Quote# 113303

Is Polygamy Next?

For years I’ve been saying that once you open the door to redefine marriage, where do you stop? Well, that’s already starting to happen since the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) decision to legalize gay “marriage” in June. After all, if “love wins,” as gay “marriage” activists say, then by this line of thinking why shouldn’t “love win” in cases of polygamy, bestiality, and pedophilia? As soon as you get rid of an absolute standard—God’s Word—anything and everything goes with regard to marriage. It’s just like Scripture says, “everyone did what was right in his own eyes” (Judges 21:25).

Well, the Browns, a polygamous family made popular by the reality TV show Sister Wives, says the SCOTUS ruling “shows that laws restricting consensual adult relationships are outdated, even if certain unions are unpopular.” Now, the Browns are currently in court “defending a legal victory they won in 2013, when a federal judge struck down key parts of Utah’s law banning polygamy.” The Browns are not seeking to have polygamy legalized, but just to uphold this court ruling that would allow them all to live together without fear of arrest. But court cases like this raise the question of when a polygamous family will decide to fight for the legalization of polygamy. With the redefinition of marriage by SCOTUS, why shouldn’t they be allowed to marry since the new philosophy in our culture is “as long as they love one another”? Again, without an absolute authority you can’t call anything right or wrong!

But polygamy—and other perversions of marriage—are wrong, and we as Christians can say so because we have the authoritative Word from the Creator of marriage. You see, Genesis describes the creation of marriage. It is not something that evolved or that society or a government invented. It’s an institution created by God,

So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. Then God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it. (Genesis 1:27–28)

Then the rib which the Lord God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man. And Adam said:

This is now bone of my bones
And flesh of my flesh;
She shall be called Woman,
Because she was taken out of Man.

Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. (Genesis 2:22–24)


In Matthew 19, Jesus quotes from Genesis 2 (one flesh) as the basis for marriage being a male and female—one man and one woman (Matthew 19:4–7).

Some erroneously believe that the Bible endorses polygamy because of clear occurrences of it in the Old Testament. But the cases mentioned in detail actually point to the sinfulness of mankind and negative consequences of such situations. God created marriage, and He designed it for one man and one woman for life. Because we have the absolute standard of God’s Word, we can authoritatively declare certain behaviors and practices to be wrong because our Creator says that they are wrong. As Christians, we need to boldly stand on the authority of God’s Word and defend biblical marriage as we act as salt and light in a dying world. You can also read this article on the Answers in Genesis website about whether the Bible condones polygamy.

Those who reject God’s Word as the absolute authority have to live inconsistently in this world. If there is no absolute authority, then who draws the lines in regard to moral issues—and why? Who sets and standards and why? Ultimately, the culture will become like that described in the book of Judges:

In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes. (Judges 21:25)

Thanks for stopping by and thanks for praying,
Ken

This item was written with the assistance of AiG’s research team.

Ken Ham, Answers in Genesis 39 Comments [10/3/2015 5:18:01 AM]
Fundie Index: 8
Submitted By: Chris
Username:
Comment:



1 2 | bottom

Malingspann

Cue the Biblical Marriage chart.

10/3/2015 5:28:58 AM

Kanna

You have an entire useless "research team". Why not ask them to define "consenting adult" for you?

As for polygamy, the laws would have to be extremely complicated, instead of just the single change needed for ALL the marriage laws to permit same sex couples to marry. It may happen, but I don't expect they'll unravel that ball of string in my lifetime.

10/3/2015 5:29:17 AM

gimel

Patriarch Jacob and king Solomon might want to share few words with you.

10/3/2015 5:30:26 AM

Philbert McAdamia

But...but...but what about Bill Nye, Kenny?

10/3/2015 5:32:52 AM



I get it now - Ken wants to be King!

10/3/2015 5:33:59 AM

TimeToTurn

Even if you think gay marriage and homosexuality is wrong, why shouldn't gay marriage be legal, being that one, the Bible is not the law of the US and never was, and two, the Bible only condemns homosexuality and not gay marriage.

I don't see how the Old Testament doesn't support polygamy, though. Remember that out of the 12 tribes of Israel, most descend from Leah, including the Tribe of Judah, Jesus's tribe. Therefore, Jacob having multiple wives was a misunderstood blessing from God.

10/3/2015 5:50:19 AM

Da Rat Bastid

(Kanna)
"It may happen, but I don't expect they'll unravel that ball of string in my lifetime."


It could indeed happen that soon, if sufficient effort were devoted to solving the admittedly complicated problem. Hell, with the raging hard-on the U.S. government has for corporations, it'd be even easier than most people think. Since marriage in the absence of any religious trappings is merely a legal contract, a plural marriage could be treated similarly to a corporation (which, as we all know, has the same rights as an actual person anyway *rolls eyes*). We could bankroll 100 of the best corporate lawyers whose services money can buy, and assemble them into a group, calling their collective efforts "The Solomon Project". Once that ball starts rolling, it could easily reach its destination by 2050.

10/3/2015 5:55:28 AM

Grey Rook

@Kanna : Allow me to take a swing at how that would work out:
"Consent: term irrelevant, only god matters. Adult: any human over sixteen years of age. Conclusion: the world was created six thousand years ago by Jesus who walked with the dinosaurs and gave us everything good in the world."

Or something like that.

10/3/2015 5:55:36 AM

Kuyohashi

AiG has a research team? Do they have to pull their "facts" out of their own asses, or do they help each other out with the extraction?

10/3/2015 6:07:01 AM



Solomon had no problem

10/3/2015 6:14:44 AM

FundieVision Inc

....

Didn't Bill Nye beating you down in the debate teach you anything Hammy-Chan?

Why is this even an issue? What happens between two or more adults who give informed consent is no one elses business. Love is love, and ethical non monogamy is a perfectly acceptable

I think Kanna is right about the legal hurdles with the marriage, but for now I'd settle for a more tolerant and accepting attitude towards ethical non-monogamy.

10/3/2015 6:39:14 AM

Teddeck

"Is polygamy next?"

Well your precious bible approves of it heartily, so why are you so upset?

10/3/2015 6:42:29 AM

creativerealms

Who needs a research team to rant?

10/3/2015 6:45:43 AM

Swede

The redifining of marriage began when it became just one man and one woman.
The Supreme Court just said that forbidding same-sex marriages is unconstitutional.

They say "love wins" AFTER equal marriage rights have been passed. It's not an argument for it, silly. The argument is that marriage is between two consenting adults. Polygamy carries with it a lot of legal problem as to who inherits who and what to do when they split up, and that everyone ought to be equal in the marriage (no first and second hierarchy). Bestiality and pedophilia both have a lack of consenting adults.

" an absolute standard—God’s Word


I kinda fail to see the word "marriage" in the bolded text in the middle..

God's Word: "Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones."

The United Nations is the closest thing to "absolute authority" on this planet.

10/3/2015 6:57:00 AM

nazani14

"Is polygamy next?"
Maybe. I don't give a rat's ass, unless the laws governing it give unfair tax breaks.

10/3/2015 7:21:57 AM

solomongrundy

This item was written with the assistance of AiG’s research team.

The last paragraph of AiG's 'Statement of Faith';

By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the scriptural record. Of primary importance is the fact that evidence is always subject to interpretation by fallible people who do not possess all information.

That is completely incompatible with any real form of research.



10/3/2015 8:30:16 AM

Thinking Allowed

But polygamy—and other perversions of marriage—are wrong

So Ken, are you saying your god is wrong?


10/3/2015 8:38:56 AM

Goomy pls

I am fairly sure that polygamy is not inherently a bad thing, and also that your shiftiness with the Bu¥Bull's attitude toward it is deceptive.

10/3/2015 8:54:47 AM



What a difference. Just a few years ago, you swore up and down polygamy wouldn't happen. Now you say there's nothing wrong with it.

10/3/2015 9:35:55 AM

Pule Thamex

Proof positive that the AIG research team is absolutely useless. The most that it is able to dredge up after ...er..some research ...er...is that spittle may be flecked egregiously in lieu of intelligence being shown.

Ken Ham - what a donut!

10/3/2015 10:42:02 AM



@ #1866353: There is nothing wrong with it, and it's still not gonna happen.

10/3/2015 11:14:55 AM

shy

@#1866353: Whenever I or someone else say that we don't think something is going to happen, it does not mean that we approve or disapprove of said thing, nor does it mean that we approve or disapprove of said thing not happening. Instead, it means exactly what it says: We don't think something is going to happen—nothing more, nothing less.

"Just a few years ago," when I "swore up and down polygamy wouldn't happen," I didn't "swear up and down" that I approved or disapproved of polygamous marriages, nor did I "swear up and down" that I approved or disapproved of them not happening.

In fact, I have no problem with polygamy, and I have never said anything suggestive that I did. Polygamy isn't for me, but neither is straight marriage. That doesn't mean I object to either.

Try harder.

10/3/2015 11:31:27 AM

SpukiKitty

Some erroneously believe that the Bible endorses polygamy because of clear occurrences of it in the Old Testament. But the cases mentioned in detail actually point to the sinfulness of mankind and negative consequences of such situations. God created marriage, and He designed it for one man and one woman for life. Because we have the absolute standard of God’s Word, we can authoritatively declare certain behaviors and practices to be wrong because our Creator says that they are wrong. As Christians, we need to boldly stand on the authority of God’s Word and defend biblical marriage as we act as salt and light in a dying world. You can also read this article on the Answers in Genesis website about whether the Bible condones polygamy.

So, according to you, guys like Kings David & Solomon are getting a devilish case of pitchfork-butt in "The Gruesome Gig Underground".

Also, in a society where the gender ratio is incredibly lop-sided, polygamy would have been necessary to keep spouses "satisfied", families going & humanity existing. Unfortunately it became a big status-symbol thing.

Also some people can't handle monogamy no matter how hard they try. Many an otherwise supremely stable and genuinely loving marriage has been destroyed due to one or both spouses cheating. If monogamy wasn't such a big deal and "open marriages" was a mainstream norm, these marriages would've lasted "til death do us part" because flings on the side would've been no big whoop. After all, there's many different types of Love the other-man/woman could be more a "friendship-love" or "just plain lust".

Plural, polyamorous marriages should be a respectable mainstream thing, though strict polygamy (polygyny or polyandry) would only fly in a severely lopsided gender-ratio society. If there are very few women around, polyandry. If there are very few men around, polygyny.

While I like Jesus, he still was somewhat old-fashioned concerning adultery & marriage and even forbade divorce & remarriage. Which is one of the reasons I'm a NeoPagan, instead. Organized Religion is pretty dumb, though I do take a somewhat universal/interfaith approach to things. O.R. contains both genuine Divine truths & human-made nonsense. Eclectic, non-pantheon-specific NeoPaganism's "Bible" is simply nature, common sense & spirituality.

I realized that I don't have to be a Christian to appreciate Jesus or quote scripture to your ilk. I do the latter a lot to prove you wrong. I also am willing to stand up for sane, non-frummy Christianity (Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, etc.) even if some elements are dumb to me.

Oh, and your face looks like your namesake...or a pineapple before it's cut up and put on said namesake.
....oh, and Bill Nye rules and beat you soundly & many Christians agree with him and not you. Unlike you, taking Genesis allegorically and accepting evolution is easy for them.


@Kuyohashi
I CAN SEE THAT NOW....
Ham: "At AiG, our researchers work 'round-the-clock', occupying the restrooms in their valiant, heroic info-search for Sweet Babby Jebus!...."

10/3/2015 12:08:54 PM

freako104

You've also been saying things showing you know not how anything works and when in debate it doesn't hold.

10/3/2015 12:25:54 PM



You say it like polygamy is something bad...

To me it's just like homosexual marriage; if it's between consenting adults who love each other, I honestly don't see anything wrong with it.

Besides, from what I've heard your precious bible doesn't exactly condemn it...

10/3/2015 1:14:14 PM

1 2 | top: comments page