Evidence for God from Science

Pre-marital sex and monogamy are some of the stronger beliefs in Christian culture. For a while on the thread entitled "Sex" the subject of monogamy was brought up. Several passages and topics were discussed, but one passage from Genesis kept being brought up:

(KJV) Genesis 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

This passage was brought up many times, and I'm glad the other members were patient with me stalling on it--it's a subject worthy of detail. Basically, this passage is the strongest argument for monogamy. The reason for this is because it has "cleaving unto his wife." "Cleave" is a translation of the Hebrew word "dabaq" which means to make a permanent alliance with, like soldering two pieces of metal together.

However, there's another word that needs looking into: the word for "wife" in Hebrew is the word "issa". A more accurate translation for issa would be "woman". "Wife" is completely wrong. What does this passage mean? It means that the woman you want to spend your life with will be joined to you forever.

I personally find this passage to be rather clever; notice how it doesn't say "marry", and it doesn't say "sleep with", it simply says "cleave unto", suggesting that love and commitment aren't tied to any legalistic ceremony like marriage (even though most people like the ceremony anyway ), and it doesn't say that once you sleep with someone you're bond to them forever. It makes more sense anyway--Kurt Russell has been with his wife for over a decade, even though they never actually married.

Which brings us to the part about the "one flesh". This website discusses that issue in Bible and Sexuality:

The Hebrew word (dâbaq), translated "cleave" is a verb describing the closeness that should exist between a husband and wife. This describes both physical and emotional closeness. The next phrase "they shall become one flesh" refers to the sexual relationship. To reinforce the idea that Adam and Eve were engaging in a sexual relationship the text says that they "were both naked and were not ashamed."

So the passage does NOT refer to marriage, but a sexual relationship. Now, notice how the "one flesh" passage comes after "cleave", suggesting that having sex in no way indicates who you will cleave to.

Jesus quotes this passage in Mathew, but the subject matter is ONLY in regards to divorce, and whether a man has the right to divorce. To paraphrase, Jesus says "Dude, once you're committed, you're committed."

Conclusion
Genesis never says that the woman we cleave to needs to be your wife in the legal terms that we know it.
Genesis never says we can't have a sexual relationship with someone else before you marry.
Genesis never says that it has to be one man and one woman.

Adam and Eve were one man and one woman. Is this enough to prove that a marriage should only be arranged the same way?



No way man!!

You've got several problems.

First, by your own definition, once you "cleave" with a woman, she is your mate for life. Permanently. By your own definition, YOU ARE BOUND TO THE FIRST PERSON YOU HAVE SEX WITH. I believe that marriage is an oath before God to stay together. You are right, we don't need a formal marriage. But the moment you have sex(provided both are virgins), you are bound to each other. This is further reinforced in Mathew, where it says that "what God put together, let no man pull apart.

Mastermind wrote: First, by your own definition, once you "cleave" with a woman, she is your mate for life. Permanently. By your own definition, YOU ARE BOUND TO THE FIRST PERSON YOU HAVE SEX WITH.

I have no idea where you get that from me. I said that I thought that it was a proper choice of words to say "cleave" as opposed to "sleep with" or "have sex with" because finding your mate for life is not about who you sleep with or your virginity, it's about who you love.

I believe that marriage is an oath before God to stay together.

No disagreement here.

This is further reinforced in Mathew, where it says that "what God put together, let no man pull apart.

Okay maybe we're not on the same level. I've hinted at things that I probably should have been more obvious about, and I'd like to make it more clear: divorce is wrong. I believe that once you decide to marry someone, you're bound with her for life. Which is why I agree whole-heartedly with what Jesus said in Matthew 19:3-9, because that passage was about divorce, the aspects of divorce, the history of divorce, and God's stance on divorce. It never, ever says anything about sex, or about how many wives you can have.

Folks, we have to ask ourselves: Does God control us, or do we control God? Do we believe something so firmly, without any doubt in our mind as to whether we are wrong, that we can't listen to the only message that God gave to us? The Bible is the only record of what God wants us to do. Is it a coincidence that the Bible never directly condemns polygamy, never directly endorses monogamy, and never directly says that sex=marriage?

In order to truly understand what I'm talking about, you need to read what the Bible has to say about divorce. The Bible directly, and bluntly condemns divorce in the Old and the New Testament:

(NIV)
Jeremiah 3
If a man divorces his wife

and she leaves him and marries another man,

should he return to her again?

Would not the land be completely defiled?

Malachi 2:16
"I hate divorce," says the LORD God of Israel, "and I hate a man's covering himself with violence as well as with his garment," says the LORD Almighty.

Matthew 5:31-32
“It has been said, 'Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.' 32But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery. Jesus says basically the exact same thing in Matthew 19:3-9, Luke 16:18, Mark 10:2-12

1 Corinthians 7:10-11
To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. 11But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife.

So here we have seven direct references specifically condemning divorce. No one can argue that God doesn't hate divorce. One can only ask why God wasn't this specific about sex and monogamy. Saying that you can't sleep with anyone but your legal wife is saying A LOT and would deserve A LOT of references. All we are given is, at best, a couple of fortune cookie riddles that may or may not reference monogamy, and the basis for this is based 50% on mistranslation!

God wants us to investigate these issues, and wants us to question:

Acts 17:11
Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.

1 Thessalonians 5:21
Test everything. Hold on to the good.

Let me be more specific as to where I see the contradiction in your statement:

So the passage does NOT refer to marriage, but a sexual relationship. Now, notice how the "one flesh" passage comes after "cleave", suggesting that having sex in no way indicates who you will cleave to.

Genesis 2:24 Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh.

I believe this is the passage you are referring to. From this, it is clear that "they" are the husband and wife, because "they" are the subject of the sentence! To assume you can "become one flesh" with any other woman would be quite a stretch in my opinion.

To become one flesh is a romanticized way of saying to sleep with someone. To say that three people couldn't have sex at the same time (though I've seen videos that say otherwise ) is missing the point. It's simply refers in a pretty way to sleeping with someone, and it isn't a summation of marriage as a whole. You can be one flesh with many.

The one flesh statement sounds like a pretty big deal, but it's nothing new. They used that kind of language a lot. Many times the Bible will use the term "to know" someone meaning to sleep with that person.

Practical reasons - how many men can say that they can successfully handle more than one woman in today's society. Also, Paul laid down some high standards of love a man should have for his woman. If most men struggle to imitate Christ's love with just one woman, what makes people think that having more than one will make it easier? As one of my friends said - Its just plain greedy to covet more than one woman - regardless of it being right or wrong.

Even if you can provide financially, I doubt you will be able to cope emotionally.

Shirtless, do you desire a polygamous marriage...? I mean what is your motivation behind this topic to keep going at it so much?

Now I think we've seen in the other thread, that polygamous marriage sets sexes as unequal, and therefore it ought to be rejected if equality of sexes is true and ought to be upheld.

Additionally, I don't think you will convince any Christian here of your position, as a plain reading of Matt 19:8-9; Mark 10:1-12; Romans 7:2-3 has obvious implications on the issue of polygamy. Only someone heavily motivated and clouded by other reasons could not clearly see God does not want us to be in polygamous relationships. Furthermore, those in leadership are to be monogamous 1 Tim 3:2; Titus 1:6, and believers are told to follow the example of the apostles, disciples, and leaders Phil 3:17, 4:9; 1 Thess 1:6,7; 2 Thess 3:7,9; 1 Tim 4:12; Tit 2:7; 1 Pet 5:3; 1 Cor 4:6; 1 Cor 11:1. Therefore, "all" believers are to emulate the purity and scripturally-mandated characteristics of elders, including monogamy! To add even further, a widow worthy of being taken in by the church, was that she be the "wife of one husband" 1 Timothy 5:9. This reference to polyandry clearly shows that monogamy was important for general believers also!

Yet, one can choose to continue on their own way. Just remember everyone (including Christians) will stand before Christ, and then we won't be able to reason against the Light which will so clearly pentrate through us revealing our ugliest sins.

Kurieuo.

Shirtless wrote:Conclusion
Genesis never says that the woman we cleave to needs to be your wife in the legal terms that we know it.
Genesis never says we can't have a sexual relationship with someone else before you marry.
Genesis never says that it has to be one man and one woman.

Christ expands further on the Genesis passage, and in doing so associates the passage within the context of marraige:

• Mark 10:4-12—
  4They said, “Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce and send her away.”
  5“It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law,” Jesus replied. 6“But at the beginning of creation God 'made them male and female.' 7'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, 8and the two will become one flesh.' So they are no longer two, but one. 9Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate.”
  10When they were in the house again, the disciples asked Jesus about this. 11He answered, “Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. 12And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery.”

Additionally Paul refers to the "two shall become one flesh" phrase derived from Genesis, as a reason not to unite our body (i.e., have sex) with a prostitute: "Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ himself? Shall I then take the members of Christ and unite them with a prostitute? Never! Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body? For it is said, “The two will become one flesh.” (1 Corinthians 6:15-16)

If the reason for not having sex with a prostitute is because the two become one flesh, then obviously the two becoming one flesh does not simply imply sexual intercourse, but rather something more. To say it does mean "sex" is to give Paul's reasoning circularity, for if true Paul would be saying one should not have sex with a prostitute because to do so is to have sex. Obviously the two becoming one flesh means more than a sexual union.

I'll end by quoting the end verses—1 Corinthians 6:18-20:

• 18Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body. 19Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; 20you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body.

Kurieuo.

I guess I can't argue with people that use words like "obvious" and "clearly", even though people that don't agree with my views, agree with me about how the Bible is vague on the subject:

vvart wrote:Yes you have proven that God didn't specifically outright say he condemns polygamy

Kurieuo wrote:Shirtless, do you desire a polygamous marriage...? I mean what is your motivation behind this topic to keep going at it so much?

Okay you wanna know why I think this is important? You wanna know?!

Both my parents have been divorced; my stepdad has divorced and remarried, and so has my stepmom; my mom has divorced and remarried as well, and Dad has been married three times.

Before I became Christian, I hated marriage more than divorce. I thought marriage was the most evil thing ever created. Divorce rates are at 60%! It would be better not to marry at all, even if I was lucky enough to pick a woman who I actually could spend the rest of my life with.

But when I started reading the Bible, I notice that marriage was praised several times. Maybe marriage wasn't so bad. However, I also noticed that practically all marriages in the Bible were polygynus in nature. Theses weren't sinful pagans--these were King David, Abraham, and Solomon! God doesn't condemn this at all--even Solomon, who had 700 wives and 300 concubines, didn't stir Gods rath...UNTIL Solomon started worshiping pagan Gods. God had several opportunities to condemn it, but he doesn't.

So what's the deal? Why do Christians believe in monogamy so greatly, even though the Bible is vague at best on it? Why don't they care about divorce? I mean, all I hear from mainstream Christians is "family values", "family values", "family values". Do you have any idea how devastating divorce is to a family?! Yet no one cares; no Christian really cares. They don't care that Jesus specifically condemns divorce four times, they just don't care about family values.

I've talked to women in polygamous relationships and they have nothing but praise for it; they said it's made their lives better. So as the rusty wheels started to turn in my head, I said "THAT'S IT! That's why marriage is messed up in this country! Because you can't expect a normal human being to stay married to one person, unless it's under extremely fortunate circumstances!" What have I learned?-- monogamy is flawed in a free society.

So, in answer to your question: Ten or fifteen years from now, I'm going to marry someone. I might marry another woman later if my wife is okay with it, and she can marry another man if she feels like she wants to expand. I care so much about this subject because I want to save marriage.

I remember talking to Mom about how bad marriage is getting nowadays. About how the woman's rights movement has exposed monogamous marriage for what it really is. She said to me "Oh, I felt the same way when I was your age, and I got married." Yeah, like that's done her any good.

And about the passages you gave:

Jesus is talking about divorce in all those NT passages, Paul is talking about prostitution (I agree with both of them), and neither of them are talking about pre-marital sex or monogamy. I've addressed all of those passages in detail on the other thread.

Shirtless wrote: So, in answer to your question: Ten or fifteen years from now, I'm going to marry someone. I might marry another woman later if my wife is okay with it, and she can marry another man if she feels like she wants to expand. I care so much about this subject because I want to save marriage.

How would you define adultery?

Lets look at this issue from the point of view of how it would affect your relationship with God:

Paul said that its better to be single, but, if you are lustful then you should marry. The downside of that is that you have to spend time and effort trying to please your wife (whom your supposed to love like Christ loved the church). So, by that reasoning, the more wives you have, the greater is the tendency to drift away from working for God. This is what happend to Solomon. He had to build a palace for his Egyptian wife and no doubt all the issues his wives brought him, he just drifted away.

I wonder if the women on this forum have an opinion in favour of poly gamy/andry?

Hmm. I never thought of it that way. I'll have to meditate on that one.

But I don't expect anybody with a brain in their head would marry two wives at the same time! It's gotta be a slow process.

Only one woman has commented on my views; she got the impression that I thought men and women were unequal. Nothing is further from the truth. But here is an article from a woman's perspective:

http://www.polygamy.com/Practical/From- ... -Place.htm

Here's one from a man:

http://www.libchrist.com/poly/manview.html

Shirtless wrote:Jesus is talking about divorce in all those NT passages, Paul is talking about prostitution (I agree with both of them), and neither of them are talking about pre-marital sex or monogamy. I've addressed all of those passages in detail on the other thread.

From my understanding you concluded the Genesis passage is not talking of marriage. Yet, many of the passages I cited (i.e., the "divorce" one from Matthew and Mark, and the prostitution one) reveal that the union spoken of goes beyond sexual intercourse.

Additionally, I'm yet to see a case in Scripture where God endorses polygamy as good. It seems I can find many cases where God endorses monogamy, but the most I can find of polygamy are examples due to certain circumstances whether it be bareness of the first wife (Abraham), peace and advantage offered by political alliances (Solomon), or a taking over of kingship where all possessions, including wives, being inherited by the new king. At the same token, we see many issues that arose because of such polygamous relationships. With Abraham jealousy occurred (something which from my understanding is also common in tribes where polygamy is common—the older wives feel beyond their used by date and become jealous of the younger ones), one becomes lead astray from God, as Solomon did, by the many diverging beliefs of their wives, and can simply not devote themselves to God as much, or one can even begin to envy the love that can exist within a monogamous relationship as David did, and so wish to covet such. In no place can I find polygamy in the Bible in good light, or as something with God's backing.

As for "divorce" in Matthew and Mark, it is certainly more than divorce being spoken of. To quote the ThinkTank on such passages:

Jesus' point is that improper divorce does not nullify a marriage, and if the first marriage still stands, then a "second" marriage is adultery--and NOT simply 'polygamy'! This is very clear.

• "The saying is hyperbolic-that is, it has exaggerated, intensified force: because God does not accept divorce as valid, any man who divorces his wife is not really divorced, and if he marries someone else, he commits adultery. No one else in antiquity spoke of divorce in such strong terms. (Because most Jewish teachers allowed polygamy, they would not have seen marrying a second wife as adultery, even if they had agreed that the man was still married to the first wife. But Jesus eliminates the double standard; a man consorting with two women is as adulterous as a woman consorting with two men.) [BBC, in.loc. Mark 10:11.
  
  "The school of Shammai ... did not permit divorce except for the wife's unfaithfulness (whether successful or attempted), but they did not consider remarriage afterward adulterous. Jesus is more consistent: if one divorces one's spouse without valid grounds , the marriage is not truly dissolved and subsequent marriage is adulterous." [BBC, in. loc. Mtt 19.9]

http://www.christian-thinktank.com/polygame.html

Yet, as I'm sure you are aware, your problem does not appear to be with Scripture, but rather with your grievances over your parent's marraige. Therefore, it is perhaps worth discussing whether polygamy could solve the problems that occured within your parent's monogamous marraige. You seem to picture polygamy as the holy grail, or total fix for marraige problems, but I'm not at all convinced.

Kurieuo.

Kurieuo wrote:Yet, as I'm sure you are aware, your problem does not appear to be with Scripture, but rather with your grievances over your parent's marraige.

Woah there now! I don't wanna be set up as a straw man. I'm not a poor orphan boy who's views have been blinded by his parent's marriage. You asked me why I was(and still am) beating a dead horse, and the hole that marriage is in right now is the reason. I've been convinced that polygamy is a perfectly acceptable way of life for a while, but I still kept it to myself. It was only later that I thought that I could really do good for the country.

Kurieuo wrote:With Abraham jealousy occurred (something which from my understanding is also common in tribes where polygamy is common

I know (sigh). Sadly no arrangement is perfect. You can look at the glass half full though--healthy competition helps keep the spouses physically fit 'cause they want to look their best; unlike monogamy where once they marry, they get fat (I know, I've seen it ). But this aspect of polygamus relationships isn't denied. It's addressed here:

It was permissible to feel an emotional bond with one's kin, but amour was to be reserved only for that certain someone. In the case of the male, this seems to be almost a predatorial instinct, the protection of one's turf/territory from marauders, the defense of one's possession. It is a difficult instinct to overcome, and the ugly emotions it evokes, jealousy, anger, and envy, are not easily closeted. I do not claim to have perfected my control over all these, but have come to realize that they are superseded by a more real and pressing need that my soul mate felt. I had to awaken to the fact that my mate needs the close company of others. (in other words, "Be gone eros! Agape all the way!")

Kurieuo wrote:Additionally, I'm yet to see a case in Scripture where God endorses polygamy as good.

Okay, I'll concede that...for now. But I would like you to do two things in return:

1. Pray for guidance. Ask God to place you in the right direction, whatever it may be. And pray for me too; it's was an awkward prayer for guidance years ago that made me Christian today.

2. Admit to yourself (not to me) that you could be mistaken, and truly try to look at every problem objectively. I am now undecided about abortion because I care too much about what God wants as opposed to what I want. Try and and give polygamy the benefit of the doubt - you might even want to try it sometime.

just to add my two cents... I submit that marriage itself is not really the problem. Our society has made it to easy to get into and out of, and promotes a lifestyle which encourages marriage for the wrong reasons. You've already indicated you believe that marriage to more than one woman at a time would drive a man nutty so expanding marriage to polygamy probably wouldn't solve a thing. If we marry for the right reasons, and truly commit to the marriage, making quiting unthinkable, then it makes it ever so much easier to handle the ups and downs. Here's a site to visit so that when you do marry yours will stand the test of time http://www.covenantmarriage.com/

Also here's a summary of a brochure that may explain current marriage/divorce trands better than I (gives analysis, reasonings, stats, etc) and which you can read in full at http://www.frc.org/index.cfm?i=BC04D02&f=WU04K09&t=e

Deterring Divorce
Few in our society remain untouched by divorce. In 2001, the divorce rate was almost double that of 1960.

Today, 40 to 50 percent of marriages are likely to end in divorce, with second and subsequent marriages having an even higher likelihood of divorce than first marriages.

Much of the rise in divorce rates can be attributed to no-fault divorce laws, which eliminate consideration of fault from divorce grounds and financial settlements.

No-fault divorce gives all spouses unrestricted access to no-fault divorce, because it makes unilateral divorce possible; that is, a spouse no longer needs to obtain the consent of the other spouse in order to file for and obtain divorce.

Divorce has long-lasting emotional consequences on children, often negatively impacting them into adulthood. Divorced men and women also suffer tremendously from divorce, often experiencing depression and financial loss.

Because divorce has devastating consequences on families and society, state legislators and policy makers are reforming no-fault divorce. Some of these reforms include laws implementing covenant marriage, mutual consent, longer waiting periods, and premarital education.

[/quote]