While I appreciate the well written comment, I must point out the overly broad and unsupported assumption about status of women in Bible times. Women were never considered a commodity for market. The law of God that regulated marriage and relationships and even property and inheritance were not restrictive toward women, but were in fact designed to protect the health, welfare and happiness of women. The world was not the cultivated place we know today. Life was hard, women were not physically strong enough to compete alone in the stringent labors that were necessary to survive and prosper. Yes, they worked hard and long, but so did the men. Both of them with out the benefit of electricity and machinery as we know it today. Technology has greatly leveled the playing field between men and women in today's world, making it possible for each gender to compete in a broader field of labors.
In regard to times being different, well, have you heard that the more things change, the more they stay the same? Yes, the world is different, but human nature has not changed one iota since the beginning of time. The majority of people that marry today, still want the same things from their marriages that we have always wanted, love, acceptance, belonging, peace, security, excitement, sex, family, identity and others. However, in our rapidly changing world, instead of improving on the quality of the marriage relationship our culture is decimating the institution. The high divorce rate, the growing number of people who decide to live together without lifelong commitment, the drug and alcohol abuse by married people all tells this blogger that as a people we are not getting it right! Because of this I look to the Bible as my guide, to tell me how the creator of marriage said it should be. If you want to succeed, read the instruction manual (never thought you'd hear a guy say that!). Bottom line, if you want a solid marriage that works, do it the Bible way. Patriarchy is the Bible way, feminism is the modern worldly way. I will define those two terms in another post.
Also, any father knows what it is like to have his wife love another as much or more than him. Isn't that baby precious, how could you and why would you want to compete? There is enough love to go around, isn't there mom. Commentor, why do you assume that love is measured in limited quantities? Do you not understand that love is an inexhaustible well, the more you give, the more you have to give. One never loses by loving. Loving diversely is commanded and blessed by God. The references are too numerable to list.
For a woman to insist on love and loyalty to her only is selfishness at its worst. In a world where fewer men qualify as good husbands, to not share that blessing with her sisters is disgraceful to the very principle of love.
Why do I feel like I've been on a soap box?
10 comments:
"For a woman to insist on love and loyalty to her only is selfishness at its worst."
This is very true, John. Indeed the essence of true love would demand that a Godly woman would want to share her husband.
"We Want for Our Sisters What We Want for Ourselves" is a very good treatment of this aspect of the loving spirit.
Here is the url for its entry at amazon.com:
http://www.amazon.com/Want-Sisters-What-Ourselves-Polygyny~Copartnering/dp/0971900477/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1213169649&sr=8-1
It should also be considered that a truly loving woman will want what is best for her husband. Will she not want to see him become all that he can? If a man is blessed who finds a Godly wife, is he not even more blessed, should he have two or three?
A loving wife will not look at her happiness but at that of her husband - whom she has been called to serve, yes, SERVE, for the woman was created for the man to be a help to him, to help him serve his Lord and Master.
How utterly audacious & I am being nice, for you to say, "Any father knows what it is like to have his wife love another as much or more than him." "How could and why whould you want to compete?" Where do you get off making a statement like that? I was not aware that when man & woman came together and God created a child, that there was this great competition taking place. Was this not the command of God to replenish the earth? And you have the audacity to bring feelings of jealousy, yes jealously into this picture? We both know that the new life knows nothing of these jealous emothins. "Gee, mom loves dad more than me." How incredulous of you! I'm surpirsed & somewhat disappointed!!!
It seems that Ms. Anonymous has completely misunderstood (perhaps willfully so?) what John was trying to say.
It is not a matter of "competition". No father desires to "compete" with his child for the affection of the child's mother. Nonetheless, there is a sense of loss when one is relegated to "second place".
Does any father feel remorse at the birth of his child? God forbid! Quite the contrary! The love for the child more than compensates.
The same should be the way a sister wife is welcomed into the family. Yes, the first wife will feel a sense of loss - the loss of exclusivity, but the love for her husband and the love for her sister wife should and can more than compensate.
Open your heart to the love of Christ, Ms. Anonymous, then you will see what I mean.
A very good book is "Voices in Harmony: Contemporary Women Celebrate Plural Marriage". One can find it at amazon.com here: http://www.amazon.com/Voices-Harmony-Contemporary-Celebrate-Marriage/dp/155517499X/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1213263181&sr=8-1
Another very good book is "We Want for Our Sisters What We Want for Ourselves":
http://www.amazon.com/Want-Sisters-What-Ourselves-Polygyny~Copartnering/dp/0971900477/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1213263302&sr=1-1
In a previous post, anonymous said "In the OT and NT times, men took multiple wives. Women were property, traded and bartered, and times are different now". You replied in this post "I must point out the overly broad and unsupported assumption about status of women in Bible times. Women were never considered a commodity for market."
I am curious as to how then I am suppose to take the passages in the bible in II Saumel chapeter 12. Especially in reference to these versus:
8 .) And I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things.
9 .) Wherefore hast thou despised the commandment of the LORD, to do evil in his sight? thou hast killed Uriah the Hittite with the sword, and hast taken his wife to be thy wife, and hast slain him with the sword of the children of Ammon.
10 .) Now therefore the sword shall never depart from thine house; because thou hast despised me, and hast taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be thy wife.
11 .) Thus saith the LORD, Behold, I will raise up evil against thee out of thine own house, and I will take thy wives before thine eyes, and give them unto thy neighbour, and he shall lie with thy wives in the sight of this sun.
12 .) For thou didst it secretly: but I will do this thing before all Israel, and before the sun.
These verses have nothing to do with the(your?) assertion that women were once considered as "property".
Cannot the Lord do with us as He will? If He chooses to this or that, who are we to feel offended?
Has He not made us? Does He not sustain us? Indeed could we so much as draw our next breath without Him?
Did not God stipulate in His Law that if a man takes another wife, the food, clothing and intimacies of the first shall not be reduced. Is this treating the woman as if she were "property"?
Did not God require in His Law that if a man had two wives and loved one more than the other and the less loved of the two bore him his first born, that this first born was to have the rights of the first born and not the first born of other? Is this treating the woman as if she were "property"?
Really, the matter under consideration here is God's plan for marriage. So should we not be listening to God?
If fear that if one starts making assertions about the culture, then that one is leaving the sure foundation of God's Word and wandering off into the imaginitive world of assumptions.
Even if it were so that the culture considered women as so much property, what does that have to do with God's Word? What does that have to do with the patriarchal order which He established for the family? What does that have to do with the fact that a man can righteously have more than one wife in his family?
Remember God bears witness of His Law that it is perfect, just, righteous, good and a sure guide for our lives. What does it matter what any given culture may think about any given thing? It is not this or that culture that is to be our guide but rather God's Word.
Indeed was not the Lord our God constantly rebuking the Israelites for not following His Law-Word?
”Cannot the Lord do with us as He will? If He chooses to this or that, who are we to feel offended?”
So it doesn’t matter that GOD can flip flop on what he says? From what else I have read, GOD made David’s wives commit adultery by giving them to someone else while David was still alive and kickin. In those situations are we just suppose to say “thank you lord” and overlook the fact that the wives were punished for something the husband did wrong? I guess I am just losing my faith in the bible. Why would I want to love and worship a GOD that would punish the wives for something the husband did? Seems kind of spiteful to me
”Even if it were so that the culture considered women as so much property, what does that have to do with God's Word? What does that have to do with the patriarchal order which He established for the family? What does that have to do with the fact that a man can righteously have more than one wife in his family?”
What is has to do with it is the fact that John stated in his post “Women were never considered a commodity for market. The law of God that regulated marriage and relationships and even property and inheritance were not restrictive toward women, but were in fact designed to protect the health, welfare and happiness of women.” How did GOD turning these women into adulterers protect their health, welfare and happiness? John is trying to make his point that we should go back to a patriarchal society as found in the bible. What I am trying to understand is why any woman would want that. I’m sure there were men in the bible that loved and highly valued their wives and probably ranked them right above his flock of sheep and his camels.
Anonymous:
May I suggest that you prayerfully consider that Jesus Christ who was crucified and resurrected and who was God lived by and loved the Word of God. He found no fault with that passage to which you refer.
Further He was sinless but was put to death for the sins of others. How is that just? At least according to your standards?
You might want to read the book of Job.
Anonymous,
I hear you. So many questions that need to be addressed, and all come back to the same response when no answer of reason is available. "Just trust God". Where have we heard that before...HA!
According to the Bible, we are IN this world, but not to be OF this world. I don't know where the Pharisees we know are able to draw that line, or by what sensible voice they receive that authority from, but we are in the real world and doing out best to be IN the world. So I think that culture has a lot to do with our everyday living and our belief systems. And as you see from most of the writings around this blogger, each culture will continue, as started with Cain and Able, to be at odds. We all know we're right.
It's comforting to know that while the Pope doesn't hear from God, the Mormon Bishops don't hear from God, the Pentecostals don't hear from God, and absolutely no way is it possible for a non-believer to be able to hear the voice of God... we do have the Gospel according to Independent, Fundamental, Bible-believing, etc, etc Baptists. Ya feeling me there, Anonymous?
What is the Gospel according to pv27:17?
Post a Comment