What is your thought on marriage?

[Dylar]

Modern polygamy is very different. Nowadays they tend to be very loving group relationships, where everyone mutually loves and respects one another, irrespective of gender.

I'll be sure to check next time I'm in a Muslim country.

Wait...I didn't think they had polygamous relationships...
But why go to a Muslim country? There are plenty of Mormon communities in the U.S.

[The Parkus Empire]

Actually, humans aren't a naturally monogamous species, funnily enough...

Indeed, most of the time it has to be forced, with the non-monogamous urges being fought tooth and nail by religions/morality.

Indeed, controlling your base instincts and animal inclinations is the foundation of civilization.

[The New California Republic]

Modern polygamy is very different. Nowadays they tend to be very loving group relationships, where everyone mutually loves and respects one another, irrespective of gender.

I'll be sure to check next time I'm in a Muslim country.

I am not talking about religion-based polygamy.

[The Parkus Empire]

I'll be sure to check next time I'm in a Muslim country.

Wait...I didn't think they had polygamous relationships...
But why go to a Muslim country? There are plenty of Mormon communities in the U.S.

Islam allows Muslims to have up to four wives, and I think Mohammed had thirteen.

Mormon communities are seldom polygamous these days.

[New haven america]

Actually, humans aren't a naturally monogamous species, funnily enough...

Indeed, most of the time it has to be forced, with the non-monogamous urges being fought tooth and nail by religions/morality.

IIRC, some biologists even believe that it would be healthier for each human/partner (This includes both males, females, and anything in-between) should have 2 partners instead of 1.

[The Parkus Empire]

I'll be sure to check next time I'm in a Muslim country.

I am not talking about religion-based polygamy.

Then it has zero place in regard to a question about religious doctrine.

[Petrolheadia]

Does not mean it always has to look like this.

Christian marriage is about subordination to God's will, though, not about God pleasing yours.

So, we're kinda like his slaves?

[The Parkus Empire]

Indeed, most of the time it has to be forced, with the non-monogamous urges being fought tooth and nail by religions/morality.

IIRC, some biologists even believe that it would be healthier for each human/partner should have 2 partners instead of 1.

My goodness, how ridiculous our society is! We can't even be depraved anymore without using scientific justification. We can't say, "I have sex with people because I lust," but, "Because it's healthy!"

[The New California Republic]

Indeed, most of the time it has to be forced, with the non-monogamous urges being fought tooth and nail by religions/morality.

Indeed, controlling your base instincts and animal inclinations is the foundation of civilization.

Indeed, but there is a difference between a rational control and a control that is based on the teachings of a book that is thousands of years old.

[The Parkus Empire]

Christian marriage is about subordination to God's will, though, not about God pleasing yours.

So, we're kinda like his slaves?

From a Christian perspective, you are either God's slave, or Satan's slave, and when you die the clock stops and you go into the custody of one or the other.

[Petrolheadia]

IIRC, some biologists even believe that it would be healthier for each human/partner should have 2 partners instead of 1.

My goodness, how ridiculous our society is! We can't even be depraved anymore without using scientific justification. We can't say, "I have sex with people because I lust," but, "Because it's healthy!"

The question to every problem shouldn't be "why should I?", but "why shouldn't I?".

[The New California Republic]

I am not talking about religion-based polygamy.

Then it has zero place in regard to a question about religious doctrine.

We were talking about polygamy sans prefixes and suffixes before its relation to religious doctrine was mentioned.

[The Parkus Empire]

Indeed, controlling your base instincts and animal inclinations is the foundation of civilization.

Indeed, but there is a difference between a rational control and a control that is based on the teachings of a book that is thousands of years old.

Reason is only a small part of what makes me human, and, in sophisticated form, was never the basis of civilization, but the invention of it.

[The Parkus Empire]

My goodness, how ridiculous our society is! We can't even be depraved anymore without using scientific justification. We can't say, "I have sex with people because I lust," but, "Because it's healthy!"

The question to every problem shouldn't be "why should I?", but "why shouldn't I?".

No, not from a Christian perspective. The question must always be, "Am I doing this to fulfill God's will"?

[Petrolheadia]

So, we're kinda like his slaves?

From a Christian perspective, you are either God's slave, or Satan's slave, and when you die the clock stops and you go into the custody of one or the other.

If God is real, then I feel like somebody grabbed me and put me in a sadistic reality show.

[Dylar]

Christian marriage is about subordination to God's will, though, not about God pleasing yours.

So, we're kinda like his slaves?

Not quite. We have a choice to do whatever the hell we want, until we die and meet him in the afterlife for our judgement.

[Petrolheadia]

The question to every problem shouldn't be "why should I?", but "why shouldn't I?".

No, not from a Christian perspective. The question must always be, "Am I doing this to fulfill God's will"?

Listen, before I become a slave, I have to know my master exists.

[The Parkus Empire]

From a Christian perspective, you are either God's slave, or Satan's slave, and when you die the clock stops and you go into the custody of one or the other.

If God is real, then I feel like somebody grabbed me and put me in a sadistic reality show.

It's not sadistic, since God has an inverse order: "Blessed are those servants, whom the lord when he cometh shall find watching: verily I say unto you, that he shall gird himself, and make them to sit down to meat, and will come forth and serve them."

[The Parkus Empire]

No, not from a Christian perspective. The question must always be, "Am I doing this to fulfill God's will"?

Listen, before I become a slave, I have to know my master exists.

Yes, but that is beyond the scope of this thread.

[New haven america]

The question to every problem shouldn't be "why should I?", but "why shouldn't I?".

No, not from a Christian perspective. The question must always be, "Am I doing this to fulfill God's will"?

I'd like to point out that it was a clergyman who disproved the idea of creationism, which seems like it would definitely go against God's will.

[Keshiland]

Do you think 1 form of poligamy is better or worse then the other? 1 man multiple woman or 1 woman and multiple men?

[Petrolheadia]

If God is real, then I feel like somebody grabbed me and put me in a sadistic reality show.

It's not sadistic, since God has an inverse order: "Blessed are those servants, whom the lord when he cometh shall find watching: verily I say unto you, that he shall gird himself, and make them to sit down to meat, and will come forth and serve them."

It's kinda sadistic. You have arbitrary rules you have to blindly follow, and you could have been engineered to happily follow them without questioning, but weren't.

[Albrenia]

So, about that marriage stuff...

[New haven america]

From a Christian perspective, you are either God's slave, or Satan's slave, and when you die the clock stops and you go into the custody of one or the other.

If God is real, then I feel like somebody grabbed me and put me in a sadistic reality show.

Eh, that's mostly for the OT, the NT is much more relaxed (You know, what Christians are supposed to be following, yet don't do a very good job at).

[The New California Republic]

So, about that marriage stuff...

Indeed, we are discussing polygamous marriage at the moment. Feel free to jump in, the more the merrier(!)