Laura in VA Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 I have 4 chidren and love my dh. We have lived together since we were married. We hold a Biblical view of marriage: one man and one wife no porn (hard, soft, or any other kind) Please note that I am not asking for anyone to agree or disagree with me. I'm just sharing. ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michelle My Bell Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 Interesting... Wow that is so Interesting. Thanks so much for sharing. That is so different nowadays. [sarcasm] :DMichelle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desert Rat Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 I guess it takes all kinds, Laura! Big :o Just teasing! LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravin Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 Good for you! :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiana Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 I have 4 chidren and love my dh. We have lived together since we were married. We hold a Biblical view of marriage: one man and one wife no porn (hard, soft, or any other kind) Please note that I am not asking for anyone to agree or disagree with me. I'm just sharing. ;) Some people just live those weird, weird livestyles ...sigh ... Just kidding :):):):) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michelle in MO Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 I have 4 chidren and love my dh. We have lived together since we were married. We hold a Biblical view of marriage: one man and one wife no porn (hard, soft, or any other kind) Please note that I am not asking for anyone to agree or disagree with me. I'm just sharing. ;) Good for you, Laura! A hearty nod of approval from my corner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MomOfOneFunOne Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 I have often said that I could really use a wife but . . . strictly Biblical world view here, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hillary in KS Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Good job, Laura! It's encouraging to hear from someone so bravely living a lifestyle out of the cultural mainstream! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I talk to the trees Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Laura, I'm so glad you decided to share this with us! It's so refreshing to see someone who isn't afraid to stand up for what they believe! (And, not that you asked for approval or agreement, but ITA with you!) -Robin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stripe Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 ha. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LibraryLover Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 (edited) . Edited July 6, 2009 by LibraryLover Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
katilac Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 um . . . duly noted?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renee in NC Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 And I mean no offense to anyone. But I would love a second dh and a second dw. No snark at all, and I have them picked out. I wish I were brave enough. It would be nice. I want a wife. Someone to cook, clean, take care of the dc....but she can't get within 10 feet of my dh!:lol: Oh yeah, someone to help homeschool, too! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LibraryLover Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 um . . . duly noted?? Have anyone in mind for me? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LibraryLover Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 (edited) . Edited July 6, 2009 by LibraryLover Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
katilac Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Have anyone in mind for me? ha, no! that was meant in response to the OP. I have now caught up on my reading, ;), and understand this thread. Funny thing is, I skipped right past the first thread until this one alerted me that sumpin' was going on! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MamaT Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 I have 4 chidren and love my dh. We have lived together since we were married. We hold a Biblical view of marriage: one man and one wife no porn (hard, soft, or any other kind) Please note that I am not asking for anyone to agree or disagree with me. I'm just sharing. ;) Me too, except 6 dc. I didn't know how normal/boring I was until today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elizabeth Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 (edited) We hold a Biblical view of marriage: one man and one wife Actually considering that when read literally the Bible has conflicting passages regarding polygamy, adultery etc. It might be more accurate to say that one holds one Biblical view of marriage as compared to the others. I am not trying to belittle your beliefs but as a factual matter it seems that there are many passages in the aforementioned text that would seem to contradict or at least call into question the propriety of monogamous marriage as practiced today. If one reads the entire Bible literally and also infallible there are conflicting positions taken on this matter. Fortunately I do not read the Bible as merely a literal or historical document . Thus it is not intellectually impossible for me to reconcile what might appear to be clearly conflicting and contradictory messages. Of course, I understand you are culling from Genesis and Corinthians among others for your comment I merely wish to point out that there are other passages that conflict with these. I personally find the whole concept of polygamy to be a mess legally and would hate to have to unravel the quagmire it means for custody issues, health insurance, property rights and related matters. I am not defending the lifestyle or condemning it just pointing out that the appeal to authority is really ineffective especially when you are using only one set of interpretive tools. Edited July 1, 2009 by elizabeth I cannot type Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AuntieM Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Happy to know I am swimming against the flow of pop culture in good company! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elizabeth Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 bump Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
secular_mom Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 I really don't get the point. You are not sharing any details about your life, there are no updates, and to my knowledge no one here has asked about your marital status. I just don't see the need for a spin-off with such a 'plain' OP. *shrug* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the4Rs Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 The accounts mentioned in the Bible that dealt with polygamy were old testament. And for the record we saw what happened to those families that practiced polygamy (David, Solomon, etc). Those instances of polygamy and what not in the old testament had nothing to do with God ordained love between multiple people but all to do with man's sinful choices. The Bible does not glorify that practice but it pointed out some cultural practices that the people of God sometimes adopted. They sinned. Plain and simple. And we see the realities of those sins (David had Bathsheba's husband killed so he could marry her even though he already had wives- not good, and Solomon had so many wives and concubines they turned his heart away from God- doubly not good) When God created man he made one woman and one man. That is the way it is supposed to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elizabeth Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Matthew 25?? Do you see my point about infallibility and literalism coming together in such a way that this parable if read in such a manner contradicts Genesis? I do appreciate your response. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kate CA Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Matthew 25?? This passage has nothing to do with polygamy. As God was often described as the "husband" of Israel in the Old Testament, as Jesus is described as the bridegroom in the New Testament. This happens over and over. It was a Jewish custom for the groom and his friends to leave his home and go on to the home of the bride. Once there the ceremony would be conducted (often at night). After the ceremony, the wedding party would return to the groom's home for a celebratory banquet. It was the responsibility of each person to be prepared to go with the bridegroom to the banquet. If we are not ready when Christ returns we will not go into the marriage supper with the Son of God. We will be like the virgins without any oil and God will not know us if we are not ready. That is what that passage is about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laura in VA Posted July 1, 2009 Author Share Posted July 1, 2009 Matthew 25?? Do you see my point about infallibility and literalism coming together in such a way that this parable if read in such a manner contradicts Genesis? I do appreciate your response. I suppose you are assuming that the ten virgins belong to the groom? They do not: "As God referred to himself as the “husband†of Israel in the OT (e.g., Isa. 54:4–6), so Jesus pictures himself here as a bridegroom (cf. Matt. 9:14–15). It was the Jewish marriage custom (cf. 1:18) for the groom and his friends to leave his home and proceed to the home of the bride, where the marriage ceremony was conducted, often at night. After this, the entire wedding party returned to the groom's home for a celebratory banquet." Study notes from ESV Study Bible If you want to discuss this topic, I'd recommend beginning another thread. I'm sure you'll get many more responses. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LUV2EDU Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Matthew 25?? Do you see my point about infallibility and literalism coming together in such a way that this parable if read in such a manner contradicts Genesis? I do appreciate your response. You are not reading this correctly.:001_huh: The parable of the five wise and the five foolish virgins continues the emphasis of being prepared for a sudden coming of the Messiah. It has nothing to do with polygamy. Quote: "...the bridegroom stands for Jesus, the delay of the bridegroom stands for the period of time between his two comings, the bridegroom's arrival stands for Jesus' return at the end of the age, the wedding feast stands for his kingdom, and the virgins stand for humanity." http://www.xenos.org/teachings/topical/parables/gary/parables-6.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elaine Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 I have 4 chidren and love my dh. We have lived together since we were married. We hold a Biblical view of marriage: one man and one wife no porn (hard, soft, or any other kind) Please note that I am not asking for anyone to agree or disagree with me. I'm just sharing. ;) :D Count us in, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blueridge Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 I really don't get the point. You are not sharing any details about your life, there are no updates, and to my knowledge no one here has asked about your marital status. I just don't see the need for a spin-off with such a 'plain' OP. *shrug* Do you find your comment necessary? I think it was unkind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Indeed Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 I have 4 children and love my dh. We have lived together since we were married. We hold a Biblical view of marriage: one man and one wife no porn (hard, soft, or any other kind) Please note that I am not asking for anyone to agree or disagree with me. I'm just sharing. ;) You too? I thought I was the only one! :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
katemary63 Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 I have 4 chidren and love my dh. We have lived together since we were married. We hold a Biblical view of marriage: one man and one wife no porn (hard, soft, or any other kind) Please note that I am not asking for anyone to agree or disagree with me. I'm just sharing. ;) :iagree::: Us too! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nakia Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 I have 4 chidren and love my dh. We have lived together since we were married. We hold a Biblical view of marriage: one man and one wife no porn (hard, soft, or any other kind) Please note that I am not asking for anyone to agree or disagree with me. I'm just sharing. ;) Same here, but three children!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remudamom Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 I want a wife. Someone to cook, clean, take care of the dc....but she can't get within 10 feet of my dh!:lol: Oh yeah, someone to help homeschool, too! You can have one of those, they're called maids, housekeepers, cooks tutors and nannies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elizabeth Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 This passage has nothing to do with polygamy. As God was often described as the "husband" of Israel in the Old Testament, as Jesus is described as the bridegroom in the New Testament. This happens over and over [/U] I agree that it is a parable , I read the Bible non -literally for this very reason. You just gave evidence of my point . If you assert that the Bible is to be read literally, as is done so often to justify positions on social issues, and at the same time assert it to be the infallible word of God there is an impossiblity that both propositions are true as it is internally contradictory. So some parts are to be read literally when it says what you wish it to say on a particular issue and other parts are to be read figuratively ???It is not a consistent approach to interpreting scripture but to each his/her own. I was not using that passage as evidence that polygamy was Biblical just to show that fundamentalists read it literally when it suits and figuratively when it does not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amy g. Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Why would you say something like that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HollyinNNV Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Why would you say something like that? Read her other 2 posts. Obviously a TROLL! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hillary in KS Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Why would you say something like that? Troll. She's had 3 posts so far. All unpleasant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mom In Missouri Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 (edited) Went to a lot of trouble to get a new screen name just to vent your personal attack. You've enjoyed an audience...Thank you for sharing. That ignore feature works really well.:iagree: Edited July 1, 2009 by Mom In Missouri Deleted quoted info from a post that was removed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommylawyer Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 I have 4 chidren and love my dh. We have lived together since we were married. We hold a Biblical view of marriage: one man and one wife no porn (hard, soft, or any other kind) Please note that I am not asking for anyone to agree or disagree with me. I'm just sharing. ;) Me, too; me, too - so I'll agree with you! (Although, we won't have 4 kids until the end of this year, but close enough!) Thanks for the post - and the "warning" in the thread title! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcconnellboys Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Thanks! I was beginning to think I'd fallen off the edge.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lionfamily1999 Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Well, I am shocked and appalled! How dare you post such a controversial thread! Really! My word! So forth and so on. :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cricket Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 This passage has nothing to do with polygamy. As God was often described as the "husband" of Israel in the Old Testament, as Jesus is described as the bridegroom in the New Testament. This happens over and over [/U] I agree that it is a parable , I read the Bible non -literally for this very reason. You just gave evidence of my point . If you assert that the Bible is to be read literally, as is done so often to justify positions on social issues, and at the same time assert it to be the infallible word of God there is an impossiblity that both propositions are true as it is internally contradictory. So some parts are to be read literally when it says what you wish it to say on a particular issue and other parts are to be read figuratively ???It is not a consistent approach to interpreting scripture but to each his/her own. I was not using that passage as evidence that polygamy was Biblical just to show that fundamentalists read it literally when it suits and figuratively when it does not. I'm trying to figure out why you think something is "Biblical" because it is mentioned in the Bible. Just because God allows something to happen doesn't mean he condones it and that it is a good thing. I can think of other events in the Bible such as incest, rape, murder, and adultery. I don't think anyone would argue that those are Biblical virtues and yet God allowed those events to occur. :confused: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alison in KY Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Um, what's a troll? Alison Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heather in WI Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Um, what's a troll? Alison http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet) In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alison in KY Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet) In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion. That's just weird. I don't get it, is it people who are sitting back and laughing at the craziness they are causing? Like is this person then not even a homeschooler? I'm just stumped and feeling pretty dumb right now. Alison Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lionfamily1999 Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Alison, think of those people that are rude and/or nasty for no obvious reason, that's a troll. There's plenty irl too :glare: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Bay Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Could someone link the original thread that led to this spin off? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asta Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 I'm trying to figure out why you think something is "Biblical" because it is mentioned in the Bible. Just because God allows something to happen doesn't mean he condones it and that it is a good thing. I can think of other events in the Bible such as incest, rape, murder, and adultery. I don't think anyone would argue that those are Biblical virtues and yet God allowed those events to occur. :confused: What else would it be, Qur'anic? Vedaic? Seriously. Isn't that the definition? a Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LUV2EDU Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 That's just weird. I don't get it, is it people who are sitting back and laughing at the craziness they are causing? Like is this person then not even a homeschooler? I'm just stumped and feeling pretty dumb right now. Alison Some trolls are miserable people. They don't have the guts to express how they feel face to face, so they troll the web looking for forums to devour. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cricket Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 What else would it be, Qur'anic? Vedaic? Seriously. Isn't that the definition? a When someone says an action is Biblical, I assume they mean that the Bible condones it. That is how I've always used the term. Elizabeth seems to be saying that polygamy is Biblical (which I take as meaning the Bible condones it). So I'm just trying to figure out how you get from an act mentioned in the Bible to the Bible condoning that act. Maybe she didn't mean that she thought the Bible presented polygamy as a good thing. :confused: BTW, does anyone know what the meaning of the word 'is' is? ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirtroad Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 (edited) When someone says an action is Biblical, I assume they mean that the Bible condones it. That is how I've always used the term. Elizabeth seems to be saying that polygamy is Biblical (which I take as meaning the Bible condones it). So I'm just trying to figure out how you get from an act mentioned in the Bible to the Bible condoning that act. Maybe she didn't mean that she thought the Bible presented polygamy as a good thing. :confused: BTW, does anyone know what the meaning of the word 'is' is? ;) Yes, just because it is in the Bible doesn't mean it is "of God". Polygamy was/is the result of man's sin or defiance. Another issue was divorce. It was listed in law by Moses b/c people had "hard hearts" and marriages were given a legal way to be dissolved. That doesn't mean God planned divorce - it is painful & can be very destructive. It means that someone wouldn't soften & return the love of their spouse.... divorce was a result. Many other things occur or have rules to help us through the conflicts or troubles... but they aren't GOD's idea or plan... they are our hard hearts, defiance, or big fat messes. Polygamy was primarily the result of these men taking wives from other cultures also. Solomon was perfect example of wives from other cultures. God told them not to do this... but many did it anyway (Esau was another). Then Jacob (the deciever) was tricked into marrying Leah. Poor Leah. He wasn't happy to have been decieved himself (and to the homely older sister) and he still had to have & marry Rachel. Look at that happy family. Then he just had to have 2 concubines to make the wives happy.... think these wives had to drag him kicking and screaming to the young maid's tent... .I doubt it. Look at the mess they continued to make (wive's sinful competiveness & his infidelity). God made the example in for us in the Garden. We goofed it all up. I think that if you do not take the Bible as literal.... you can't really take it at all. It is just a book of stories. NO real relegion or faith. Why? Because we have NO authority or great knowledge to pick & chose which verses we would like to be real and those which are not. If you do not accept the Bible as a literal, then you can't accept Christ as who he professes to be.... remember it might not be accurate. If one verse isn't accurate.... and subject to all's interpretation... then NONE is accurate & subject to all's interpretation. So, you can't believe any of it. (I do not follow this thinking & believe it is literal). I find most people only pick & chose what they want to read & apply. This makes it neat & tidy in our minds. NOT IN our LIVES though. Also the arguement of Monks changing verses as they copied isn't good today b/c so many translations skip the latin & go back to the oldest verses found (in Greek & other languages.... and some date very closely to the time of Christ's life) The most accurate accounts are the ones closest to the event or person. Sorry, to stir the hornets nest! Post from wife of DH and 2 children (really 3.... 1 more due in October). Edited July 1, 2009 by Dirtroad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.