Evidence for God from Science

What of the verse Isaiah 4:1

What of the verse Isaiah 4:1

Read the end of the previous chapter (3) - the separation of chapters was incorrectly done. Verse 4:1 should have been at the end of 3. Read it and you will understand.

Polygamy is condemned by Paul when he addressed the qualifications for deacons and Elders. "Elders and deacons are to be the husbands of ONE wife"! (1 Timothy 3:2,12; Titus 1:6)

First of all, this passage is not addressed to all believers in Christ, but applies only to elders and deacons. Period. We cannot take something that only applies to a specific group of men, and apply that too all men in general. This would be taking a verse out of its context.

Secondly, notice, these passages do not say "only" one wife. The Greek word that "one" is translated from here is word #3391, mia, and is also translated as "a" or "the first" in other parts of scripture. Thus the emphasis would be that an elder needs to be a married man, having children, and that he must not have divorced his first wife.

For example, in the following passages, the word "a" is the same word translated "one" above:

Matthew 21:19,"And when he saw a fig tree in the way..."
Matthew 26:69, "Now Peter sat without in the palace: and a damsel came unto him...",
Revelation 9:13, "And the sixth angel sounded, and I heard a voice..."


What do you guys think about this? I got this from a site that defends polygamy

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 7:2 is often brought up as a proof against polygamy but a closer look shows it's exactly the opposite. The word translated as "her own" that precedes husband is "idios" from which the English word idiosyncrasy derives, one peculiar to her. Now we've all heard the expression "they share the same idiosyncrasy" and indeed, a woman may also share the same husband, as is the case with polygamy, made clear by Paul's choice of the word "idios". On the other hand, the word translated as "his own" that precedes wife is "heautou" which actually translates as "hisself" without conveying a limit in number but a limit in who possesses that wife. For example, in America, if you're from the South or the Inner City and your brother went to get more food at the family reunion you might say, "he got hisself another helping" and by saying that you're not saying he won't get "hisself" a helping again and again, lot's of helpings. Those of us who have not been blessed with this deeper English would say "he got himself another helping" and the meaning of the original Greek would not be as easily conveyed.

KJV Translates 1 Corinthians 7:2 as follows: Nevertheless, [to avoid] fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.

KJV Should be corrected as follows: Nevertheless, [to avoid] fornication, let every man have himself a wife, and let every woman have a husband peculiar to her.

I'm against polygamy. I'm just wondering why so much support for it

Men like to have sex with as many women as they can. That's why there's support for polygamy.

What? Two polygamy threads? One not enough

RickD wrote:Men like to have sex with as many women as they can. That's why there's support for polygamy.

I don't think thats exclusive to men, is it?

Nessa wrote:

RickD wrote:Men like to have sex with as many women as they can. That's why there's support for polygamy.

I don't think thats exclusive to men, is it?

Do you know any women stupid enough to marry more than one man?

Nessa wrote:What? Two polygamy threads? One not enough

Clever...for a blonde.

RickD wrote:

Nessa wrote:

RickD wrote:Men like to have sex with as many women as they can. That's why there's support for polygamy.

I don't think thats exclusive to men, is it?

Do you know any women stupid enough to marry more than one man?

The women would most likely always be pregnant and no one would know who was the father...

And making all those sammiches!!

Yeah, ok you have a point