Sometimes mere rebuttal is not a sufficient response. I propose this thread (perhaps the synopsis will ultimately find its way into an FAQ as well! :lol: ) be used as a repository for the
Absolutely WORST, most disingenuous, anti-Bible articles on polygyny
that any of us have ever seen.
I will start the process with my own nomination, noted just the other day in a "links" thread. Extra points, obviously, if the so-called "teacher" claims to be a "pastor" or "preacher"...since one could argue that they should know better.
Without further ado, here's the link:
http://theresurgence.com/is-polygamy-biblical
===============================================
At this point -- since this "teacher" obviously understands the propaganda techniques of "guilt by association", "lying by omission", and related methods of semantic manipulation (all of which are demonstrated in this bit of ...tripe) but does NOT evidently allow comments on his site...
I will put up a point-by-point analysis, just to make the point :
My comments will be in this color.
I continue to submit that SOME "teachings" are so malicious and anti-Biblical that they are worthy of open rebuke and outright ridicule. Our Savior called those who "taught as doctrine the commandments of men" Hypocrites over and over. (See all of Matthew 23, of course, and MANY other references, like Mark 7 and major parts of the 'Sermon on the Mount'.
I'll close this way. Go back and read the story in Genesis 3 (you know, the famously failed First Monogamous Marriage, by which Sin Entered The World, which proves that ALL Monogamy is "wrought" with recrimination and deception, and that God gave Adam only one wife so that it would be easier for Satan to deceive Only One.
:twisted: 
)
Check out that First Addition to God's Word, right there in v.3:3. I submit, in all seriousness, that what this "teacher" has done is NOTHING less twisted, and arguably more deliberate, than that identical failure of Adam's (presumed
) Monogamous Wife:
she "added to" the one, simple, single commandment she had been taught, and only a few words (in the English - even less in the Hebrew!)
"neither shall you touch it."
This guy not only added a LOT more, but deliberately worked up his version with a superb propaganda effort as well!
I submit that he should have started his tome with these words:
"Yea, hath God said...?"
--------------------------------------
* And I'll add this footnote in the interest of honesty and to short-circuit a possible objection. Lamech himself admits that he has "slain a man". But is he the First Murderer in Scripture, even if he is the First (noted) Polygynist?
No - that would be Cain, son of the First Monogamists. What does THAT say about the Evil Wrought by Monogamy?
Hey, at least Lamech was "godly" enough to confess his sin, and even evidently repent of it. Cain apparently just made excuses and whined about his punishment. I guess I should point out the "lie of omission" by our nominated author here, too. Did you catch how Lamech is "godless" -- but doesn't get any credit for being the father of musicians and metalworkers?
Do you see why this type of self-serving, underhanded, downright lazy and deliberately misleading "exegesis" is so reprehensible?
Absolutely WORST, most disingenuous, anti-Bible articles on polygyny
that any of us have ever seen.
I will start the process with my own nomination, noted just the other day in a "links" thread. Extra points, obviously, if the so-called "teacher" claims to be a "pastor" or "preacher"...since one could argue that they should know better.
Without further ado, here's the link:
http://theresurgence.com/is-polygamy-biblical
===============================================
At this point -- since this "teacher" obviously understands the propaganda techniques of "guilt by association", "lying by omission", and related methods of semantic manipulation (all of which are demonstrated in this bit of ...tripe) but does NOT evidently allow comments on his site...
I will put up a point-by-point analysis, just to make the point :
My comments will be in this color.
JUST BECAUSE SOMETHING IS IN THE BIBLE
DOES NOT MEAN THAT GOD APPROVES OF IT
Various cults, aberrant sects, and perverts make the case that the Bible does mention polygamy and so it is biblically acceptable.
Let's get right to the propaganda! So -- if YOU can read God's Word for what it ACTUALLY SAYS...which are you?
Cult, aberrant, or pervert?
However, they fail to acknowledge that the Bible speaks of human sin from beginning to end to show the evil horrors of sin.
Just like THIS guy conspicuously "fails to acknowledge" that the Bible is specific. God manages to call "sin", sin. He even calls "abomination", abomination.
Funny, I don't see this fellow quoting any Scripture that explicitly forbids "adding to" His Word (like "forbidding to marry", or inventing new prohibitions He did not), or calls people "Hypocrites!" for calling "good", evil!
Therefore, just because something is in the Bible does not mean that God approves of it, as is the case with the rapes, murders, and adulteries reported throughout Scripture.
Is it just me, or did anyone else note that ALL of those things that he disingenuously lumps in with 'polygyny' also happen to be EXPLICITLY FORBIDDEN? Did you catch the attempt at guilt by association, though? I bet we see him try this technique again...after all, every propagandist knows that it's REPETITION that cements the Evil Association!
There are many biblical and practical reasons why polygamy is sinful and harmful.
Let's see if this bald assertion is actually supported by evidence.
1. The first man to take more than one wife was the godless man Lamech (Genesis 4:19–24).
"godless"? I'll go out on a limb here and call this statement a "lie", since I actually READ the reference. The only thing about his claim that is honest is that Lamech* actually had two wives; the rest is mere assertion -- or worse.
2. Some of the Old Testament patriarchs did practice polygamy, and it never honored God.
Never?
For example, Abram married Hagar in addition to Sarai. The results of this polygamy are truly tragic,
Watch the dissemination! "results of this polygamy" is what even a crooked lawyer (he's making me feel more kindly to the worst of 'em
as is the case with other instances of adultery and polygamy in Scripture.
Aha! Clever! Anybody catch this? More subtle than the last attempt, this is yet another "guilt by association" jab. He's still not done, though...
Abram slept with Hagar and she bore him a son.
"slept with"...even MORE clever.
God promised that Hagar’s son would become the father of a great nation because he was a son of Abram, though not the son of the promise (which would eventually be Isaac). God promised that Ishmael would be a “wild donkey of a man” and that he would be a warrior in hostility with his brothers who would descend from Abram. Ishmael was born to a Hebrew father and Egyptian mother and became the father of the Arab nations that to this day are in hostility with Jews and Christians alike, as promised.
Lotsa verbage, eh? Do you think ANY of this has to do with "polygyny" per se -- or is he just spreading it a bit thicker?
3. The disaster of polygamy
Subtle...but he's on a roll...
is illustrated by Lamech and Adah and Zillah in Genesis 4:19–24, Esau and Mahalath and other wives in Genesis 28:6–9, and Jacob and Leah and Rachel in Genesis 29:15–30. None of these occurrences was [sic] godly or good.
This is one of my favorites. Joseph Goebbels would've loved this one. Note that he still even judges for himself what is 'godly or good'.
But it's also sooo twisted that nothing short of a bit of parody will do it justice. Here's how I'd rewrite it to make the point:
3. The disaster of monogamy is illustrated by Adam and Eve in Genesis 3:3 and 3:12. None of these occurrences [sic] was godly or good.
4. The Bible repeatedly shows that polygamy is wrought with favoritism, fighting, jealousy, and mistreatment (e.g., Genesis 35:22; 38:18–28; 2 Samuel 3:2–5; 13:1–29; 15–18; 1 Kings 11:1–4).
Let's just get it right; watch carefully:
- The Bible repeatedly shows that marriage is wrought with favoritism, fighting, jealousy, and mistreatment...
(this may be why the Apostle Paul says "Nevertheless such shall have trouble in the flesh, but I spare you." :shock: )
I'm gonna assert at this point that he's 0-for-2 with those unsupported assertions!('sinful' and 'harmful'). QED.
5. The New Testament church elders who serve as the pattern for Christian families are to be one-woman men and not polygamists (1 Timothy 3:2, 12).
We've seen this one a hundred times, so it wouldn't even qualify for "special mention" in this hall of shame. It's merely a "lie by omission", since he simply doesn't bother with "due diligence" (as many of us have done, by looking at the Greek article "mia" and noting that "first-woman man" is just as faithful a rendering. Propaganda points, however, are awarded for the subtle -- and again unsupported -- bogus assertion. Didja catch it? These "NOT polygamists" are intended "serve as a pattern"! Funny, I could make the case that if there was a "pattern" that the author of these letters (that guy Paul, again) intended, it was celibacy! After all, he said so, and I just quoted it!
6. God’s intention is that each man would have one wife (Genesis 2:18; Matthew 19:4–6).
Now he [sic] knows "God's intention"! How DARE I actually READ those two references and say "shame on you." An admission here, folks: Even though I've seen this one before, such self-serving hubris really makes me mad.
7. Marriage is ultimately a picture of Jesus’ loving relationship with the church (Ephesians 5:22–33; Revelation 19:6–9). Jesus is faithful to one bride, the church, as the pattern for all marriages.
That's no doubt why He told the "Parable of the Ten Virgins", wrote SEVEN letters to SEVEN churches, and talks (via TWO witnesses, even) about His TWO wives (Israel and Judea, or Jerusalem and Samaria - take your pick).
I continue to submit that SOME "teachings" are so malicious and anti-Biblical that they are worthy of open rebuke and outright ridicule. Our Savior called those who "taught as doctrine the commandments of men" Hypocrites over and over. (See all of Matthew 23, of course, and MANY other references, like Mark 7 and major parts of the 'Sermon on the Mount'.
I'll close this way. Go back and read the story in Genesis 3 (you know, the famously failed First Monogamous Marriage, by which Sin Entered The World, which proves that ALL Monogamy is "wrought" with recrimination and deception, and that God gave Adam only one wife so that it would be easier for Satan to deceive Only One.
:twisted: )Check out that First Addition to God's Word, right there in v.3:3. I submit, in all seriousness, that what this "teacher" has done is NOTHING less twisted, and arguably more deliberate, than that identical failure of Adam's (presumed
) Monogamous Wife: she "added to" the one, simple, single commandment she had been taught, and only a few words (in the English - even less in the Hebrew!)
"neither shall you touch it."
This guy not only added a LOT more, but deliberately worked up his version with a superb propaganda effort as well!
I submit that he should have started his tome with these words:
"Yea, hath God said...?"
--------------------------------------
* And I'll add this footnote in the interest of honesty and to short-circuit a possible objection. Lamech himself admits that he has "slain a man". But is he the First Murderer in Scripture, even if he is the First (noted) Polygynist?
No - that would be Cain, son of the First Monogamists.
What does THAT say about the Evil Wrought by Monogamy? Hey, at least Lamech was "godly" enough to confess his sin, and even evidently repent of it. Cain apparently just made excuses and whined about his punishment.
I guess I should point out the "lie of omission" by our nominated author here, too. Did you catch how Lamech is "godless" -- but doesn't get any credit for being the father of musicians and metalworkers?Do you see why this type of self-serving, underhanded, downright lazy and deliberately misleading "exegesis" is so reprehensible?
