Polygamy in the New Testament (Series Part 3)

When European missionaries condemned the polygamy they saw in Africa (see Part 1), they did so on an assumed authority of the New Testament. They concluded that both Jesus and Paul forbade polygamous unions. The following are the key passages informing such reasoning against polygyny: Matthew 5:31-32, Mark 10:2-12, Matthew 19: 1-9, 1 Corinthians 7:2-16, Ephesians 5:22-23, 1 Timothy 3:1-2, and Titus 1:6. Let us zoom in on each of these passages. 

Continue Reading

Polygamy in the Old Testament (Series Part 2)

It is tempting to conclude that the Adam and Eve story in Genesis is an argument for monogamy. According to this narrative, God wanted to make humans who would manage the earth. Interestingly, he chose monogamy as the means to go about it. If time was a critical factor in God’s project of populating the planet, one would expect him to have opted for polygamy or several simultaneous monogamous relationships.1 (This argument assumes that there were no humans outside the garden; that is, we assume that Adam and Eve were the genetic ancestors—not mere genealogical ancestors—of all humans.) Nonetheless, Genesis is silent about God’s reasons for opting for monogamy. What we know from the account is that God created a man and a woman to populate the garden and the earth. Concerning what may be established by the text, Herbert Ryle writes in his commentary:

The relation of the man to his wife is proclaimed to be closer than that to his father and mother. By the words, “shall cleave unto his wife … one flesh,” is asserted the sanctity of marriage. Polygamy is not definitely excluded, but the principle of monogamy seems to be implied in the words “cleave” and “shall be one flesh”.

In other words, one cannot safely conclude that the passage teaches monogamy without additional data. What is certain from the text is the sacredness or divine provenance of marriage.

Continue Reading

European Missionaries and Polygamy (Series Part 1)

“Our thinking has been so influenced by western theologians that we still continue to beat the old missionary drums which summon us to see that our cultural heritage is incompatible with Christianity.” — Rev. David Gitari, Kenyan Anglican Archbishop

A man cannot give what he does not have. We could add to this by borrowing from a Yoruba saying that he who has not been to another’s farm may erroneously assume that his father’s farm is the grandest. These maxims seem to be fair descriptions of the European missionaries who attempted to tackle polygamy in the continent. Coming from a culture where men had multiple unmarried mistresses, the European missionaries were ill-prepared to deal with Africa’s ubiquitous form of marriage: polygyny. Polygyny is a type of polygamy in which a man has more than one wife, and this was a quite common form of marriage in Africa before and after European encounters. Unsurprisingly, white missionaries assumed the worst about the polygyny they saw in Africa.

Continue Reading

My Encounters with the Africa Study Bible: A Review

The message is simple: use the Africa Study Bible in your studies, for it will immensely help in exposing colonial ideals masquerading as Christian virtues and also arm you with knowledge of Africa’s colossal contributions to the faith.

Some years ago, while assisting in a Sunday School, a lady joined our class. She was a little above the age bracket that I was used to seeing, but she was calm, respectful, and teachable. I do not recall the lesson of the day, but it must have had a citation from the Pentateuch which mentioned ancient places like Cush or Put. Shortly after the reading, this lady raised a question: Why do we, black Christians in black churches, read passages having to do with Africa in such a hurry? On that occasion, her point was that we read through “Cush” or “Put” without mentioning that these terms have real referents that still exist today. We had read the passage like many Christians do the genealogy passages of the bible. After the class, I went to thank the lady for her contributions that day. It was then that I noticed she had an unusual bible with a trademark African design on its covers. 

Continue Reading

How Our Churching Structure Subjugates the People (Part 5)

2. The churching structure and practice is generally unhealthy for the family of preachers.

The family members of preachers are often the recipients of the unhealthy effects of our churching practices. Since they often must keep up with being the Moses of their time, preachers do everything of importance in their local assemblies often at the expense of their family. It is, in fact, very common among preachers to hierarchize things in the following order: God > ministry > family > the rest. Little wonder why many preachers’ kids turn out in opposition; preachers often leave their children in the wild while running after other people’s kids.

Continue Reading

How Our Churching Structure Subjugates the People (Part 4)

Problems Accompanying the Structure
Having argued that the churching structure is lacking in any normative power, it ought to be at least obvious that believers need not defend it like it’s a pure directive from heaven. Yes, we are used to associating church with the familiar one-man-show order, but this probably is just nothing more than a mere tradition—and tradition, someone says, is often simply undue pressure from dead people. I shall now describe some more practical issues with the churching structure that I believe hinder nation-building.

Continue Reading

How Our Churching Structure Subjugates the People (Part 3)

Who directed the affairs of the church?

Interestingly, we see a pattern: whenever New Testament writers refer to the leadership of local churches, they used a plural term, “elders.” We see this a lot in Acts but also in other books. For example, Acts 15:6, 11:30, 20:17, 21:18, 14:23, 15:22; Titus 1:5, and James 5:14. Now, we must be careful not to be guilty of anachronism. “Elders” very likely did not mean an ageing Christian who sometimes taught in Sunday School classes. We have an illuminating passage in 1 Timothy 5:17 shedding some light on the roles of elders:

Continue Reading

How Our Churching Structure Subjugates the People (Part 2)

Follow me as I follow Christ?

Sometimes in conversations, preachers often bring up the many references in Paul’s writings where he essentially tells Gentile Christians to imitate his examples. Here are some passages: 1 Corinthians 4:16, 11:1, Philippians 3:17 as well as 1 Thessalonians 1:6, and 2 Thessalonians 3:7, 9. Generally, those who want to defend the one-man-show churching practice read these passages to mean that Paul became a present, proximal example to those Gentile Christians like Jesus was an example to those who believed in him during his earthly ministry. The obvious deduction being that today’s preachers can be the Christ-figure example for the parishioners to imitate. This reading of Paul is quite problematic, and the deduction is quite dangerous. In all the passages above, Paul does encourage Gentile Christians to imitate his doctrines. Now, what can we say about the doctrines in question? They all emanate from the gospel of Jesus Christ that Paul claimed to have received by revelation and which he ran by the other Apostles in Jerusalem who believed earlier than he did to make sure that he had encountered the right Jesus.

Continue Reading

How Our Churching Structure Subjugates the People (Part 1)

Background:

I shall share some personal convictions in the following work—convictions that I have had for some years now. But first, let me issue some disclaimers. Considering that my position on the omniscience ladder is very low, I am reasonably certain that not everything I have to say will be correct; that is, I count on readers to point out defects. There are a few generalizations in this work, even where I know that exceptions exist. Lastly, I really do not mean any offence in this work. This piece is informed by years of observations and the demonstrable ineffectiveness of the status quo. Shall we start properly then?

Continue Reading