if men are created from different sources. Perhaps some from sand, some clayey, loam, silt. I begin to wonder if our biological wiring is different.

I'm sure that is not the case. We may be culturally, mentally, spiritually and socially different, no doubt, and our choices different and individually (different forms), but in no way are we meant to be diverse in kind. Certain groups, faiths or culture may favour polygamy but nature's provision speaks otherwise by differing human needs from wants.

Take for instance, a story in here of a lady who instead of receiving her bride price on her wedding day requested instead for her husband not to marry more wives. The man consented.

Polygamy is a practice. Practicing polygamy is a decision based on one's sexual orientation. It is not a necessary act but a decision based one.

Our forefathers had multiple wives as a way of fulfilling their sociocultural wants (not needs). A single wife can offer all what is needed within her capacity to her husband's satisfaction. A question I've never gotten answer to is "what is the unique need for several wives"? The answer perhaps is nonexistent.

Now, a cheating man derives different sexual appetite right from the point he yields himself to having multiple sexual partners. This makes him sexually vulnerable. Marriage may not solve the problem. Such a case requires divine discipline. Sex we should know goes beyond physical fusion and connection.

I for one believe that men who say such things as initially stated above, are either trying to justify their inherent weakness, or they're suffering from gross ignorance, or they're morally loosed.

Naturally, it is more tolerable for a man to cheat than for a woman due to underlying factors (differing emotional level of connection, DNA shelling and deposition in women, and the ego/jealousy/vengefulness of men). However, this in no way makes men less guilty of cheating.

If a woman should be stoned and hanged for cheating, a man too should be burnt at the stakes for doing same.

To claim that "the male reproductive organ has a mind of its own'' is an encouraging attempt to justify wrongdoing. However responsive or sensitive one's male organ is, it should never overrule the coordination of the brain except that brain is lost and dead. A wise man thinks with his brain and not his brawny penile gland in matters of sex.

Discrimination against erring females does not exempt too from faulty masculinity. To rubbish a particular female age grade on moral grounds does not confer on male's moral superiority. Although reasons for such discrediting may sound logical and may be based on realistic observations, such discriminations are not absolute and realistic truths.

When people by virtue of societal influences applaud baby mama lifestyle and talk of their willingness to tow that part, I think about failed parenthood. Well, their choice. However, I personally only pity the unfortunate and depraved woman who would submit or fall victim to such. Products of such unions would suffer mental and moral bankruptcy.

How come destitutes desire honour, and why do pigs seek after goodly pearls. Thistles do not bear thorns of briers. In the same vain, an unfaithful man should not seek after a woman of virtue. He need first seek change. Only when changed can such hope for the best. A law of nature is the law of attraction. A rule of life is the golden rule. Some may say "after all, a man gets what he seeks". Yes, but only when he has the wherewithal to attract such to himself.

This confusion of the human male species as partly illustrated stems from a superiority contest between the male nature and the complex female nature. For a man to get what is right, he has to do what is right. A man should live his life the way it ought to be lived. A proactive and not a reactive life. The failure to know this truth is why many men ere.

You just pointed out our only confusion....."WOMEN".

I agree completely.
Polygamy is nothing more than a sexual orientation. It is mandotory or the resultant of a gene in the male's chromosome.
I'm shocked tho that your wrote an epistle to address the issue... Good work!
It wouldn't change anything.
The lies men tell are here to stay.

This polygamy of a stuff is a cliche excuse used also to justify cheating.
You know the whole, "It's in our genetic makeup... Deal with it!"

donbachi:
You just pointed out our only confusion....."WOMEN".

Smiles. Well, you said so and you're not far from the truth. But on a lighter note. We men should be responsible for our actions and inactions.

Women always blaming men for not having the balls to do what men do


Recycled crap

Blu03:


I agree completely.
Polygamy is nothing more than a sexual orientation. It is mandotory or the resultant of a gene in the male's chromosome.
I'm shocked tho that your wrote an epistle to address the issue... Good work!
It wouldn't change anything.
The lies men tell are here to stay.

This polygamy of a stuff is a cliche excuse used also to justify cheating.
You know the whole, "It's in our genetic makeup... Deal with it!"

Thanks for the cintribution. Never mind the epistle though. It was intended to give weight to my assertions and make it sort of detailed for emphasy sake.

lilmax:
Women always blaming men for not having the balls to do what men do


Recycled crap

you can counter the op's writeup with facts instead of throwing a tantrum...

lilmax:
Women always blaming men for not having the balls to do what men do


Recycled crap

Smiles. Honestly do you really think it's about not having balls?! Not at all.
It's about taking responsibility and doing what's right by both genders

Op you cannot understand why men are polygamous or cheat because you're not a man.

It is a primordial need for a man's key to open as many padlocks as he can.

ValCon888:
Op you cannot understand why men are polygamous or cheat because you're not a man.

It is a primordial need for a man's key to open as many padlocks as he can.

Just because it's a need doesn't mean he has to satisfy it. Some men choose the celibate lifestyle cause they understand the mantle of leadership they carry on their head. They know and are disciplined enough to understand that sex is not a prerequisite for a fulfilled life.

Any man that has absolute control of his penis is on his way to greatness and a fulfilled life. That man is disciplined and is a rare gem.

Sixfeetbelle:


Just because it's a need doesn't mean he has to satisfy it. Some men choose the celibate lifestyle cause they understand the mantle of leadership they carry on their head. They know and are disciplined enough to understand that sex is not a prerequisite for a fulfilled life.

Any man that has absolute control of his penis is on his way to greatness and a fulfilled life. That man is disciplined and is a rare gem.

Such men women cheat on. Such men loose their wives to randy playboys! So shut the hell up!

Men are polygamous by nature. Never subscribed to that excuse but it is not entirely untrue. Women are born manipulators. They weaponise the very benefits of marrying them.

There was a thread a while ago about a man whose wife had refused to have sex or get intimate with for 3 years. She turned him into a flat mate.

It would take a second wife to rescue him from blue balls. Or should he rape his own wife? Of course not. So, a side chick is necessary.

Sixfeetbelle:


Just because it's a need doesn't mean he has to satisfy it. Some men choose the celibate lifestyle cause they understand the mantle of leadership they carry on their head. They know and are disciplined enough to understand that sex is not a prerequisite for a fulfilled life.

Any man that has absolute control of his penis is on his way to greatness and a fulfilled life. That man is disciplined and is a rare gem.

You can still carry the mantle of leadership, become great, and still cheat.
If you think it's a lie ask Jeff Bezos.

Sixfeetbelle:


Just because it's a need doesn't mean he has to satisfy it. Some men choose the celibate lifestyle cause they understand the mantle of leadership they carry on their head. They know and are disciplined enough to understand that sex is not a prerequisite for a fulfilled life.

Any man that has absolute control of his penis is on his way to greatness and a fulfilled life. That man is disciplined and is a rare gem.

I know a man who is remembered everyday the sun comes out and who has thirteen wives.

So stop deceiving yourselves about polygamy, there is nothing left after the truth but lies!!!!

ValCon888:

You can still carry the mantle of leadership, become great, and still cheat.
If you think it's a lie ask Jeff Bezos.

Does he have a fulfilled life?

ValCon888:
Op you cannot understand why men are polygamous or cheat because you're not a man.

It is a primordial need for a man's key to open as many padlocks as he can.

ValCon88, how's it man's primordial right to go about sharing his seed based on the analogy you gave. I think you're sexily wrong. Such act is criminal. I'll explain why.

Firstly, if you're refuting me on traditional or cultural primordialism as a way to justify and abdicate men of sexual robbery; then in the real sense of it, originalism invalidates the claim of primordialism and makes it an erroneous belief under moral and scriptural grounds. From inception, it is one man one wife. Nature itself affirms it.

Why does a man sneak around to cheat and try so much to keep it secret from his partner. Conscientiously, he feels it's wrong.

Penultimately, every padlock has it's own specific key. Meant only to unlock it. The ideal of owning a master key is for criminal purpose. Why will a man keep a master key when his padlock has it's own key? It is simply because the man hopes to open somebody else's padlock.

Everyone has the the right to choose and tread his path. We're all free moral agents.

To erroneously believe and rigidly so, that all men cheat or will cheat is a confusion beyond remedy and redemption on the part of whoever holds that believe. It is both a case of crass ignorance of enormous proportion and an overwhelming foolery transcending enigma.

I appeal to the men here to check their ways. A man who cheat is toiling with fire on his bosom. He might escape earthly retribution put will never miss eternal consequences.
Blessings.

snitchbitch:



I know a man who is remembered everyday the sun comes out and who has thirteen wives.

So stop deceiving yourselves about polygamy, there is nothing left after the truth but lies!!!!

Remembered for what exactly?

I have no problem with you believing Polygamy is your right, but do it the acceptable way. Don't claim monogamy and then practice Polygamy. That, there in, is the unfulfillment I was talking about.

Omar09:


Such men women cheat on. Such men loose their wives to randy playboys! So shut the hell up!

Do you have proof of such claim?

Trust me, men who have distinguished themselves through sexual discipline do not spend the rest of their life with people who are morally loose. Even serial cheaters know they've overstayed their welcome in a marriage with a disciplined man. They either change or divorce him, or karma does the job by removing them through randy playboys.

Sixfeetbelle:



Do you have proof of such claim?

Trust me, men who have distinguished themselves through sexual discipline do not spend the rest of their life with people who are morally loose. Even serial cheaters know they've overstayed their welcome in a marriage with a disciplined man. They either change or divorce him, or karma does the job by removing them through randy playboys.

I was such proof. Tbh the right way to put this should have been THE MAN WHO REMAINS SEXUAL DISCIPLINED AVOIDS A LOT OF DISEASES IN ONE'S LIFE. not some having a faithful wife or girlfriend cause that is far fetched in the generation.

You are totally correct at op. But think again


The girls men cheat with, you think he is their only partner? Last time I checked ratio of men to women is 102 is to 100.

Omar09:


I was such proof. Tbh the right way to put this should have been THE MAN WHO REMAINS SEXUAL DISCIPLINED AVOIDS A LOT OF DISEASES IN ONE'S LIFE. not some having a faithful wife or girlfriend cause that is far fetched in the generation.

What kind of stupid logic is that? If a man is faithful to his spouse, he will definitely has a faithful spouse.
Please, who said so?

HolyTrinity:


ValCon88, how's it man's primordial right to go about sharing his seed based on the analogy you gave. I think you're sexily wrong. Such act is criminal. I'll explain why.

Firstly, if you're refuting me on traditional or cultural primordialism as a way to justify and abdicate men of sexual robbery; then in the real sense of it, originalism invalidates the claim of primordialism and makes it an erroneous belief under moral and scriptural grounds. From inception, it is one man one wife. Nature itself affirms it.

Why does a man sneak around to cheat and try so much to keep it secret from his partner. Conscientiously, he feels it's wrong.

Penultimately, every padlock has it's own specific key. Meant only to unlock it. The ideal of owning a master key is for criminal purpose. Why will a man keep a master key when his padlock has it's own key? It is simply because the man hopes to open somebody else's padlock.

Everyone has the the right to choose and tread his path. We're all free moral agents.

To erroneously believe and rigidly so, that all men cheat or will cheat is a confusion beyond remedy and redemption on the part of whoever holds that believe. It is both a case of crass ignorance of enormous proportion and an overwhelming foolery transcending enigma.

I appeal to the men here to check their ways. A man who cheat is toiling with fire on his bosom. He might escape earthly retribution put will never miss eternal consequences.
Blessings.

I'm sorry, you said what? Cheat or marriage? Do you mean a man who marries a second wife will never escape eternal consequence?

Blackmiserable:


I'm sorry, you said what? Cheat or marriage? Do you mean a man who marries a second wife will never escape eternal consequence?

In discussing sensitive issues as this, one ought not to sound overly religious due to our differing faiths and beliefs. However, on the grounds of the christian Faith (by virtue of new testament doctrines), HE (any man who does) WILL NOT ESCAPE.

Not everyone will receive this. No, not everyone. We've got to make our choice. We decide our choices and our choices define us.

Johnjnr:
You are totally correct at op. But think again


The girls men cheat with, you think he is their only partner? Last time I checked ratio of men to women is 102 is to 100.

This your question isn't one-sided. The cheating women have several partners. So also the cheating men.
Forget about the ratio stuff. Even female animals in the jungle outnumber their male counterpart and they all sexualize with whatever male can claim territorial authority over them. I don't need to begin to go into why women cheat. I would simply summarily say that they do because men also do. simple.

HolyTrinity:


In discussing sensitive issues as this, one ought not to sound overly religious due to our differing faiths and beliefs. However, on the grounds of the christian Faith (by virtue of new testament doctrines), HE (any man who does) WILL NOT ESCAPE.

Not everyone will receive this. No, not everyone. We've got to make our choice. We decide our choices and our choices define us.

Okay, lol, sister, I like how you assume from my opinion. I respect your opinion about this though. It's one thing to say that polygamy is wrong and another to say that God's word condemns it. They are two different things. Saying that a polygamous man will not escape divine retribution isn't just a barefaced lie but extremely dishonest. Could you kindly quote any New Testament passage that prohibits polygamy? I am honestly curious. Thank you.

Blackmiserable:

Smiles. Glad you don't know my identity. Now, to your question, let's have a few minutes of searching the scriptures.

Logically, Polygamy is not mentioned per say in scripture just like "smoking, pornography, etc" are not categorically stated in scriptures as sin. But you and I know some things not mentioned in the bible are wrong. As man evolves, sin evolves with man.

See, Genesis 2:24 ''Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife (not wives): and they shall be one flesh.

This command laid the foundation for marital relationships.

Leviticus 21:13 "And he shall take a wife (note: a wife) in her virginity...but he shall take a virgin of his own people to wife.

No hint of plurality. "a wife'' (Monogamy). Anywhere you see the bible mentioning WIVES, it is with respect to the multiple possessors of the women. For instance, ''the sons of God took them wives''.

Take note of the key words WIFE
Proverbs 5:18 ''Let thy fountain be blessed: and rejoice with the WIFE of thy youth.
Proverbs 6:29 So he that goeth in to his neighbour's WIFE; whosoever toucheth her shall not be innocent.
Proverbs 18:22 ''Whoso findeth A WIFE findeth a good thing, and obtaineth favour of the LORD.
Ecclesiastes 9:9 ''Live joyfully with the WIFE whom thou lovest all the days of the life of thy vanity, which he hath given thee under the sun, all the days of thy vanity: for that is thy portion in this life,...
Jeremiah 3:1 ''They say, If a man put away his WIFE, and she go from him, and become another man's, shall he return unto her again? shall not that land be greatly polluted?...

The above is also a strong indication against divorce which God also frowns against. Well, this is a matter for another day.

Malachi 2:14 ''...Bcause the LORD hath been witness between thee and the WIFE of thy youth, against whom thou hast dealt treacherously: yet is she thy companion, and the WIFE of thy covenant.

The above gives a more solid and specific claim to monogamy being the standard for marriage.

Malachi 2:15 "And did not he make one? Yet had he the residue of the spirit. And wherefore one? That he might seek a godly seed. Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let none deal treacherously against the WIFE of his youth.

With the above, a strong credence is given to monogamy.

Matthew 5:32 "But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his WIFE, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

Jesus gave no indication of anything outside monogamous marriage. The express focus is WIFE. In fact, the below verse says it all.

Matthew 19:5 ''And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his WIFE: and they twain shall be one flesh.
Mark 10:7 ''For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his WIFE.

1 Corinthians 7:2 "Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his OWN WIFE, and let every woman have her own HUSBAND.

1 Corinthians 7:4 "The WIFE hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the WIFE.

(how many women are to hold authority over the man's body?)

1 Corinthians 7:10-11 "And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the WIFE depart from her husband: But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his WIFE.

1 Corinthians 7:27 "Art thou bound unto a WIFE? seek not to be loosed...

1 Corinthians 7:39 "The WIFE is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord.

A woman for a man.

Ephesians 5:33 ''Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his WIFE (not wives. one man one wife) even as himself; and the WIFE see that she reverence her husband.

1 Timothy 3:2 ''A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one WIFE, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach

1 Timothy 3:12 "Let the deacons be the husbands of one WIFE, ruling their children and their own houses well.

Are only the bishops and deacons commanded to have one wife alone. Not at all. See below;

Titus 1:6 "If any be blameless, the husband of ONE WIFE, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly...

The above sums it. No need for much talking. We ere because we know not the Scriptures.

HolyTrinity:


Smiles. Glad you don't know my identity. Now, to your question,

Smiles. Haha! I am more than happy to take you on this one.

HolyTrinity:

Logically, polygamy is not mentioned per say in scripture just like "smoking, pornography, etc" are not categorically stated in scriptures as sin. But you and I know some things not mentioned in the bible are wrong. As man evolves, sin evolves with man.

I have to make bold the word "logic" because some sanctimonious ones are notorious for shoving their beliefs on others by holding onto 2 Tim 3 : 16 (All scriptures is inspired and...) by saying "I know you wouldn't believe me. It's not your fault. You need the Holy Spirit to interpret...". So since we want to use common sense and still be very, very true to God and scriptures, I think we are good to go then, haha.

Okay, you said polygamy isn't mentioned in scriptures. No! Old covenant is part of scriptures bro. I mean that is not entirely true. Unlike smoking, pornography, and other vices, polygamy didn't evolve with time. The old dispensation talks about marrying more than one wife. In fact, it assumes it as normal. I am not going to quote copious texts here but here's one.

Deuteronomy 21:15 “Suppose a man has two wives, but he loves one and not the other…."


If this not polygamy then I wonder what it is. The great law giver who saw God face to face and whom scriptures likens to no other man, Moses, had two wives. Many righteous men were polygamous.

If the Bible didn't mention a "vice" as old as man, don't you see how corruptible and fallible scriptures is? Like, a "sin" as old as man getting overlooked in the Pentateuch? Never! People were adulterous and God kept quiet about it? It should have been a part of the ten commandments bro.

HolyTrinity:


See, Genesis 2:24 ''Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife (not wives): and they shall be one flesh.

This command laid the foundation for marital relationships.

How does divine will prohibit polygamy? And how does scriptural silence, too, butress your arguement? I honestly don't get it. God could have created ten men and one women or vice versa. He could have created two men to reproduce and multiply if he so wants, so how does this forbid polygamy? It's like saying since we believe in divine providence, bearing in mind that I was born and raised to black parents in Nigeria, it is a sin if I seek greener pastures in a white man's country. After all, if God so desires, I'd be born there, or it becomes a sin NOT to sleep at night since God created the lesser light (night, in particular) to refresh man's body (sleep is meant to refresh man). But hold on for a minute, is this even a command? Is Genesis one of the instructional books? Do we, the adherents, receive the does and don'ts there? My point is we cannot use creation account story to conjecture divine commands. Get it? They are two different things. By the same arguments and following the same passage, some have followed your train of thought that it is a sin not to marry. I have met them bro. They claim that the quoted makes no exceptions: a man, all men, after all. No! Divine creation account is not the same as how God wants his creatures to act. He has moral codes for that.

HolyTrinity:

Leviticus 21:13 "And he shall take a wife (note: a wife) in her virginity...but he shall take a virgin of his own people to wife.

This is specifically a priestly instruction and priests follow a higher code of conduct than the people, so you cannot argue that the Old Testament mandates people to follow a priest code of conduct since only the Levi are priests, except you're arguing for Nazirites.

And sadly, this passage doesn't even talk about polygamy or forbid it. In fact, one would assume that due to God's high demands on priest and the high priest, he should forbid them from marrying more than one wife, but that's not the case at all. In fact, with regards marriage, a high priest is required to marry only a virgin from his clan, just as you quoted. BUT NOTHING OF ADDING MORE VIRGIN WIVES.

HolyTrinity:

No hint of plurality. "a wife'' (Monogamy). Anywhere you see the bible mentioning WIVES, it is with respect to the multiple possessors of the women. For instance, ''the sons of God took them wives''.
Take note of the key words WIFE
Proverbs 5:18 ''Let thy fountain be blessed: and rejoice with the WIFE of thy youth.
Proverbs 6:29 So he that goeth in to his neighbour's WIFE; whosoever toucheth her shall not be innocent.
Proverbs 18:22 ''Whoso findeth A WIFE findeth a good thing, and obtaineth favour of the LORD.
Ecclesiastes 9:9 ''Live joyfully with the WIFE whom thou lovest all the days of the life of thy vanity, which he hath given thee under the sun, all the days of thy vanity: for that is thy portion in this life,...

You quoted Proverbs, Eccle, and yet, the author has more than one wife. Why should we follow people who don't practice what they preach? Does it make sense? If Solomon is asking us to marry only one wife and he married more than one, I'd rip the pages of the bible, wouldn't you do that too? But no, Solomon is not being hypocritical. He could have said "wives" too bro. We shouldn't carve out commands from human preferences. Mere examples. By that logic, we run into tons of problem.

HolyTrinity:

Jeremiah 3:1 ''They say, If a man put away his WIFE, and she go from him, and become another man's, shall he return unto her again? shall not that land be greatly polluted?...
The above is also a strong indication against divorce which God also frowns against. Well, this is a matter for another day.
Malachi 2:14 ''...Bcause the LORD hath been witness between thee and the WIFE of thy youth, against whom thou hast dealt treacherously: yet is she thy companion, and the WIFE of thy covenant.
The above gives a more solid and specific claim to monogamy being the standard for marriage.
Malachi 2:15 "And did not he make one? Yet had he the residue of the spirit. And wherefore one? That he might seek a godly seed. Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let none deal treacherously against the WIFE of his youth.
With the above, a strong credence is given to monogamy.

There is no contention here as I am strongly anti-divorce myself. God's word forbids it. Very strongly. Now let me back off a little bit because of Deu 24. Moses permitted divorce (as spoken by Christ) because if you read scriptures very well, some instructions in the Mosaic laws weren't direct commands of God. One of the strongest litmus to know God's command is when Moses starts with "Then the Lord said to me..." other than that, it could just be the wise counsel of a holy man which should be followed nonetheless, until another divine revelation surfaces. For instance, Moses himself admits "Deuteronomy 24:22 …That is why I am giving you this command." If you search "that is why" from the NLT, you would see atleast 2 instances where Holy Moses differentiates divine commands from his. We can always trust Moses so we should obey him too, but not surprising Christ had to call him out for his fallibility. I am saying that because I know where you chief arguement is heading.

HolyTrinity:


Matthew 5:32 "But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his WIFE, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

For the love of God, answer me. Can we paraphrase Matt 5:32 as, Whosoever shall marry another wife saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery. Lol. Is that correct, lol? If he's adding wives, can we call her an adulterer?

HolyTrinity:


Jesus gave no indication of anything outside monogamous marriage.

The express focus is WIFE. In fact, the below verse says it all.

Matthew 19:5 ''And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his WIFE: and they twain shall be one flesh.
Mark 10:7 ''For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his WIFE.

Jesus didn't talk about whether a man could marry more than one wife, sir. In no place did he. And no one asked him to explain his stance on that, either. J You like many people I know seem to argue for silence, if the Bible only talk about wife, then wives is not permitted. God will not be silent on this "vice" that is as old as man if he did not permit it.

In Matt 19, someone asked Christ if a man should marry more than one wife? For goodness sake, no. So all you can ever come out with, like other passages is a conjecture. They are taking about rice and you're taking about beans lol. Christ gave a perfect response to their question, as pertains to divine will as thundered from the lips of the prophets, so it was a perfect response. One, Holytrinity is like Oh Christ, did you just say a man cannot marry another wife because God made them one? Christ: Nope! That isn't what I was asked. If you want to know about that Holytrinity, you may ask.

HolyTrinity:
1 Corinthians 7:2 "Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his OWN WIFE, and let every woman have her own HUSBAND.

1 Corinthians 7:4 "The WIFE hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the WIFE.

(how many women are to hold authority over the man's body?)

1 Corinthians 7:10-11 "And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the WIFE depart from her husband: But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his WIFE.

1 Corinthians 7:27 "Art thou bound unto a WIFE? seek not to be loosed...

1 Corinthians 7:39 "The WIFE is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord.

A woman for a man.

Ephesians 5:33 ''Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his WIFE (not wives. one man one wife) even as himself; and the WIFE see that she reverence her husband.

1 Timothy 3:2 ''A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one WIFE, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach

1 Timothy 3:12 "Let the deacons be the husbands of one WIFE, ruling their children and their own houses well.

Are only the bishops and deacons commanded to have one wife alone. Not at all. See below;

Titus 1:6 "If any be blameless, the husband of ONE WIFE, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly...

The above sums it. No need for much talking. We ere because we know not the Scriptures.

I have written to much bro. I don tire. People in the church were polygamous that is why Paul laid a great moral code on church leaders otherwise this instruction would not make sense. If monogamy was the norm, why tell priest as a matter of command? I don't want to argue for translation sake but modern translations translated it differently. I don't know which is correct though, but it still doesn't forbid it, just like all Israel weren't command to abstain from wine except the Nazirites.

Every woman deserves to get married no matter her condition. How do you expect a marriage to work if the couples are not permitted to have sex at specific time, like a woman menstruating one week in four or divorcees or woman who just gave birth and require atleast 2 months to recover? Sure, self control is key, but the all knowing God didn't forbid it for his own good reasons. I am out.

Omar09:


I was such proof. Tbh the right way to put this should have been THE MAN WHO REMAINS SEXUAL DISCIPLINED AVOIDS A LOT OF DISEASES IN ONE'S LIFE. not some having a faithful wife or girlfriend cause that is far fetched in the generation.

I agree with what you said, most especially the the bold.

Sexual discipline

Blackmiserable:

I had to take my time to go through your reply. Good you want to get to the root of this. But I simply hope it's with a open mind, because there's nothing I can do to convince you if your heart is set towards what you want to believe. Already, the point from which you're basing your argument has been deciphered. It is not spiritual but for personal contentment.

Originally, the essence of this post is not to debate on polygamy. it was to reveal the deceitful nature of the male species when it comes to pursuing personal satisfaction in relationships. But since you've drawn me into this, I'll do my best hopefully to see how I can point out a few things for the sake of those viewing this thread.

You twisted a whole lot of things and I initially saw it as a daunting task to begin to convince you. This was the reason I didn't reply your post the moment I saw it. Just as you did, I'm going to pick out your statements one by one and try as much as I can by the God's grace to point out some things. I don't know all, so I'm relying on divine inspiration.

Well, you would realize that I gave so many verses in response to your request asking me to give at least a verse where polygamy is kicked against in the Bible. Also note that I highlighted some key words WIFE as a way of buttressing my point on why polygamy is not the Christian way and not also the natural order. Again, you would discover I didn't give in-depth explanation of those verses since I felt they would be sufficient enough to convince and hopefully serve as an answer to your request on scriptural texts annulling polygamy.

I appreciate the fact that you took out my references bit by bit and gave your view, but you seem to have ignored portions that are very vital and essential to this issue of polygamy, or you altogether misinterpreted these texts.

Now back to the significance of the references I gave; of all of them I wonder why you didn't really give greater consideration to Titus 1:6, which says;
''IF ANY (this 'any' is used as a generalization without specifying a group or person. Contextually, the word is used as a means of indirect reference to any of the all without specification) BE BLAMELESS, the HUSBAND OF ONE WIFE,...''

How else do I explain this husband of one wife. it's clearly stated. Endeavor to check out the verse and the entire text, you would realize this first verse was directed to no particular group but to the generality. The succeeding verses where then given to priests and bishops and so on.

To clarify something here. The above text was a prerequisite for the church then particularly those considering leadership. It's like a condition that must be met. If it must be met, it's more or less like a command. Not just a command to specific people but to any who'd be a part of them. More will still be said on this.

To analyse what you said about this text being laws made for priests and hence should not determine other men's conduct. Think about this. Priestly laws are laws to guide priestly conduct. However, biblical laws applies to all men irrespective of spiritual positions. If you're obedient to the Bible, you're reckoned as a priest of God.

Sriptures tell us ''Ye are gods". Again it says (for anyone who claims to know God) "Ye are a royal priesthood. A holy nation. A peculiar people''. So my brother, all men are reckoned as priests and servants of God. Bible says so. If you ask where, I won't mind sourcing it out for you. So, what applies to your pastor applies to you. No double standards with God.

Ordained priests may have set rules guiding them by virtue of their spiritual leadership. These set rules are however made to guide their conduct. They may not be precepts set by God but by the authorities under which they are. Churches have standards for their pastors by level of their spiritual underatanding and this is only meant to guide their conducts and operations not their morality. That was why Paul said, "All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not".

Typing...

[quote author=Blackmiserable post=87195098]
Okay, you said polygamy isn't mentioned in scriptures.

Bro, you're not getting my point. I said it is not categorically stated in scriptures. Besides, the bone of contention is if it is supported in scriptures. The reference you gave, Deut 21:15 “Suppose a man has two wives, but he loves one and not the other…." is a case for settling and resolving marital disputes btw polygamous couples and that verse does not in anyway support it. In fact, this text outlines the flaws inherent in polygamy such as mutual/sexual partiality, contentions and envy/jealousy. Take for instance Jacob. He had two wives, Leah and Rachel. He love the latter more than the former. What was the end result? I need not tell you. Now, the text you gave was purposely given to address such issue as that. This should make one to clearly see what's wrong in polygamy.

Although the people of old practiced polygamy, it was not God's original ideal. Check out Matt 19:8 which says;
"...Moses because of the hardness of your hearts (suffered you to put away your wives): but in the beginning it was not so''. Understand here that God permitted some things (permissive will) for people of that time. Divorce is not allowed but God permitted them to because of their innate hardness and confusion. It will also not be out of place to say polygamous practices were allowed for them, not because it is right or perfect but because they wanted it. Remember God allows men to make choices they deem best for themselves which may be wrong.

The text I quoted is not to digress the issue from polygamy to divorce. Get my point. The people of that time where hardened with lesser knowledge of God. Just like then, men of this times are still hardened but with greater knowledge of God. The mosaic law of the old testament was given to suit the people of that dispensation. Christ came to set better laws, the Apostolic laws.


[If this not polygamy then I wonder what it is]

It is indeed polygamy but give a place in scripture where polygamy is supported not where it occurred. Support it scripturally.

[The great law giver who saw God face to face and whom scriptures likens to no other man, Moses, had two wives. Many righteous men were polygamous]

You're ruthlessly wrong. Moses had no two wives. He married an Ethiopian. I would appreciate if you mention the supposed righteous men who had multiple wives. The only honorable mentions you might have would be David, Solomon or Jacob. But what was the end result: Solomon's wives mislead him. The children of David's wives were in constant contention. Jacob's wives and sons envied each other. So, what good is there in polygamy. Samson suffered, he wasn't even polygamous but sexually not disciplined. So who're the righteous men who kept wives. Abraham? Job? Elijah? Noah? Christ disciples? Mention them pls.

[If the Bible didn't mention a "vice" as old as man, don't you see how corruptible and fallible scriptures is?...People were adulterous and God kept quiet about it? It should have been a part of the ten commandments bro]

How best can you explain "Thou shall not covet thy neighbor's wife...". God took Adam's one rib to make Eve. It is one man one woman. No more or less. Do you believe in the doctrine of marital restitution?

[How does divine will prohibit polygamy? And how does scriptural silence, too, butress your arguement? I honestly don't get it]

God is not the author of confusion OK! He tells you what you should know and doesn't bother you with what you should not. Check John 21:25 and get a clue as to why God will not bother us with everything but those things important for us. Can you lay hand on any Bible text that directly or indirectly suggests polygamy? Why will God be stressing out on polygamy when he already laid the path to follow in marriage.

[God could have created ten men and one women or vice versa. He could have created two men to reproduce and multiply if he so wants, so how does this forbid polygamy?]

Since God didn't do it this way based on your assumptions what does it tell you? Look, no need trying to think out anything here. I don't know how best to make you understand, but I trust God to.

[...By the same arguments and following the same passage, some have followed your train of thought that it is a sin not to marry]

Wrong for you to say they follow my train of thought. I'm basing strictly my arguments on scriptures. The reason people misinterpret the bible is to use it to justify their actions. I hope that's not the case with you! You should know people no longer study the scriptures to become approved. hence, the reason for all these confusions. Lemme ask you, is the Bible against marriage? Does it suggestively support polygamy?

Note: all scriptures (Old/New) is given by inspiration for reprove, edification and admonition.

[This is specifically a priestly instruction and priests follow a higher code of conduct than the people, so you cannot argue that the Old Testament mandate...]

I think I've already spoken on this enough from my first reply, notwithstanding, let's jettison unnecessary juxtaposition and legalism and focus on biblical truths. The laws given in those texts binds all.

[You quoted Proverbs, Eccle, and yet, the author has more than one wife]

So, Christ that didn't have a wife why don't you believe His words instead. How about Apostle Paul?

Solomon said on realization "vanity upon vanity. All is vanity. After all he did by having so much women and wealth to please himself, he found out they where all vexation of spirit. We're to learn from such men rather than copy them.

[For the love of God, answer me. Can we paraphrase Matt 5:32 as, Whosoever shall marry another wife saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery...if he's adding wives, can we call her an adulterer]

What do you think? OK, he's greedy.

[Jesus didn't talk about whether a man could marry more than one wife, sir...God will not be silent on this "vice" that is as old as man if he did not permit it]

Search scriptures well.

Jesus only came to tell us what we ought to know. Did you say he didn't say anything on marriage? Search the bible well. Read again Mark 10: 5-9. Pls, read it o.

Naturally, man is a curious being and this has been our greatest undoing. Have you ever wondered why God didn't tell Adam what will happen if he ate from the forbidden tree but only commanded him not to eat? Yes, Christ may not have emphasized on polygamy but by talking only about monogamy should be enough to let us know God's mind.

Remember at first in the old testament, adultery was prohibited but not lusting. But when Christ came he criminalized lusting (looking at a woman with lustful tendencies). This should make you understand that God only let us know what we should know. He doesn't bother us with what we shouldn't know.

[In Matt 19, someone asked Christ if a man should marry more than one wife?...]

You really made me laugh in tongues. Funny you. From all what you said there, I need not talk much. Just open the eyes of your heart and mind.

[I have written to much bro...]

At this point, I commend your perseverance, but it is wrongly channelled. Just give a scriptural backing for polygamy and we will all be good.

[Every woman deserves to get married no matter her condition. How do you expect a marriage to work if the couples are not permitted to have sex at specific time, like a woman menstruating one week in four or divorcees or woman who just gave birth and require atleast 2 months to recover? Sure, self control is key, but the all knowing God didn't forbid it for his own good reasons. I am out]

Wonderful. Now I know. You see why I said your arguments supports for personal gains for polygamous men. So, you as a man cannot wait for and stand by your wife at a time when she can't express her marital duty to you? Where's the place of discipline? Your last paragraph sums it all up. No subtle excuses.

Note: by defending polygamy, do you know you're also defending polyandry by extension. What is good for Adam is good for Eve. After all, both Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit.