"Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil". Woe to you pastor Joel! You have elevated monogamy to the status of the Word of God, and demoted polygyny to adultery, which it is never called such in the entirety of Scripture.
Joel, you are spot on. In any interaction I’ve had with the polygamy evangelists, it’s ALWAYS monogamy is defective and polygamy is the superior option. You can’t say they are equal because they are not. Thanks for doing this sermon series!
How about neither one being superior. It is the FORCING of monogamy or polygyny onto someone against their will, which is the problem. The church forces monogamy onto both men and women (yes, there are women who propose polygyny to their husbands), and there are men who are predominantly Muslim, who force polygyny onto their wives. You are misrepresenting our position. We love you monogamy only advocates, but we are not going to allow untruths that you present, to go unchallenged.
@@danieldeluca4936Monogamy is not polygamy and polygamy is not monogamy. One is superior over the other. I know which one Scripture presents as the ideal, but you miss the clear teaching on it. I have been calling you guys polygamy evangelists because I don’t believe you understand the gospel. Polygamy to you is the gospel. The church in your view is corrupt. You guys think your mission is to convert as many people as possible to your position so that you ease your conscience because y’all are a bunch of tribalists who need to ease your conscience. Men like John Calvin, Matthew Henry etc. are just foolish idiots who had no clue how to interpret Scripture. But you, who is a nobody keyboard warrior, thinks that you have a superior hidden knowledge that no one else can figure out. I’ll take the Reformers view any day over your private interpretation. Before you say “but but but Luther”, how about you look into what Luther said about it a little bit more than taking a quote of his out of context.
Joel Saint is making false accusations, calling men adulterers who God says are righteous and will be in His kingdom. To bear false witness is a sin because it breaks God's Commandment. Stop supporting a man caught up in sin!
You said, "We here at IRBC do consider polygamy as adultery!" How is it that you place your consideration above the clear teaching of Holy Scripture? The command is simple, "You shall not commit adultery" (Ex. 20:14). Paul wrote, "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers... will inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9, 10). Jesus said Abraham and Jacob are in the kingdom (Matt. 8:11). Why do you call Jesus Christ and Paul liars when it is you who have added to Scripture? Adultery is always defined in the Bible based on the marital status of the woman, never the man. David was only ever referred to as an adulterer after taking Bathsheba, the wife of Uriah, and having sex with her. David was NEVER referred to as an adulterer for taking other women as his wives and neither was any other man called an adulterer for having more than one wife. You condemn the righteous with your statement saying, "We here at IRBC do consider polygamy as adultery!" REPENT!
I scanned the comments section in all three of the previous messages that were posted, and I am not able to find the comment where someone said, "Wow! I hope you like being in prison with your one wife." Since you don't want to identify who this person is, it makes it hard to call this individual out, but it would at least be helpful if you could identify which message this comment appeared in!
It is not about being a rebel; it is about not being enslaved to man made rules and regulations that masquerade as if it were Biblical truth, when the only biblical passages used, were clearly misused and applied with logical fallacies that have clearly been exposed!
The first lie of Satan in Genesis 3, was to add to the Word of God. God never said that they could not eat from ANY tree in the garden, just like God never said that a man could only have one wife. The restriction was for a particular tree, just as the prohibition given in Scripture, which GOD calls adultery, is taking another man's wife!
"We here at IRBC DO consider polygamy to be adultery." However, God in the Bible doesnt. In the Bible adultery is 1. When Gods people go after other gods. 2. When a man's wife is sexually with another man (Lev 20:10). They are exactly parallel concepts. You xannot find one place where polygyny is called adultery. In fact if a man (regardless of marital status) has sex with an unmarried women he is required to marry her, unless the womans father forbids it (Exodus 22:16-17). It is therefore completely illogical that God would forbid a married man from marrying another unmarried women and have sex with her, because "it's adultery." But then require a married man who has sex with an unmarried woman to marry her. It makes no sense that plural marriage then sex equals adultery (death penalty). But sex then plural marriage equals a commandment.
"driven by lust and driven by rebellion" is once again the "Argument from Motive" fallacy. It ignores the many who have spoken truth on this topic, who have had no desire whatsoever to have more than one wife!
I showed this verse to a friend of mine when he questioned where the Bible indicates that a man can have more than one wife. He then claimed that there was all kinds of debauchery going on there. I told him to reread it and show me where the debauchery was. All he could find, was that Lamech's great great great great grandfather had committed murder, and that Lamech had killed someone, and he couldn't even argue that that was not in self-defense! Then I told him that the only way that Jubal could be the father of ALL who play the Harp and Flute, was if one of his daughters or granddaughters married into the Noahic line. He tried to argue that this didn't happen, and I responded that we don't know who Noah's wife and his son's wives were, nor do we know who Methuselah or the other Lamech (Noah's father) married.
Christ NEVER promoted monogamy OR polygyny! The "two become one", is a Septuagint addition that He was simply quoting! It is nonetheless true to say what Moses actually wrote, that they become one flesh, and His point has NOTHING to do with monogamy, but rather with PERMANENCE!
Obviously, you are new to this topic. You thought you knew everything when you began to oppose it, and now, you are finding yourself in over your head! You just cannot bring yourself to admit that you were wrong!
where does it specify gay or Stright on your monogamous government pimp daddy marriage license because if it doesn't how do you know you didn't get a gay one.
No one here wants to be impure. Titus 1:15. Obviously you have found a way to preach something the Bible does not say. When you add to God's Word, He rebukes you and calls you a liar. Prov 30:5-6
This is not about whether people are condemned or not. We all acknowledge our need of a Savior! The real question is whether a person who has more than one wife, can be free from that condemnation, by grace through faith. You seem to take the stance that they cannot, but have yet to provide any valid biblical arguments for that stance. Why don't you at least answer some of the objections that we have raised here. I can't help but believe that you have no answer.
There is no "Doctrine of Polygamy"! There is a heresy of "Monogamy Only", which is what you are promoting here. If there were a "Doctrine of Polygamy", it would only be #1 to point out that this dogma of "Monogamy Only" is unbiblical, and #2 that polyandry and polyamory or polyfidelity, are in fact called out as adultery in Scripture, whereas polygyny is not! There is in fact a doctrine we know of which is called "Freedom in Christ". Paul tells us to "Stand firm and do not be subjected again under a yoke of slavery" in Galatians 5.
Your defense has been nothing but a series of Eisegesis and Logical Fallacies. No one is saying that you should have more than one wife, and if they are, it is only because you indicated a desire to have more than one, that you cannot seem to understand is clearly allowed by God Himself; the One whose Word, you have clearly distorted in order to elevate MONOGAMY, as if it is superior to polygyny, and as if it were somehow found in the Scriptures.
You can consider polygamy as adultery all you want, but that doesn't matter to God, what you think. The only forms of polygamy that are adultery in the eyes of God, you seem to gloss over, and some of you have even promoted! This is hypocrisy!
Wow, that's a powerful statement to make! "We here at IRBC do consider polygamy as adultery!" It is written, Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9-10). Jesus said, And I say to you that many will come from east and west, and sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven (Matt. 8:11). Jesus said Abraham and Jacob would be in the kingdom but clearly adulterers won't be. Joel, you just called Jesus Christ a liar! Repent of this abomination!!
@@Fivesolas777 The same reason that any of us will be in heaven, whether we have zero wives, one wife, or more than one wife. Polygyny however, is NEVER referred to as adultery in Scripture. That is the point that you are missing.
@@danieldeluca4936 On the Day of Judgment, we will see which one of us is right. The one who has taken the CLEAR words of Christ, or the one who has tried to insert polygamy into every passage of the Bible to ease your sexually perverted conscience. Your utter lack of the fear of the Lord makes me tremble for you on that Day.
@@Fivesolas777 Hey glad to hear back from you! Wasn't it you who promoted this idea of me allowing my wife to have other husbands? Did I not expose your hypocrisy on that? Again, you are conflating polygamy with polygyny. When you talk about inserting polygamy, are you not doing that with the very words of Christ when you try to make it sound like "two becoming one" is somehow a prohibition of polygyny? When you say, "to ease your sexually perverted conscience", you are once again employing the "Argument from Motive" fallacy. Try that on Dr. William Luck, who has never had the desire for more than one wife! Where do you come up with this idea that I have a lack of fear of the Lord? I know in whom I have believed, and I am persuaded that He is able to keep that which I have committed unto Him against that day.
@@danieldeluca4936 The law is summed up in two commandments. Love God, love neighbor. By suggesting your wife to take on another lover (which is adultery) I was trying to show you that if it would be devastating to you (which rightly it should), then why would it be okay for you to love another woman which would be devastating to your wife? That is not loving to your closest neighbor, who is your wife that you are to be one with. Do unto others as you would have them do for you. That’s the point. Do we really need to go thru Matthew 19 again? To divorce your wife unlawfully (I.e. you are still married because marriage is permanent) and to marry another woman you commit adultery. It’s not adultery to divorce your wife, it is adultery to have a second marriage aside from your lawful wife. If you try to disagree with me then I have one simple question, how is adultery occurring in this scenario on the part of the man? I am not asserting anything with “two become one” I am taking Jesus seriously when he said “the two” and am not trying to fit it how polygamy might work. Just take Christ at his word that two really does mean two. 1 Cor 7- I’ve seen your dumb arguments trying to say how it really doesn’t promote monogamy. Okay, let’s give this some thought. You do realize if polygamy were an option, Paul would have said “to avoid fornication when your wife isn’t giving you sex, have sex with your other wife instead. Or if you have only one wife, marry a second so you aren’t deprived to avoid fornication.” A third person invalidates this command because it doesn’t make sense at all for Paul to say don’t defraud one another if the man can go be intimate with his other wife. What if both wives want sex at the same time? The man is defrauding one of them in that scenario which goes against the command. If polygamy were acceptable and a man could have as many wives as he wanted, there would be no need for Paul to mention being defrauded sexually since he’s got many options right?
Who are you not talking to any more? We who understand this freedom that we have in Christ, have already turned to Him! I know you do street evangelism at PRIDE parades, so obviously you are still talking to the homosexuals!
"Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil". Woe to you pastor Joel! You have elevated monogamy to the status of the Word of God, and demoted polygyny to adultery, which it is never called such in the entirety of Scripture.
Anytime you hear a pastor speak on this subject with such haughtiness, such as here, understand he is not being guided by the word.
Joel, you are spot on. In any interaction I’ve had with the polygamy evangelists, it’s ALWAYS monogamy is defective and polygamy is the superior option. You can’t say they are equal because they are not. Thanks for doing this sermon series!
How about neither one being superior. It is the FORCING of monogamy or polygyny onto someone against their will, which is the problem. The church forces monogamy onto both men and women (yes, there are women who propose polygyny to their husbands), and there are men who are predominantly Muslim, who force polygyny onto their wives. You are misrepresenting our position. We love you monogamy only advocates, but we are not going to allow untruths that you present, to go unchallenged.
@@danieldeluca4936Monogamy is not polygamy and polygamy is not monogamy. One is superior over the other. I know which one Scripture presents as the ideal, but you miss the clear teaching on it.
I have been calling you guys polygamy evangelists because I don’t believe you understand the gospel. Polygamy to you is the gospel. The church in your view is corrupt. You guys think your mission is to convert as many people as possible to your position so that you ease your conscience because y’all are a bunch of tribalists who need to ease your conscience. Men like John Calvin, Matthew Henry etc. are just foolish idiots who had no clue how to interpret Scripture. But you, who is a nobody keyboard warrior, thinks that you have a superior hidden knowledge that no one else can figure out. I’ll take the Reformers view any day over your private interpretation. Before you say “but but but Luther”, how about you look into what Luther said about it a little bit more than taking a quote of his out of context.
Joel Saint is making false accusations, calling men adulterers who God says are righteous and will be in His kingdom. To bear false witness is a sin because it breaks God's Commandment. Stop supporting a man caught up in sin!
You said, "We here at IRBC do consider polygamy as adultery!"
How is it that you place your consideration above the clear teaching of Holy Scripture? The command is simple, "You shall not commit adultery" (Ex. 20:14). Paul wrote, "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers... will inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9, 10). Jesus said Abraham and Jacob are in the kingdom (Matt. 8:11). Why do you call Jesus Christ and Paul liars when it is you who have added to Scripture? Adultery is always defined in the Bible based on the marital status of the woman, never the man.
David was only ever referred to as an adulterer after taking Bathsheba, the wife of Uriah, and having sex with her. David was NEVER referred to as an adulterer for taking other women as his wives and neither was any other man called an adulterer for having more than one wife.
You condemn the righteous with your statement saying, "We here at IRBC do consider polygamy as adultery!" REPENT!
I scanned the comments section in all three of the previous messages that were posted, and I am not able to find the comment where someone said, "Wow! I hope you like being in prison with your one wife." Since you don't want to identify who this person is, it makes it hard to call this individual out, but it would at least be helpful if you could identify which message this comment appeared in!
It is not about being a rebel; it is about not being enslaved to man made rules and regulations that masquerade as if it were Biblical truth, when the only biblical passages used, were clearly misused and applied with logical fallacies that have clearly been exposed!
The first lie of Satan in Genesis 3, was to add to the Word of God. God never said that they could not eat from ANY tree in the garden, just like God never said that a man could only have one wife. The restriction was for a particular tree, just as the prohibition given in Scripture, which GOD calls adultery, is taking another man's wife!
"We here at IRBC DO consider polygamy to be adultery."
However, God in the Bible doesnt. In the Bible adultery is 1. When Gods people go after other gods. 2. When a man's wife is sexually with another man (Lev 20:10). They are exactly parallel concepts. You xannot find one place where polygyny is called adultery. In fact if a man (regardless of marital status) has sex with an unmarried women he is required to marry her, unless the womans father forbids it (Exodus 22:16-17). It is therefore completely illogical that God would forbid a married man from marrying another unmarried women and have sex with her, because "it's adultery." But then require a married man who has sex with an unmarried woman to marry her. It makes no sense that plural marriage then sex equals adultery (death penalty). But sex then plural marriage equals a commandment.
"driven by lust and driven by rebellion" is once again the "Argument from Motive" fallacy. It ignores the many who have spoken truth on this topic, who have had no desire whatsoever to have more than one wife!
genesis 4 Lamech took two wives
I showed this verse to a friend of mine when he questioned where the Bible indicates that a man can have more than one wife. He then claimed that there was all kinds of debauchery going on there. I told him to reread it and show me where the debauchery was. All he could find, was that Lamech's great great great great grandfather had committed murder, and that Lamech had killed someone, and he couldn't even argue that that was not in self-defense! Then I told him that the only way that Jubal could be the father of ALL who play the Harp and Flute, was if one of his daughters or granddaughters married into the Noahic line. He tried to argue that this didn't happen, and I responded that we don't know who Noah's wife and his son's wives were, nor do we know who Methuselah or the other Lamech (Noah's father) married.
Christ NEVER promoted monogamy OR polygyny! The "two become one", is a Septuagint addition that He was simply quoting! It is nonetheless true to say what Moses actually wrote, that they become one flesh, and His point has NOTHING to do with monogamy, but rather with PERMANENCE!
Paul never promoted monogamy in 1 Cor 7! This has already been exposed as a lie!
Obviously, you are new to this topic. You thought you knew everything when you began to oppose it, and now, you are finding yourself in over your head! You just cannot bring yourself to admit that you were wrong!
where does it specify gay or Stright on your monogamous government pimp daddy marriage license because if it doesn't how do you know you didn't get a gay one.
The Bible explicitly condemns arsinokoitai, but never condemns, not even the slightest bit, having more than one wife! Your example fails miserably.
No one here wants to be impure. Titus 1:15. Obviously you have found a way to preach something the Bible does not say. When you add to God's Word, He rebukes you and calls you a liar. Prov 30:5-6
This is not about whether people are condemned or not. We all acknowledge our need of a Savior! The real question is whether a person who has more than one wife, can be free from that condemnation, by grace through faith. You seem to take the stance that they cannot, but have yet to provide any valid biblical arguments for that stance. Why don't you at least answer some of the objections that we have raised here. I can't help but believe that you have no answer.
There is no "Doctrine of Polygamy"! There is a heresy of "Monogamy Only", which is what you are promoting here. If there were a "Doctrine of Polygamy", it would only be #1 to point out that this dogma of "Monogamy Only" is unbiblical, and #2 that polyandry and polyamory or polyfidelity, are in fact called out as adultery in Scripture, whereas polygyny is not! There is in fact a doctrine we know of which is called "Freedom in Christ". Paul tells us to "Stand firm and do not be subjected again under a yoke of slavery" in Galatians 5.
Your defense has been nothing but a series of Eisegesis and Logical Fallacies. No one is saying that you should have more than one wife, and if they are, it is only because you indicated a desire to have more than one, that you cannot seem to understand is clearly allowed by God Himself; the One whose Word, you have clearly distorted in order to elevate MONOGAMY, as if it is superior to polygyny, and as if it were somehow found in the Scriptures.
You can consider polygamy as adultery all you want, but that doesn't matter to God, what you think. The only forms of polygamy that are adultery in the eyes of God, you seem to gloss over, and some of you have even promoted! This is hypocrisy!
Wow, that's a powerful statement to make! "We here at IRBC do consider polygamy as adultery!"
It is written, Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9-10). Jesus said, And I say to you that many will come from east and west, and sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven (Matt. 8:11).
Jesus said Abraham and Jacob would be in the kingdom but clearly adulterers won't be. Joel, you just called Jesus Christ a liar! Repent of this abomination!!
The patriarchs who practiced polygamy will be in Heaven for one reason and one reason alone. Faith in Christ. Next.
@@Fivesolas777 The same reason that any of us will be in heaven, whether we have zero wives, one wife, or more than one wife. Polygyny however, is NEVER referred to as adultery in Scripture. That is the point that you are missing.
@@danieldeluca4936 On the Day of Judgment, we will see which one of us is right. The one who has taken the CLEAR words of Christ, or the one who has tried to insert polygamy into every passage of the Bible to ease your sexually perverted conscience. Your utter lack of the fear of the Lord makes me tremble for you on that Day.
@@Fivesolas777 Hey glad to hear back from you! Wasn't it you who promoted this idea of me allowing my wife to have other husbands? Did I not expose your hypocrisy on that? Again, you are conflating polygamy with polygyny. When you talk about inserting polygamy, are you not doing that with the very words of Christ when you try to make it sound like "two becoming one" is somehow a prohibition of polygyny? When you say, "to ease your sexually perverted conscience", you are once again employing the "Argument from Motive" fallacy. Try that on Dr. William Luck, who has never had the desire for more than one wife! Where do you come up with this idea that I have a lack of fear of the Lord? I know in whom I have believed, and I am persuaded that He is able to keep that which I have committed unto Him against that day.
@@danieldeluca4936 The law is summed up in two commandments. Love God, love neighbor. By suggesting your wife to take on another lover (which is adultery) I was trying to show you that if it would be devastating to you (which rightly it should), then why would it be okay for you to love another woman which would be devastating to your wife? That is not loving to your closest neighbor, who is your wife that you are to be one with. Do unto others as you would have them do for you. That’s the point.
Do we really need to go thru Matthew 19 again? To divorce your wife unlawfully (I.e. you are still married because marriage is permanent) and to marry another woman you commit adultery. It’s not adultery to divorce your wife, it is adultery to have a second marriage aside from your lawful wife. If you try to disagree with me then I have one simple question, how is adultery occurring in this scenario on the part of the man?
I am not asserting anything with “two become one” I am taking Jesus seriously when he said “the two” and am not trying to fit it how polygamy might work. Just take Christ at his word that two really does mean two.
1 Cor 7- I’ve seen your dumb arguments trying to say how it really doesn’t promote monogamy. Okay, let’s give this some thought. You do realize if polygamy were an option, Paul would have said “to avoid fornication when your wife isn’t giving you sex, have sex with your other wife instead. Or if you have only one wife, marry a second so you aren’t deprived to avoid fornication.” A third person invalidates this command because it doesn’t make sense at all for Paul to say don’t defraud one another if the man can go be intimate with his other wife. What if both wives want sex at the same time? The man is defrauding one of them in that scenario which goes against the command. If polygamy were acceptable and a man could have as many wives as he wanted, there would be no need for Paul to mention being defrauded sexually since he’s got many options right?
Who are you not talking to any more? We who understand this freedom that we have in Christ, have already turned to Him! I know you do street evangelism at PRIDE parades, so obviously you are still talking to the homosexuals!