All Comments for: What to Do about Unbiblical Unions | Christianity Today

Free Newsletters:

RSS Feeds |

Audio |

Twitter

Home > 2009 > July

Christianity Today, July, 2009 |

What to Do about Unbiblical Unions

African churches seek a better response to polygamy than in years past as western churches address new same-sex marriages.

Susan Wunderink | posted 6/25/2009 10:09AM

Jacob Zuma's recent election as South Africa's fourth president since the end of apartheid was a foregone conclusion. The question that captivatedobservers has been which of the Zulu traditionalist's ...

[Reader Reviews]

Average User Rating:

Rate and Comment on this article

Displaying 1 - 25 of 43 comments.

Page: 1 2

Show All

Perplexed

Posted: June 30, 2009 8:18 PM


Robyn, certainly those of us in the Wesleyan tradition would say - as Wesley did - that communion is a means of grace.

Robyn

Posted: June 30, 2009 3:31 PM


Communion is not a MEANS of grace. It's symbolic of the grace that we have already recieved. I do agree, however, that polygamous converts and their families must be welcomed and treated with respect as full and equal members of the church without regard for past sins. Perhaps the various sexual relationships could end, but without severing the familial connections.

Perplexed

Posted: June 30, 2009 12:40 PM

This evening I am taking part in a discussion with Gay and Lesbian students on why Christianity is good news for them. Am I going under false pretences? I find the tone of many of the coments to be quite bizarre. They justify a patriarchal practice which reduces women to being chattals, on the gounds that the religious texts of a nomadic society thousands of years ago are ok with it while condemning even the most committted and caring same sex relationship. Whay is there scope for pastoral sensitivity (or is that simply realism) in the former case while the latter is simply forbidden? I won't get into what biblical texts might or might not say about homosexuality, no one ever changes their mind anyway. However it is worth remebering that when the Bible discusses any form of sex it is almost invariably in the context of power and the abuse of power. Why are so many Evangelicals so adamant re homosexuality?

Nelson

Posted: June 29, 2009 9:38 AM


Also one has to understand why Yaweh instituded marriage so one wouldn't commit fornication.....

Hugh McBryde

Posted: June 29, 2009 7:40 AM

Scripture never commands anyone to marry unless that command could also be construed to marry polygynously. If you say Adam and Eve, you forget that Eve was created as Adams wife, not married to him. After that there is just a general command to be "Fruitful and Multiply" which means that in general, someone had to marry, but no one in particular. There are only two places in the whole Bible where a man is told he must marry, and in both places there was no concern for whether or not he was already married. I find that interesting.

Ephrem Hagos

Posted: June 29, 2009 2:57 AM


You really do not think that Christian unions between one man and one woman are strictly Biblical, i.e., one indivisible body just like Adam's and Eve's; and Christ's and the Church's (Matt. 16: 13-28)? It is the Christian denial of such blessed unions, based on the true knowledge of God, that has given rise to the popularity and acceptance of same-sex marriages and polygamy (Rom. 1: 18-32).

Jan Brown (Registered User)

Posted: June 29, 2009 12:00 AM

There is a strong connection between legalizing same sex marriage and legalizing polygamy. The Church will have to learn to deal with both in the coming decade. I recommend to resources on polygamy (both have to do with fundamentalist Mormonism and the practice of polygamy in the USA) Lifting the Veil of Polygamy (A dvd) Is Polygamy Biblical by Doris Hanson both resources are available at http://www.shieldandrefuge.org/resources/media.htm

Ray Redlich

Posted: June 28, 2009 9:03 PM

In response to EMMANUEL OLADIPO, please read MARK 10:11,12. It seems to me that Jesus was specifying ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN as the sole scriptural, New Testament standard for marriage. If it is adultery to divorce one's wife (or husband) and marry another, why wouldn't it also be adultery to add an EXTRA wife (or husband)? See also our Lord's explanation of Genesis 2:24 earlier in the same chapter of Mark. I believe that Jesus was showing that God TOLERATED divorce (and I believe, by extension, also polygamy) in the Old Testament, but it was never His perfect will (as revealed in Gen. 2:24). Christ brought us back to the original (higher) standard.

David

Posted: June 27, 2009 4:41 PM


Jacob Zuma is a political leader, not a church elder. I don't see how the word relates here. Forgiveness over his past is more powerful than having multiple wives. Why do look to tear people down when are call is to love and redeem? Get over it.

Wayne McEntire

Posted: June 27, 2009 10:21 AM

For John G., the Bible is an imperfect word subordinated to the Persons of the Trinity. Without diminishing the incomparable worth of the Godhead, how can we interpret His will apart from what has been revealed? We know HIm as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit because of the Bible. When we make ourselves the arbitor of Truth apart from the Bible, we end up with sentimental and subjective jargon that ultimately allows us to make a god in our own image. In regard to this issue, polygamy is not to be equated with homosexual practice. The former was tolerated but not recommended -- the latter was neither.

EMMANUEL OLADIPO

Posted: June 27, 2009 5:20 AM


I AGREE THAT POLYGAMY IS NOT TO BE RECOMMENDED FOR VARIOUS REASONS, WHETHER OR NOT THE LAW OF YOUR COUNTRY ALLOWS IT. MY PROBLEM IS FORBIDDING IT ON THE BASIS OF SCRIPTURE. CAN SOMEONE PLEASE POINT OUT WHERE, IN THE OLD OR THE NEW TESTAMENT, THE BIBLE TEACHES AGAINST THE PRACTICE, OTHER THAN FOR CHURCH LEADERS?

Jim Roane, PhD

Posted: June 26, 2009 1:23 PM

Billy Graham once remarked when asked a similar question about serial monogamy; replied, “We can not unscramble eggs.” Pretty good advice, I believe, and applicable to polygamous marriages. As a missionary to Africa (Kenya) my advice was always based on two primary scriptures: "If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has passed away, the new has come." (2 Corinthians 5:17); and, 1 Corinthians 7: 20, "Let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called." However, the bottom line in all of this is that this is between God and the concerned parties; but under no circumstances should a husband kick a poor woman out into the street simply because she is one of several wives. So, I leave this up to the grace of God, and I believe that they can all live a success Christian life. However, no practicing Christian should marry more than one woman. For a Christian, one is enough, unless you have already married others. The one-man-one-wife principle should be,

John G

Posted: June 26, 2009 12:10 PM

This is a classic dilemma created by granting the bible the same status as Jesus. This is done when we use the "Word of God" interchangeable with Jesus and the bible. The Word of God is a person not a book, a sermon, a song or any event that may reveal or contain the Word of God. To do so is tantamount to making the "container" a diety which then makes it faultless. God is in 3 persons Father, Son and Holy Spirit a trio, not a quartette Father, Son, Holy Spirit and bible. The trio is diety and faultless. Everything else and everyone else however valuable and useful, endearing and profound is not diety and imperfect. To struggle as the church continuously does with issues using only the bible as the "authority" it is attempting to make the imperfect perfect. Impossible. We (the church) need to follow the message we declare to the world. Jesus is the Word of God. He is more than a wonderful historical figure of the past but a living presence today.

Linda

Posted: June 26, 2009 11:40 AM

Since Jesus said "go and sin no more" after forgiving the adulterous woman at the well I believe that those Christians who are truly saved will do just that, "go and sin no more." This could mean for polygamists that they refrain from sex with all but their first wife but keep supporting the others and all children involved. In the case of homosexual "marriage" if the individuals become truly saved they will no longer want to be in a union that Jesus does not recognize. It was Jesus who said in Mark 10:6-9: "But from the beginning of the creation, God 'made them male and female.' For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'; so then they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate." Jesus didn't say two guys or two women can be married and those who love Him will seek to get right with him.

caveatBettor

Posted: June 26, 2009 10:52 AM


Yes, I do expect to meet Jacob and David and other polygamists in heaven. While polygamy does not look like the Creator's intent to me, it also doesn't seem to offend Him the way homosexuality does, at least according to apparent context of the entire Scripture.

Steve S

Posted: June 26, 2009 10:33 AM

Hear this: "We sit in Africa and can be very condemnatory about gay people because we don't have relations who are openly gay. If we did, it would make our theology more complicated." EXACTLY! When the church opens its eyes to the damage it is causing -- even with good intentions -- then it must revisit its tradition-encrusted theology and search the scriptures again. We must be humble enough to admit that our traditional understanding might be wrong. Lord knows, we've been wrong before.

Paul	Posted: June 26, 2009 9:26 AM

In a strong patriarchal culture, or feudal society, which had no nation-state to subvert it's subjects from afar, imagine living as a single woman with no "husband" or children. It could be shameful and actually sometimes dangerous. Many times women were given coverage in a family for protection and was not sexual at all. I think people mistake the polygamous sects of Mormonism for polygamy in Ancient Near East cultures. I am not going to make any comments regarding African culture in the 21st century, because I live in the U.S. and have not earned the right to critique foreign nations. Peace!

Maria

Posted: June 26, 2009 8:18 AM

As many of my fellow Africans have said, same-sex marriages and polygamy are not on the same spectrum. I will meet some folks who practised polygamy in heaven but I WILL not meet any practising 'homosexuality' there. I've never studied Jewish traditions, but I wonder if some of the high priests were polygamous. It wouldn't surprise me if they were since the times they lived in permitted their having more than one wife. I believe then it wasn't a sin. On homosexuality, African traditional religions as well as that of other regions have frowned at homosexuality in any form - it is regarded as an 'abomination' against the norm. So equating polygamy & homosexuality is very erroneous. Even the pagans will open your eyes to this truth.

Dayo Adeola

Posted: June 26, 2009 5:25 AM


I agree with Kombo that 'gay marriage and polygamy are not moral equivalents in Scripture'. Gay union is outlawed by the scriptures and nature. No good intentioned article should seek to discuss Polygamy and gay unions as near equivalent problems of the African church and the western church respectively.

ngozi

Posted: June 26, 2009 5:06 AM


I agree with Deborah all through. Same sex marriage is evil and should be condemned however we should love those involved and encourage them to come to church.

Don	Posted: June 26, 2009 5:01 AM

Jos ecwa Seminary is E.C.W.A. Evangelical Church of West Africa. An article of this sort is lacking when it overlooks the views on these topic of Dr. Samuel Kuniyop author of African Christian Ethics (Zondervan). Also sociologist/theologian Dr. Yusufu Turaki is a source that would have put more "biblical" into this article. As for comparing polygamy (not God's ideal, but not condemned) and gay marriage (condemned by Scripture in scathing terms), how can the suggestion be worthy of consideration?

Deborah Solomon

Posted: June 26, 2009 2:10 AM


It was God's plan from the very beginning that marriage was between a man and a woman. It was the pagan practices of people around them that lead the children of Israel into polygamy. It was not God's plan from the beginning. It was mankind's way of getting things distorted and straying from God's original plan. Deborah Solomon

Dave N.

Posted: June 26, 2009 1:25 AM


The title of the article is very misleading since it never shows how such relationships are "unbiblical."

Jodave

Posted: June 25, 2009 11:36 PM

Alison is right in saying that "There's no comparison between the two at all. No common ground." A few further points. "Same sex marriages" come under the unequivocal condemnation of Romans 1, not even to mention other pertinent passages from both the Old and New Testaments. And the Romans 1 passage is but a small part of the Lord prevised or meant in John 16:12,13, and is not merely Paul's own opinion. "Same sex marriages" are more closely akin to the "going after other [or "strange"] flesh" condemned in Jude 7. It differs from normal marriage in kind, not just in number (as does polygamy vs. monogamy).

lewsta

Posted: June 25, 2009 10:41 PM

Nowhere does the bible condemn polygamy. It is not sinful according to biblical standards. Sure, a man with more than one wife cannot serve as elder or deacon. Fine. If such an one comes to faith in Jesus Christ, let him walk out his faith serving in other ways. BUT-- should such join the church, there is no reason to call for his rejecting or abanding his "additional" wives.. he has MARRIED them, taken vows to be faithful to them, and must not abandon them. What God has joined together (yes, even through the traditions and laws of his pagan culture) let no man tear apart. There is NOTHING to indicate such a man must divest himself of all but one wife. Let them take their part in the church. On the other hand, homosexual partnerships are always and everywhere condemned in every instance. If I were living with my sister and "came to faith", I'd have to cease. If I were living with a same-sex partner, same thing. BOTH are condemned always. That would be part pf repentance from dead works

Page: 1 2

E-mail this page

Write CT

Print this article

Post a comment