(In a Nutshell) Your Hermeneutical Approach

[Mojo]

I was semi-forced to learn about poly when my first wife divorced me. Now what am I gonna do? I am a divorced pastor!

*depression and panic ensues*

This is the missing part I’m looking for in this thread.

When it all started to make sense, what new hermeneutic did you arrive at?

Most fundamental Baptists I know are:
Pretrib
Premillennial
Dispensational

Those beliefs don’t leave much room for polygyny do they?

 

[Mojo]

But that prerogative rests with them. Ultimately it is the individual who decides what is right and wrong.

Agreed

But you don’t think your voice of reason and expertise can make them reconsider?

Explaining to them WHY you believe in polygyny and HOW you arrived at that belief is much better than just declaring that you’re right and they’re wrong.

 

[Mojo]

Hence the "ten virgins" parable. (Or is it the "ten bridesmaids", as twisted?)

It's a weak argument. Until they recognize that He didn't re-write His own "statutes, judgments, and commandments" - about anything! - they will REFUSE to see things like that.

I think you may have missed the full context of this quote.

Is it a good argument to argue that the ecclesia is plural and Christ marries all of us? Wouldn’t that imply bisexuality?

 

[Mojo]

There also comes a time when we are told to NOT "keep silent."

The key is obedience to Him, and wisdom.

I agree. But I’d say that line is very rarely necessary to cross when speaking of polygyny.

If we go around bringing it up and throwing it in people’s faces as the ultimate issue in our churches, fellowships and assemblies, I’d say we’re missing the big picture (a dying world in need of salvation).

 

[Mark C]

I agree. But I’d say that line is very rarely necessary to cross when speaking of polygyny.

Often true. But it's an issue every man with more than one wife WILL need to be able to address.

Years ago, I decided never to be "defensive" about it ever again.

 

[Mark C]

Is it a good argument to argue that the ecclesia is plural and Christ marries all of us? Wouldn’t that imply bisexuality?

No, because that 'marriage' is already beyond most of 'sun-day xtianity' to be able to understand anyways, since His two wives are Israel, the northern kingdom, and Judah, the southern kingdom. And both were exiled (shalach-ed) for whoring/idolatry -- and still are.

If the idea on this thread was 'simple,' and 'succinct' - that puts it beyond an explanation that they will understand, even if they can name most of the 'ten commandments.'

 

[Mojo]

If the idea on this thread was 'simple,' and 'succinct' - that puts it beyond an explanation that they will understand, even if they can name most of the 'ten commandments.'

I agree. Which is why I don’t think it’s the most essential point to get someone who’s struggling, or outright rejecting this truth, to understand how all of us here can arrive at our conclusions.

I’m thinking broader picture in this thread.

When we approach this topic with a skeptic, we need to avoid going straight for the jugular and showing them “proof texts”. Cults and provocateurs love that stuff.

Stepping back and showing them a broader approach to scripture (hermeneutic) sets the table. It gets them in the door.

 

[Mark C]

I trust you see the sarcasm.

I did. Hopefully that was to emphasize it.