Author Topic: Humans & Monogamy?  (Read 3322 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline JamesR

  • The Second Coming of Jason
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,913
  • Remember me?
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: OCA
Humans & Monogamy?
« on: August 03, 2012, 08:55:40 PM »
Something that does not make sense to me about Orthodox ethics. If Orthodoxy teaches that the purpose of sex is to produce children to be raised under the faith and that we are only allowed to have one wife, then how do we explain basic human biology? The human male was not built for monogamy. If we are only supposed to have sex with our one wife so that we produce children, then how come it takes 9 months for a woman to have one child whereas a male can ejaculate and thus impregnate several women almost whenever he wants? In theory, if we were truly designed to have children with only one woman (our wife), then wouldn't it follow that males should only be able to impregnate one woman every per 9 months?--in accordance with how long it takes for his wife to have a child?

This leaves only two possibilities--both of which contradict the Orthodox positions. Either a) man was not meant to be monogomous or b) producing children is NOT the only purpose of sex. If we go with the former then we have to admit that the Church is wrong by promoting monogomy and outlawing polygamy. But if we go with the latter, we have to then accept that the Church is wrong in stating that the only purpose of sex is children. I am starting to think that the Church's morals are mere products of what society at a particular time believes is right or wrong. And I think that monogomy may just be a sham by feminists to cover up the true male nature to spread his seed wherever and try and force him into committing to only one partner. Just like premature ejaculation; another feminist sham. There is no such thing as 'premature' ejaculation. When you ejaculate you ejaculate. When it comes you are ready. 'Premature' is just an arbitrary human label with no real basis in biology. It ignores the true male nature. Women invented it just so that they could try and fool their man into feeling guilty for not engaging in enough foreplay, when in reality foreplay is what is biologically unnatural; not 'premature' ejaculation. Lousy feminists.

Discuss

Offline Asteriktos

  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 35,701
  • the irregardless one
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #1 on: August 03, 2012, 08:58:17 PM »
Who told you that the only reason for sex was procreation?  :police:
"The bed is too short to stretch out on, the blanket too narrow to wrap around you." (Isa. 28:20)

"For because they wronged the simple, they shall be slain; and an inquisition shall ruin the ungodly." (Prov. 1:32 LXX)

Offline JamesR

  • The Second Coming of Jason
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,913
  • Remember me?
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: OCA
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #2 on: August 03, 2012, 09:00:39 PM »
Who told you that the only reason for sex was procreation?  :police:

Some Orthodox Saint or something

Offline orthonorm

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,715
  • Ad Aluminum!
  • Faith: DSM 5
  • Jurisdiction: Apostle to the Church of ASD
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #3 on: August 03, 2012, 09:06:57 PM »
Didn't we already cover this topic.

You can have sex with your pregnant wife till the water breaks and again to repeat my joke about Germans, this is when it finally gets interesting for them.

Monogamy definitely seems the most likely type of coupling for a species which takes so long to provide for their offspring.

Lifelong monogamy, not so much. Hence the proverbial seven year itch.

But serial monogamy, certainly seems a *relatively* consistent pattern of sexual practice in the contemporary Western world. 
January 23, 2016, 03:47:17 PM   Ad Hominem - "mere foil"   +45

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foil_(literature)

Offline HabteSelassie

  • Ises and I-ity
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,314
!
« Reply #4 on: August 03, 2012, 09:12:00 PM »
Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

Something that does not make sense to me about Orthodox ethics. If Orthodoxy teaches that the purpose of sex is to produce children to be raised under the faith and that we are only allowed to have one wife, then how do we explain basic human biology? The human male was not built for monogamy.



Who in the world ever told you that nonsense?  I would only agree with this point.  True, it is hard for human beings to resist their temptations, but I would not hardly suggest this is a matter of biological fault with God.  That would only be a cop-out or excuse, and you are young enough for me to understand how your hormones might influence your interpretation.  The Divine Mystery of Holy Matrimony is perfect by God's Grace, human beings who get married are not.  We are sinners like anyone else, married or not.  God sanctifies our marriages through the Divine Mystery by His active and dynamic Grace.  We are not perfect, but our marriages in the Church are perfected.  When we submit to them in prayer and humble Christian service to the other, we are blessed by God. When we are skeptical or resist our marriages, we only find ourselves in the mix-up mix-up of passions, lusts, and the most dreaded sin of all.. the little "what if" questions.



stay blessed,
habte selassie
"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10

Offline Sleeper

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,347
  • On hiatus for the foreseeable future.
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #5 on: August 03, 2012, 09:35:42 PM »
A third option could be that our sexual cycle is a byproduct of our evolutionary development, something left over from our non-monogamous primate ancestors that were part of creation's self-making, as it were, in accordance with God granting it a certain amount of autonomy. When the creatures that we would call mankind arrived and God breathed life into them to be His image-bearers, the beauty of monogamous marriage as a picture of God and the Church was established and our "former ways" were to be left behind. At this stage mankind thrived on God's grace and thus had no problems overcoming the animalistic instincts, but post-Fall, these "passions" flare up as our flesh wars against the spirit.

Offline Asteriktos

  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 35,701
  • the irregardless one
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #6 on: August 03, 2012, 09:39:34 PM »
Who told you that the only reason for sex was procreation?  :police:

Some Orthodox Saint or something

Some saints may have been of that opinion, but it is not the official (or even unofficial) Orthodox position. There are other reasons for having sex beside procreation. In fact, I've read in the early Church Fathers (e.g. St. Gregory) the idea that the earth was already "filled," as God had commanded, and that was back in the 4th century. No, natural attraction is not a bad thing, and there are many positive reasons for having sexual relations.
"The bed is too short to stretch out on, the blanket too narrow to wrap around you." (Isa. 28:20)

"For because they wronged the simple, they shall be slain; and an inquisition shall ruin the ungodly." (Prov. 1:32 LXX)

Offline ZealousZeal

  • Cosmic Knowledge Fish
  • Section Moderator
  • Protokentarchos
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,962
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: OCA
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #7 on: August 03, 2012, 09:59:24 PM »
Didn't we already cover this topic.

+ Eleventy billion.

I was not aware that the Church taught any such thing. Not even the RCC teaches that, and their teachings on sex are often considered strict 'round these parts.
You want your belt to buckle, not your chair.

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,695
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #8 on: August 04, 2012, 06:55:12 PM »
God never called polygamy a sin.   In fact so many in the OT were polygamists.

It was just written that a bishop should only have one wife.

The church however outlawed it from canon (I do not know of which one if anybody has info on it).

My personal beliefs is that polygamy is not sinful.   It is okay for a Christian layman to engage in it if he wants to and his wives say its okay.   Just as the prophets and many persons of highlight in the OT did.

Now, one thing that is not explained EVER though is the HONEY-DO list.

Can you imagine 2 no... 4 wives writing you a honey-do list every weekend?  I am not joking.  That would be murder.

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline Asteriktos

  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 35,701
  • the irregardless one
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #9 on: August 04, 2012, 07:06:41 PM »
The church however outlawed it from canon (I do not know of which one if anybody has info on it).

I'm not sure. I believe that there is talk of "polygamy" and such in the canons, but what is meant by that was 2nd and 3rd marriages after a divorce or death of a spouse, and not being married to multiple people at the same time. I could be wrong though, I've never looked into it in depth.
"The bed is too short to stretch out on, the blanket too narrow to wrap around you." (Isa. 28:20)

"For because they wronged the simple, they shall be slain; and an inquisition shall ruin the ungodly." (Prov. 1:32 LXX)

Offline Kerdy

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,813
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #10 on: August 04, 2012, 09:17:50 PM »
God never called polygamy a sin.   In fact so many in the OT were polygamists.

It was just written that a bishop should only have one wife.

The church however outlawed it from canon (I do not know of which one if anybody has info on it).

My personal beliefs is that polygamy is not sinful.   It is okay for a Christian layman to engage in it if he wants to and his wives say its okay.   Just as the prophets and many persons of highlight in the OT did.

Now, one thing that is not explained EVER though is the HONEY-DO list.

Can you imagine 2 no... 4 wives writing you a honey-do list every weekend?  I am not joking.  That would be murder.



Aren't we taught a man will leave his parents for his wife (singular)?

And when divorce was brought into the picture, the allowance was infidelity.  You can't have multiple wives and not commit infidelity.
« Last Edit: August 04, 2012, 09:19:40 PM by Kerdy »

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,695
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #11 on: August 04, 2012, 11:52:12 PM »
God never called polygamy a sin.   In fact so many in the OT were polygamists.

It was just written that a bishop should only have one wife.

The church however outlawed it from canon (I do not know of which one if anybody has info on it).

My personal beliefs is that polygamy is not sinful.   It is okay for a Christian layman to engage in it if he wants to and his wives say its okay.   Just as the prophets and many persons of highlight in the OT did.

Now, one thing that is not explained EVER though is the HONEY-DO list.

Can you imagine 2 no... 4 wives writing you a honey-do list every weekend?  I am not joking.  That would be murder.



Aren't we taught a man will leave his parents for his wife (singular)?

And when divorce was brought into the picture, the allowance was infidelity.  You can't have multiple wives and not commit infidelity.

Not exactly the logic of polygamy....

True a man will leave his parents for his wife.
Then a man will marry another wife, never leaving his wife.
Then a man will marry wife #3, without leaving his other two wives.

Infidelity would exist outside of matrimony.
So if you were married once, and then divorced for reasons of infidelity, then there's a problem.

The practice of polygamy was very common throughout the biblical years, and is still common in many countries.

It just sound bizarre today frankly because we don't see it.
I don't think I view it as a sin.
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline Agabus

  • The user formerly known as Agabus.
  • Section Moderator
  • Protokentarchos
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,441
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #12 on: August 05, 2012, 08:31:55 AM »
God never called polygamy a sin.   In fact so many in the OT were polygamists.

It was just written that a bishop should only have one wife.

The church however outlawed it from canon (I do not know of which one if anybody has info on it).

My personal beliefs is that polygamy is not sinful.   It is okay for a Christian layman to engage in it if he wants to and his wives say its okay.   Just as the prophets and many persons of highlight in the OT did.

Now, one thing that is not explained EVER though is the HONEY-DO list.

Can you imagine 2 no... 4 wives writing you a honey-do list every weekend?  I am not joking.  That would be murder.



Aren't we taught a man will leave his parents for his wife (singular)?

And when divorce was brought into the picture, the allowance was infidelity.  You can't have multiple wives and not commit infidelity.

Not exactly the logic of polygamy....

True a man will leave his parents for his wife.
Then a man will marry another wife, never leaving his wife.
Then a man will marry wife #3, without leaving his other two wives.

Infidelity would exist outside of matrimony.
So if you were married once, and then divorced for reasons of infidelity, then there's a problem.

The practice of polygamy was very common throughout the biblical years, and is still common in many countries.

It just sound bizarre today frankly because we don't see it.
I don't think I view it as a sin.
How do you feel about female polygamists?
Blessed Nazarius practiced the ascetic life. His clothes were tattered. He wore his shoes without removing them for six years.

THE OPINIONS HERE MAY NOT REFLECT THE ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED ORTHODOX CHURCH

Offline Kerdy

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,813
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #13 on: August 05, 2012, 09:13:39 AM »
God never called polygamy a sin.   In fact so many in the OT were polygamists.

It was just written that a bishop should only have one wife.

The church however outlawed it from canon (I do not know of which one if anybody has info on it).

My personal beliefs is that polygamy is not sinful.   It is okay for a Christian layman to engage in it if he wants to and his wives say its okay.   Just as the prophets and many persons of highlight in the OT did.

Now, one thing that is not explained EVER though is the HONEY-DO list.

Can you imagine 2 no... 4 wives writing you a honey-do list every weekend?  I am not joking.  That would be murder.



Aren't we taught a man will leave his parents for his wife (singular)?

And when divorce was brought into the picture, the allowance was infidelity.  You can't have multiple wives and not commit infidelity.

Not exactly the logic of polygamy....

True a man will leave his parents for his wife.
Then a man will marry another wife, never leaving his wife.
Then a man will marry wife #3, without leaving his other two wives.

Infidelity would exist outside of matrimony.
So if you were married once, and then divorced for reasons of infidelity, then there's a problem.

The practice of polygamy was very common throughout the biblical years, and is still common in many countries.

It just sound bizarre today frankly because we don't see it.
I don't think I view it as a sin.

I don't think the instances of multiple wives in scripture is in support of polygamy, rather I see them as cautionary.

Offline Azul

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 988
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #14 on: August 05, 2012, 10:57:24 AM »
According to Orthodox moral adultery is a sin.. God made Adam and he made only one woman for him, not many.. The first to have taken two wifes was Lamech.. The Orthodox interpretation is that since the fall humanity drawed farther and farther away from God... That is what is shown into Scripture... Cain the first murderer making a refuge and being the first to build a town as a refuge from God and Lamech the first polygam.
Every formula of every religion has in this age of reason, to submit to the acid test of reason and universal assent.
Mahatma Gandhi

Offline age234

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 559
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #15 on: August 05, 2012, 01:33:12 PM »
It is okay for a Christian layman to engage in it if he wants to and his wives say its okay.

Lawl. Go to an Orthodox priest and see if he'll marry you to your second spouse. You have your answer.

Regardless of how things looked through the dim glass of Old Testament times, in its Church-era sacramental fullness, marriage is an icon of Christ and the Church. There is one Christ and one Church, so there is one groom and one bride.
« Last Edit: August 05, 2012, 01:33:29 PM by age234 »

Offline HabteSelassie

  • Ises and I-ity
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,314
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #16 on: August 05, 2012, 09:35:01 PM »
Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

God never called polygamy a sin.   In fact so many in the OT were polygamists.

It was just written that a bishop should only have one wife.

The church however outlawed it from canon (I do not know of which one if anybody has info on it).

My personal beliefs is that polygamy is not sinful.   It is okay for a Christian layman to engage in it if he wants to and his wives say its okay.   Just as the prophets and many persons of highlight in the OT did.

Now, one thing that is not explained EVER though is the HONEY-DO list.

Can you imagine 2 no... 4 wives writing you a honey-do list every weekend?  I am not joking.  That would be murder.



Aren't we taught a man will leave his parents for his wife (singular)?

And when divorce was brought into the picture, the allowance was infidelity.  You can't have multiple wives and not commit infidelity.

Not exactly the logic of polygamy....

True a man will leave his parents for his wife.
Then a man will marry another wife, never leaving his wife.
Then a man will marry wife #3, without leaving his other two wives.

Infidelity would exist outside of matrimony.
So if you were married once, and then divorced for reasons of infidelity, then there's a problem.

The practice of polygamy was very common throughout the biblical years, and is still common in many countries.

It just sound bizarre today frankly because we don't see it.
I don't think I view it as a sin.

I don't think the instances of multiple wives in scripture is in support of polygamy, rather I see them as cautionary.

Amen!  I agree, almost every instance of multiple wives in the Old Testament is filled with drama, even murder!  Whereas the ideal is the Patriarch Isaac, who was content and adored his one wife Rebecca, who comforted his soul when he was grieving over the death of his mother.  It seems that much like with divorce under Moses' Law, that God only gave polygamy out of the hardness of men's hearts, but clearly, from the beginning of creation He created them man and woman, and a man shall leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.   Not three, not four, not five not six ;)



stay blessed,
habte selassie
« Last Edit: August 05, 2012, 09:35:58 PM by HabteSelassie »
"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10

Offline NicholasMyra

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,566
    • Hyperdox Herman
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Partially-overlapping
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #17 on: August 09, 2012, 03:09:46 AM »
Something that does not make sense to me about Orthodox ethics. If Orthodoxy teaches that the purpose of sex is to produce children to be raised under the faith and that we are only allowed to have one wife, then how do we explain basic human biology? The human male was not built for monogamy.

James, I'm going to copy here what I posted in the random topics thread for you:

[Trigger Warning: This post contains Theory of Biological Evolution]


Let us first examine the closest living genetic relative of the Homo sapiens, the Chimpanzee, because I told us to.

Chimpanzee males are much larger and stronger than Chimpanzee females. Chimpanzee males develop crests as a sign of dominance. Chimpanzee females express visible signs of ovulation. The Chimpanzee males fight over ovulating females and the stronger one gets the female. This results in many "polygamous" situations.

Now, let us examine the homo sapiens:

Homo sapiens males are not, comparatively, much larger or stronger than Homo sapiens females. They do not develop crests as a sign of dominance. The females do not express visible signs of ovulation; human males, therefore cannot fight over ovulating females.

Why did homo sapiens evolve this way, and what does it say about their 'natural' sexual practices?

[Trigger warning: Investigation in progress among biological anthropologists]

Recent discoveries have overturned the idea that hominids evolved to walk on two legs in order to walk and see across distances over savannah land. One of the oldest bipedal hominids walked on two legs in the forest. Because you can carry more food that way. Who is carrying food? The males. Why? To feed the female and her children.

Chimpanzee males ensure that they have the largest possibility of being the father of as many children as possible by mating with as many ovulating females as possible. But a hominid male invests a lot of time an energy in feeding his children in order to ensure their survival. What stops a stronger male from simply impregnating his female and making the providing male a cuckold while he's not around?

Because hominid women don't show visible signs of ovulation, other males do not know when the female is fertile. So they don't know if mating with her will produce offspring from that mating or not. But this still leaves a problem: What makes the providing male more likely to impregnate the female on random chance than another male who mates with her?

Hormonal Pair Bonding, that's what.

Studies in homo sapiens have shown that pair-bonded partners have linked hormone cycles. Male testosterone peaks when female fertility peaks. This ensures that the pair-bonded, providing male has the greatest chance of impregnating his female and providing for his own children.

So, in short, the so-called "default" mating behavior of the hominid is serial monogamy with occasional straying. Interesting; that's just what you see today.
« Last Edit: August 09, 2012, 03:11:09 AM by NicholasMyra »
Quote from: Pope Francis
Thank God he said I was a politician because Aristotle defined the human person as 'Animal politicus.' So at least I am a human person.

Vote for a Ministry section on OC.net

Offline Kerdy

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,813
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #18 on: August 09, 2012, 07:49:42 AM »
Something that does not make sense to me about Orthodox ethics. If Orthodoxy teaches that the purpose of sex is to produce children to be raised under the faith and that we are only allowed to have one wife, then how do we explain basic human biology? The human male was not built for monogamy.

James, I'm going to copy here what I posted in the random topics thread for you:

[Trigger Warning: This post contains Theory of Biological Evolution]


Let us first examine the closest living genetic relative of the Homo sapiens, the Chimpanzee, because I told us to.

Chimpanzee males are much larger and stronger than Chimpanzee females. Chimpanzee males develop crests as a sign of dominance. Chimpanzee females express visible signs of ovulation. The Chimpanzee males fight over ovulating females and the stronger one gets the female. This results in many "polygamous" situations.

Now, let us examine the homo sapiens:

Homo sapiens males are not, comparatively, much larger or stronger than Homo sapiens females. They do not develop crests as a sign of dominance. The females do not express visible signs of ovulation; human males, therefore cannot fight over ovulating females.

Why did homo sapiens evolve this way, and what does it say about their 'natural' sexual practices?

[Trigger warning: Investigation in progress among biological anthropologists]

Recent discoveries have overturned the idea that hominids evolved to walk on two legs in order to walk and see across distances over savannah land. One of the oldest bipedal hominids walked on two legs in the forest. Because you can carry more food that way. Who is carrying food? The males. Why? To feed the female and her children.

Chimpanzee males ensure that they have the largest possibility of being the father of as many children as possible by mating with as many ovulating females as possible. But a hominid male invests a lot of time an energy in feeding his children in order to ensure their survival. What stops a stronger male from simply impregnating his female and making the providing male a cuckold while he's not around?

Because hominid women don't show visible signs of ovulation, other males do not know when the female is fertile. So they don't know if mating with her will produce offspring from that mating or not. But this still leaves a problem: What makes the providing male more likely to impregnate the female on random chance than another male who mates with her?

Hormonal Pair Bonding, that's what.

Studies in homo sapiens have shown that pair-bonded partners have linked hormone cycles. Male testosterone peaks when female fertility peaks. This ensures that the pair-bonded, providing male has the greatest chance of impregnating his female and providing for his own children.

So, in short, the so-called "default" mating behavior of the hominid is serial monogamy with occasional straying. Interesting; that's just what you see today.
Not being an evolutionist, I must admit this is a very sound argument.

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,695
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #19 on: August 09, 2012, 03:28:33 PM »
God never called polygamy a sin.   In fact so many in the OT were polygamists.

It was just written that a bishop should only have one wife.

The church however outlawed it from canon (I do not know of which one if anybody has info on it).

My personal beliefs is that polygamy is not sinful.   It is okay for a Christian layman to engage in it if he wants to and his wives say its okay.   Just as the prophets and many persons of highlight in the OT did.

Now, one thing that is not explained EVER though is the HONEY-DO list.

Can you imagine 2 no... 4 wives writing you a honey-do list every weekend?  I am not joking.  That would be murder.



Aren't we taught a man will leave his parents for his wife (singular)?

And when divorce was brought into the picture, the allowance was infidelity.  You can't have multiple wives and not commit infidelity.

Not exactly the logic of polygamy....

True a man will leave his parents for his wife.
Then a man will marry another wife, never leaving his wife.
Then a man will marry wife #3, without leaving his other two wives.

Infidelity would exist outside of matrimony.
So if you were married once, and then divorced for reasons of infidelity, then there's a problem.

The practice of polygamy was very common throughout the biblical years, and is still common in many countries.

It just sound bizarre today frankly because we don't see it.
I don't think I view it as a sin.
How do you feel about female polygamists?
Those are called something like polyandry or something like that.
I disagree with those.

In a polygamist relationship, you know who the father and mother are of the child.   The other way around, you don't know who the father is.   It breaks the biblical patterns of the men's name going under the "begats".

Also biblically, I can't recall any females of importance who lived like that (or any at all for that matter).

The men however, there is a pretty good list who were polygamist or arguably polygamous.

Now that said, I would never agree to live like that or don't want to at all.  But I don't think it is entirely a sin so to say.
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,695
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #20 on: August 09, 2012, 03:31:31 PM »
Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

God never called polygamy a sin.   In fact so many in the OT were polygamists.

It was just written that a bishop should only have one wife.

The church however outlawed it from canon (I do not know of which one if anybody has info on it).

My personal beliefs is that polygamy is not sinful.   It is okay for a Christian layman to engage in it if he wants to and his wives say its okay.   Just as the prophets and many persons of highlight in the OT did.

Now, one thing that is not explained EVER though is the HONEY-DO list.

Can you imagine 2 no... 4 wives writing you a honey-do list every weekend?  I am not joking.  That would be murder.



Aren't we taught a man will leave his parents for his wife (singular)?

And when divorce was brought into the picture, the allowance was infidelity.  You can't have multiple wives and not commit infidelity.

Not exactly the logic of polygamy....

True a man will leave his parents for his wife.
Then a man will marry another wife, never leaving his wife.
Then a man will marry wife #3, without leaving his other two wives.

Infidelity would exist outside of matrimony.
So if you were married once, and then divorced for reasons of infidelity, then there's a problem.

The practice of polygamy was very common throughout the biblical years, and is still common in many countries.

It just sound bizarre today frankly because we don't see it.
I don't think I view it as a sin.

I don't think the instances of multiple wives in scripture is in support of polygamy, rather I see them as cautionary.

Amen!  I agree, almost every instance of multiple wives in the Old Testament is filled with drama, even murder!  Whereas the ideal is the Patriarch Isaac, who was content and adored his one wife Rebecca, who comforted his soul when he was grieving over the death of his mother.  It seems that much like with divorce under Moses' Law, that God only gave polygamy out of the hardness of men's hearts, but clearly, from the beginning of creation He created them man and woman, and a man shall leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.   Not three, not four, not five not six ;)



stay blessed,
habte selassie

I pretty much agree with this.  I see it as cautionary, but not a sin.

Also "the two shall become one flesh" works in Polygamy, as the women are not considered one flesh with each other.  Often the marriages are not at the same time either.

But heck no I wouldn't want that.  No way no how.  LOL.   I just don't view polygamy a sin, just "watch out buddy".  LOL
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,695
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #21 on: August 09, 2012, 03:36:45 PM »
It is okay for a Christian layman to engage in it if he wants to and his wives say its okay.

Lawl. Go to an Orthodox priest and see if he'll marry you to your second spouse. You have your answer.

Regardless of how things looked through the dim glass of Old Testament times, in its Church-era sacramental fullness, marriage is an icon of Christ and the Church. There is one Christ and one Church, so there is one groom and one bride.

From Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygamy_in_Christianity

Many of the Old Testament Prophets and Patriarchs had multiple wives, including Lamech, Abraham, Jacob, Esau, Gideon, Saul, David, Solomon, Rehoboam, Elkanah, Ashur, Abijah and Jehoiada. Some interpretations also suggest Moses had a second wife in Tharbis. Other polygamists identified in the Bible include Ahab, Ahasuerus, Ashur, Belshazzar, Benhadad, Caleb, Eliphaz, Ezra, Jehoiachin, Jehoram, Jerahmeel, Joash, Machir, Manasseh, Mered, Nahor, Shaharaim, Simeon, and Zedekiah.

And often they had way more than a couple wives.

In standing tradition the church that existed supported polygamy much longer than it didn't.
Look, I'd never do it, but I can't call it a sin if the church (Jewish at the time) had so many who were polygamists.  Even the NT doesn't condemn it, but rather just states that bishops should have only 1 wife, which of course in Orthodoxy they have NONE.
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline Quinault

  • Did you drink water today?
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,952
  • What about frogs? I like frogs!
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #22 on: July 22, 2017, 04:01:47 AM »
OK, totally wrong thread. My bad. :o
« Last Edit: July 22, 2017, 04:02:25 AM by Quinault »

Offline Indocern

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,351
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #23 on: July 22, 2017, 06:26:06 AM »
Something that does not make sense to me about Orthodox ethics. If Orthodoxy teaches that the purpose of sex is to produce children to be raised under the faith and that we are only allowed to have one wife, then how do we explain basic human biology? The human male was not built for monogamy. If we are only supposed to have sex with our one wife so that we produce children, then how come it takes 9 months for a woman to have one child whereas a male can ejaculate and thus impregnate several women almost whenever he wants? In theory, if we were truly designed to have children with only one woman (our wife), then wouldn't it follow that males should only be able to impregnate one woman every per 9 months?--in accordance with how long it takes for his wife to have a child?

This leaves only two possibilities--both of which contradict the Orthodox positions. Either a) man was not meant to be monogomous or b) producing children is NOT the only purpose of sex. If we go with the former then we have to admit that the Church is wrong by promoting monogomy and outlawing polygamy. But if we go with the latter, we have to then accept that the Church is wrong in stating that the only purpose of sex is children. I am starting to think that the Church's morals are mere products of what society at a particular time believes is right or wrong. And I think that monogomy may just be a sham by feminists to cover up the true male nature to spread his seed wherever and try and force him into committing to only one partner. Just like premature ejaculation; another feminist sham. There is no such thing as 'premature' ejaculation. When you ejaculate you ejaculate. When it comes you are ready. 'Premature' is just an arbitrary human label with no real basis in biology. It ignores the true male nature. Women invented it just so that they could try and fool their man into feeling guilty for not engaging in enough foreplay, when in reality foreplay is what is biologically unnatural; not 'premature' ejaculation. Lousy feminists.

Discuss

But monogamy is the best thing ever.

Offline Agabus

  • The user formerly known as Agabus.
  • Section Moderator
  • Protokentarchos
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,441
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #24 on: July 22, 2017, 10:08:35 AM »
OK, totally wrong thread. My bad. :o

I blame you for what happens next.
Blessed Nazarius practiced the ascetic life. His clothes were tattered. He wore his shoes without removing them for six years.

THE OPINIONS HERE MAY NOT REFLECT THE ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED ORTHODOX CHURCH

Offline Indocern

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,351
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Take comfort in the warmth of the Jacuzzi of Oriental Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 32,822
  • Pope Pius XIII, play for us!
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #26 on: July 22, 2017, 12:00:24 PM »
http://ardentlight.com/ministry/monogamy-ultimate-path-spiritual-enlightenment/

Quote
Total FREEdom for ALL through Self-Sufficiency, Intentional Community, Biodynamic Organic Farming, Permaculture, Yoga, Meditation & Holistic Healing

Can't you just read a Bible or the Prologue of Ochrid or something? 
Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

The whole forum is Mor. We're emanations of his godlike mind.

Offline Indocern

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,351
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #27 on: July 22, 2017, 12:16:55 PM »
Ok, but God created humans for monogamy according to me, like Adam and Eve and other people in bible.

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,014
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #28 on: July 22, 2017, 12:22:30 PM »
To me, this is very similar to the issue of homosexual desire that we have been debating endlessly on these boards of late.  I believe it is true that the majority of men are predisposed towards spreading their seed around as much as possible.  I believe that this is an unfortunate result of the Fall, a distortion and perversion of the blessed gift from God of a man's desire for his wife, and something that can easily lead to sin.  We cannot cop out and say, "It's in my nature" or "I cannot help it" or even "But I honestly love them both!" anymore than we can allow similar arguments for people afflicted with homosexual desires.  Indocern is right that God indeed created man and woman for heterosexual monogamy.  Anything else is a perversion no matter how you try to spin it.
« Last Edit: July 22, 2017, 12:23:26 PM by Antonious Nikolas »
Now accepting brief PMs.

Online xOrthodox4Christx

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,195
  • Faith: Orthodox Catholic Church
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #29 on: July 22, 2017, 12:45:50 PM »
Different biologists will tell you different things. Dr. Helen Fisher will tell you monogamy is entirely natural, others will say polyamory and hypergamy is the natural.

Ultimately, I don't think this is a problem with Orthodox ethics, but with human beings.
“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”- St. Ambrose of Milan

"Now one cannot be a half-hearted Christian, but only entirely or not at all." -Fr. Seraphim Rose

"He who does not love his brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen." (1 John 4:20)

Offline augustin717

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,419
  • Faith: Higher Criticism
  • Jurisdiction: Dutch
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #30 on: July 22, 2017, 01:13:39 PM »
To me, this is very similar to the issue of homosexual desire that we have been debating endlessly on these boards of late.  I believe it is true that the majority of men are predisposed towards spreading their seed around as much as possible.  I believe that this is an unfortunate result of the Fall, a distortion and perversion of the blessed gift from God of a man's desire for his wife, and something that can easily lead to sin.  We cannot cop out and say, "It's in my nature" or "I cannot help it" or even "But I honestly love them both!" anymore than we can allow similar arguments for people afflicted with homosexual desires.  Indocern is right that God indeed created man and woman for heterosexual monogamy.  Anything else is a perversion no matter how you try to spin it.
there  are a  few species of birds and mammals left unaffected by the fall in this wise . The storks I think continue in their prelapsarian monogamous felicity.
« Last Edit: July 22, 2017, 01:14:09 PM by augustin717 »
She hears, upon that water without sound,
A voice that cries, “The tomb in Palestine
Is not the porch of spirits lingering.
It is the grave of Jesus, where he lay.”
We live in an old chaos of the sun,
Or old dependency of day and night,
Or island solitude, unsponsored, free,
Of that wide water, inescapable.

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,182
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #31 on: July 22, 2017, 01:14:31 PM »
I see this is a very old thread. So kind of like shouting in an empty room if I post: Stop worshiping scientists you numb-nuts.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,014
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #32 on: July 22, 2017, 01:53:18 PM »
To me, this is very similar to the issue of homosexual desire that we have been debating endlessly on these boards of late.  I believe it is true that the majority of men are predisposed towards spreading their seed around as much as possible.  I believe that this is an unfortunate result of the Fall, a distortion and perversion of the blessed gift from God of a man's desire for his wife, and something that can easily lead to sin.  We cannot cop out and say, "It's in my nature" or "I cannot help it" or even "But I honestly love them both!" anymore than we can allow similar arguments for people afflicted with homosexual desires.  Indocern is right that God indeed created man and woman for heterosexual monogamy.  Anything else is a perversion no matter how you try to spin it.
there  are a  few species of birds and mammals left unaffected by the fall in this wise . The storks I think continue in their prelapsarian monogamous felicity.

I know you're being flip of course, but this does raise an interesting question.  Can we truly say that God ordained monogamy for all creatures?  I don't know that we can.  It is clear that He ordained it for human couples though.
Now accepting brief PMs.

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,182
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #33 on: July 22, 2017, 02:06:24 PM »
Quote a few species at all levels of life form are monogamous. The creatures can be an icon of various qualities for mankind, in my opinion. All of them are an example to man in this way: inasmuch as they can, they always do what was ordained for them by God.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Take comfort in the warmth of the Jacuzzi of Oriental Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 32,822
  • Pope Pius XIII, play for us!
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #34 on: July 22, 2017, 02:28:26 PM »
To me, this is very similar to the issue of homosexual desire that we have been debating endlessly on these boards of late.  I believe it is true that the majority of men are predisposed towards spreading their seed around as much as possible.  I believe that this is an unfortunate result of the Fall, a distortion and perversion of the blessed gift from God of a man's desire for his wife, and something that can easily lead to sin.  We cannot cop out and say, "It's in my nature" or "I cannot help it" or even "But I honestly love them both!" anymore than we can allow similar arguments for people afflicted with homosexual desires.  Indocern is right that God indeed created man and woman for heterosexual monogamy.  Anything else is a perversion no matter how you try to spin it.
there  are a  few species of birds and mammals left unaffected by the fall in this wise . The storks I think continue in their prelapsarian monogamous felicity.

I know you're being flip of course, but this does raise an interesting question.  Can we truly say that God ordained monogamy for all creatures?  I don't know that we can.  It is clear that He ordained it for human couples though.

If it is clear, how would you explain instances of polygamy in the OT, particularly among the fathers? 
Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

The whole forum is Mor. We're emanations of his godlike mind.

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,182
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #35 on: July 22, 2017, 02:36:23 PM »
To me, this is very similar to the issue of homosexual desire that we have been debating endlessly on these boards of late.  I believe it is true that the majority of men are predisposed towards spreading their seed around as much as possible.  I believe that this is an unfortunate result of the Fall, a distortion and perversion of the blessed gift from God of a man's desire for his wife, and something that can easily lead to sin.  We cannot cop out and say, "It's in my nature" or "I cannot help it" or even "But I honestly love them both!" anymore than we can allow similar arguments for people afflicted with homosexual desires.  Indocern is right that God indeed created man and woman for heterosexual monogamy.  Anything else is a perversion no matter how you try to spin it.
there  are a  few species of birds and mammals left unaffected by the fall in this wise . The storks I think continue in their prelapsarian monogamous felicity.

I know you're being flip of course, but this does raise an interesting question.  Can we truly say that God ordained monogamy for all creatures?  I don't know that we can.  It is clear that He ordained it for human couples though.

If it is clear, how would you explain instances of polygamy in the OT, particularly among the fathers?

The Holy Patriarchs actually seemed quite resistant to polygamy. St. Abraham loved St. Sarah and desired a child with her for many decades. In the end, he was won over by his beloved's urging attempts to gain them children and copulated with Hagar and Keturah. St. Isaac lived a long and faithful life with his Rebekah. St. Jacob's story is even more pathos-filled. He worked for many years, a near-slave, to prove his love and win the hand of Rachel, but was cruelly tricked. At the urging of the pagan father-in-law, he worked as many years again, while wed to Leah, finally to win Rachel's hand. Scripture also is at pains to show the fallout of these supernumerary family lives, with brotherly strife depicted as inevitable and horrible, children's lives even on the line (Ishmael and Joseph), altho in the end the grace of God was able to bless all.

The Kings Saul and Solomon are chided by the Prophets very outspokenly for their multiple marriages, which were the pagan political order of the day.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline Jetavan

  • Argumentum ad australopithecum
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,807
  • Tenzin and Desmond
    • The Mystical Theology
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #36 on: July 22, 2017, 02:47:50 PM »
Can we truly say that God ordained monogamy for all creatures?  I don't know that we can.  It is clear that He ordained it for human couples though.
How would one explain these verses:

"If a man has two wives, one loved and the other unloved, and if both the loved and the unloved bear him sons, but the firstborn is the son of the unloved wife: when he comes to bequeath his property to his sons he may not consider as his firstborn the son of the wife he loves, in preference to the son of the wife he does not love, the firstborn."
-- Deuternomy 21:15-16
If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,182
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #37 on: July 22, 2017, 02:49:39 PM »
Can we truly say that God ordained monogamy for all creatures?  I don't know that we can.  It is clear that He ordained it for human couples though.
How would one explain these verses:

"If a man has two wives, one loved and the other unloved, and if both the loved and the unloved bear him sons, but the firstborn is the son of the unloved wife: when he comes to bequeath his property to his sons he may not consider as his firstborn the son of the wife he loves, in preference to the son of the wife he does not love, the firstborn."
-- Deuternomy 21:15-16

A law not only protecting the first marriage but serving to teach its preference in the minds of a people?
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline Jetavan

  • Argumentum ad australopithecum
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,807
  • Tenzin and Desmond
    • The Mystical Theology
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #38 on: July 22, 2017, 02:53:46 PM »
Can we truly say that God ordained monogamy for all creatures?  I don't know that we can.  It is clear that He ordained it for human couples though.
How would one explain these verses:

"If a man has two wives, one loved and the other unloved, and if both the loved and the unloved bear him sons, but the firstborn is the son of the unloved wife: when he comes to bequeath his property to his sons he may not consider as his firstborn the son of the wife he loves, in preference to the son of the wife he does not love, the firstborn."
-- Deuternomy 21:15-16

A law not only protecting the first marriage but serving to teach its preference in the minds of a people?
Mayhap, but the marriage order of the two wives is not revealed; only that the unloved wife is the first wife to bear a son.
« Last Edit: July 22, 2017, 02:54:45 PM by Jetavan »
If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,182
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #39 on: July 22, 2017, 02:57:47 PM »
Can we truly say that God ordained monogamy for all creatures?  I don't know that we can.  It is clear that He ordained it for human couples though.
How would one explain these verses:

"If a man has two wives, one loved and the other unloved, and if both the loved and the unloved bear him sons, but the firstborn is the son of the unloved wife: when he comes to bequeath his property to his sons he may not consider as his firstborn the son of the wife he loves, in preference to the son of the wife he does not love, the firstborn."
-- Deuternomy 21:15-16

A law not only protecting the first marriage but serving to teach its preference in the minds of a people?
Mayhap, but the marriage order of the two wives is not revealed; only that the unloved wife is the first wife to bear a son.

Such is the limit of law. "The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life." I'm sure the Talmidim could give you some complicated codicils meant to clarify the problem you see. Or we could stick with one wife and the one Church and seek to follow after the spirit of love.
« Last Edit: July 22, 2017, 02:59:08 PM by Porter ODoran »
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,182
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #40 on: July 22, 2017, 03:04:21 PM »
For what it's worth, I don't think two wives is the worst problem in the world. However, to present the Bible as pro-multiples isn't accurate.

The real topic of the thread, the way some Christian young men naively swallow the ragey lies of science-fans, really boils down to the longstanding modern problem of whether to be hip or to be humble. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Science-fans have their own path of salvation for you (dystopian as it may be). So man up and pick a master.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline Quinault

  • Did you drink water today?
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,952
  • What about frogs? I like frogs!
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #41 on: July 22, 2017, 04:08:47 PM »
OK, totally wrong thread. My bad. :o

I blame you for what happens next.

I thousand pardons!

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,014
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #42 on: July 22, 2017, 04:12:54 PM »
To me, this is very similar to the issue of homosexual desire that we have been debating endlessly on these boards of late.  I believe it is true that the majority of men are predisposed towards spreading their seed around as much as possible.  I believe that this is an unfortunate result of the Fall, a distortion and perversion of the blessed gift from God of a man's desire for his wife, and something that can easily lead to sin.  We cannot cop out and say, "It's in my nature" or "I cannot help it" or even "But I honestly love them both!" anymore than we can allow similar arguments for people afflicted with homosexual desires.  Indocern is right that God indeed created man and woman for heterosexual monogamy.  Anything else is a perversion no matter how you try to spin it.
there  are a  few species of birds and mammals left unaffected by the fall in this wise . The storks I think continue in their prelapsarian monogamous felicity.

I know you're being flip of course, but this does raise an interesting question.  Can we truly say that God ordained monogamy for all creatures?  I don't know that we can.  It is clear that He ordained it for human couples though.

If it is clear, how would you explain instances of polygamy in the OT, particularly among the fathers?

From what my first father of confession taught me, God allowed that "because of the hardness of [the people's] hearts".  He created Adam and Eve to be monogamous.  That was the ideal.  He didn't create Adam and Eve and Rachel and Leah so Adam could have variety.  But after the fall, the people became hard-hearted, and if a woman wasn't a part of his household, a man couldn't be bothered with her care and would let her starve, turn to prostitution, etc., so God permitted that for the same reason He permitted "putting away one's wife", the Biblical form of slavery, and any number of other less than ideal situations in the time of the Old Testament.  I think we'd all agree though that as righteous as Abraham, David, and Solomon were, their dalliances with women were not something that God wanted for man and wife before the fall, or after Christ called us to a higher standard.  I've met many Rastafari though who try to defend their own polygamy on just such a basis.

Can we truly say that God ordained monogamy for all creatures?  I don't know that we can.  It is clear that He ordained it for human couples though.
How would one explain these verses:

"If a man has two wives, one loved and the other unloved, and if both the loved and the unloved bear him sons, but the firstborn is the son of the unloved wife: when he comes to bequeath his property to his sons he may not consider as his firstborn the son of the wife he loves, in preference to the son of the wife he does not love, the firstborn."
-- Deuternomy 21:15-16

Please see my answer to Mor above, Jetevan.
« Last Edit: July 22, 2017, 04:13:19 PM by Antonious Nikolas »
Now accepting brief PMs.

Offline Alpha60

  • The Confederate Flag Is Diabolical and Blasphemous
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,359
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #43 on: July 22, 2017, 06:08:08 PM »
http://ardentlight.com/ministry/monogamy-ultimate-path-spiritual-enlightenment/

Quote
Total FREEdom for ALL through Self-Sufficiency, Intentional Community, Biodynamic Organic Farming, Permaculture, Yoga, Meditation & Holistic Healing

Can't you just read a Bible or the Prologue of Ochrid or something?

+2
"It is logical that the actions of the human race over time will lead to its destruction.  I, Alpha 60, am merely the agent of this destruction."

- The computer Alpha 60, from Alphaville (1964) by Jean Luc Godard, the obvious inspiration for HAL-9000 from 2001: A Space Odyssey. 

This signature is not intended to offend any user, nor the relatives of Discovery 1 deputy commander Dr. Frank Poole,  and crew members Dr. Victor Kaminsky, Dr. Jack Kimball, and Dr. Charles Hunter.

Offline Alpha60

  • The Confederate Flag Is Diabolical and Blasphemous
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,359
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox
Re: Humans & Monogamy?
« Reply #44 on: July 22, 2017, 06:08:34 PM »
For what it's worth, I don't think two wives is the worst problem in the world. However, to present the Bible as pro-multiples isn't accurate.

The real topic of the thread, the way some Christian young men naively swallow the ragey lies of science-fans, really boils down to the longstanding modern problem of whether to be hip or to be humble. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Science-fans have their own path of salvation for you (dystopian as it may be). So man up and pick a master.

Agreed.
"It is logical that the actions of the human race over time will lead to its destruction.  I, Alpha 60, am merely the agent of this destruction."

- The computer Alpha 60, from Alphaville (1964) by Jean Luc Godard, the obvious inspiration for HAL-9000 from 2001: A Space Odyssey. 

This signature is not intended to offend any user, nor the relatives of Discovery 1 deputy commander Dr. Frank Poole,  and crew members Dr. Victor Kaminsky, Dr. Jack Kimball, and Dr. Charles Hunter.