Polygamy and the Bible (Aberrant Theology Alert)

The Holy Bible is polygamous from cover to cover. However, the biased mind, steeped in centuries of cultural and religious tradition, can take a little time to adjust. The bottom line is honesty (a willingness to adjust inherited tradition in the light of God's Word) and logic (a willingness to stick with the mental process and not fall back on feelings and sentiment when the Word upsets cherished beliefs).

Before we begin, it is necessary to examine all assumptions in the polygamy issue as it relates to the Bible:

Q1. Do you accept the Bible as God's Word (in the original Hebrew/Aramaic manuscripts) from cover to cover?

If your answer is "no", then there is no point in your continuing with this essay because we will be working on different assumptions. Instead I suggest you read my earlier article, Objections to Polygamy: The Secular Viewpoint. The reason I categorise you as "secular" is because the arguments advanced by secularists are practically the same as those advanced by those who do not wholly accept the Bible's teachings. Somewhere along the line Yahweh's infallible Word is judged by those "Christians" who find it difficult to accept what Yahweh says in the same way as secularists do. Those who only accept the Bible in part only accept Yahweh in part. Though we could debate this matter, it is not what this Home Page is about and you would be advised to examine these issues on other Christians websites.

If your answer is "yes" to Question No.1 then I am going to hold you to your word. In my experience, though, the vast majority of Christians who say they accept God's Word from cover to cover rarely do. When God's Word contradicts what they believe, instead of confessing their error and readjusting their lives accordingly (this is the process the Bible calls "repentance") they wriggle and squirm and try to twist Scripture to conform to them. This is human nature, the fallen side of our spirit, which always resists any change in thinking, feeling or practice that requires any sort of sacrifice. We all "wriggle and squirm" from time to time, sad to say. This site acknowledges that the heart and flesh are a little slow in responding to the truth sometimes and we will show grace in that area, as we hope the same grace will be shown to us as we adjust to the truth in our daily walk with Yahweh. However, we will not permit illogical argumentation on this site and shall expect honesty and integrity of thought.

Not everyone, however, has been taught to think logically. In some countries and cultures we are simply expected to absorb "facts" without being encouraged to think. This is both a tragedy and a traversty. Accordingly New Covenant websites engage in much "mental exercise" in order to promote clear thinking. At this site we shall follow the same principle. Accordingly we shall first and foremost be led by thought before feeling, and we shall expect God's Word, the Bible, to lead both.

Q2. Does the Bible anywhere state that polygamy is wrong, sinful, unlawful or ungodly?

This site maintains that the answer to this question is crystal clear: "no". If you can find any scriptures that give an affirmative answer, I shall be most interested to hear them. However, I shall expect more than isolated scriptures (though these shall not, of course, be set aside) but will expect (1) isolated scriptures to be cited in context, and (2) isolated scriptures to be examined in the light of all scriptures on the subject. If, for example, one or two scriptures seem to maintain an anti-polygamy stance, and yet a dozen seem to maintain a pro-polygamy stance, then I shall expect an in-depth study to determine why there is an apparent discrepancy for both positions cannot possibly be right. It is here that we must make an important decision: Either (1) God's Word is contradictory and not reliable and cannot therefore be 100% true; or (2) The minority passages have been misunderstood or mistranslated by humans, God's Word being internally consistent and harmonious, or 100% correct.

No matter what topic we study, we will find apparent inconsistencies from time to time. What we cannot afford to do is accept one of two positions and ignore or "explain away" the position we don't like. If this is going to be a problem for some of our readers, then I suggest you deal with the issue of whether the Bible is wholly God's Word or not before confronting the sensitive polygamy issue. It is important that we have that matter sorted out before going any further. A person doesn't go and have riding lessons if he is uncertain about the morality of riding motorcycles - first we must be certain we think motorcycles are OK. Only then ought we to take lessons. And so we must do the same with the polygamy issue.

There are many biblical issues I have had problems with in the past but I have always discovered that the problems have stemmed not from a fault in God's Word but from an incomplete understanding of it. We live in pagan cultures (for the most part) where the whole thinking pattern is contrary to Yahweh's and to Yahweh's people's. The assumptions about life in each generation not based in God's Word change and we must become aware of this problem. Becoming a Christian requires nothing less than a total reorientation in the way we think, feel, and behave as is true, indeed, in embracing any new religion or (supposed) non-religion like atheism.

I maintain unhesitatingly that the Bible nowhere condemns polygamy as wrong, sinful, immoral, ungodly, wicked, or unlawful in Yahweh's eyes. In fact, I find exactly the opposite - Yahweh positively sanctions it, protects it, and indeed uses it Himself as an illustration of His own relationship with Israel (Judah and Ephraim) and the Church/Messianic Community (the saints), something He would hardly do if it were sinful as this would merely confuse people.

Polygamy is not, as some people mistakenly believe, a type of marriage that gives men the right to do whatever they want with women even though historically it may have been so abused. There are strict laws and regulations governing its practice. It is essential to understand this. We shall be looking at these restrictions in another article. All freedoms bring responsibilites and polygamy is no less than, for example, the freedom to eat food. Everybody acknowledges that eating is not only good but essential. However, Yahweh has placed certain dietary rules for our benefit when it comes to eating, one of which is that we eat in moderation and not become gluttons. Over-eating is a sin, but not the act of eating itself. By the same token, the multiplication of wives is a sin but not polygamy itself. The Bible strictly warns kings not to go overboard as Solomon, for example, did. Gluttony destroys one's sense of taste in the same way as a man marrying too many women destroys his ability to have a proper relationship with them. Though the Bible places no specific limitations on the number of women who may enter a polygamous relationship, the community I belong to limits it to twelve, with seven being the average - a maximum of four for Deacons, seven for Elders, and twelve for Patriarchs-Apostles. There are other restrictions too such as the ability of the husband to financially take care of so many women. This I will discuss in another article.

Q4. Is there any evidence from the Bible that polygamy was repealed in the New Testament?

None that I have been able to find. There is a school of theological thought that the whole Law of Moses was brought to an end at the time of the crucifixion and a new "Law of Christ" instituted to replace it. Such a teaching is not to be found in the Bible though bad translations have not made the matter straightforward. Besides, polygamy existed before the Law of Moses and Paul declares that His Gospel and Abraham's were essentially one and the same.

The Bible, in fact, nowhere mentions the words "monogamy" or "polygamy" because no such distinction existed. All marriage was polygamous whether there was one, two, three or more wives. Let me use the food analogy again. In some cultures only one course is served per meal. In others, several courses. However, that doesn't mean that there are different kinds of "eating" - we don't speak of "mono-eating" or "poly-eating" because such a distinction is silly. However, picture a culture which says that one course is all that is allowed and condemns all those who eat more than one. To distinguish between the two they must introduce new words into the vocabulary. "Monogamy" and "polygamy" are, in terms of history, relatively new concepts. So really it would be more appropriate to call this the "First European Christian Marriage Page" since that is nearer the biblical truth. One group of people have excluded more than one wife from the marriage covenant and called themselves "monogamists". (Why they did this, and how they justify themselves, we shall examine in other articles).

There are only a couple of places in the New Testament where polygamy is hinted at and the translators, with their monogamous bias, have altered the meaning of ceretain words and created very confusing passages indeed. For as they stand it appears as though Church leaders cannot have more than one wife but ordinary church members can! Which is you think about it, is completely contradictory and nonsensical, for if we follow the monogamy-only paradigm, we are being taught that members can sin but leaders can't. This is rather like saying that ordinary members can be homosexuals or murderers (since both are sins) but deacons and elders can't! A close examination of the original Greek text clears up the (ludicrous) discrepancy - Paul wasn't concerned about whether church leaders had more than one wife or not but whether, as polygamists, they were being faithful to their first wives and not using polygamy as an excuse to get rid of wives they didn't fancy any more. (Another school of thought maintains, and which I have since come to accept as the better of the two interpretations, that these passages are merely stating that Elders and Deacons must be married to qualify for leadership).

So, no, there is no evidence in the New Testament that Christ ever repealed polygamy. Quite the opposite - He repeatedly cites polygamists as men and women of God to emulate, even commanding His followers to "do the works of Abraham". And Abraham was a polygamist.

Q5. Is there anywhere in the Bible where God actually commands or is positive about polygamy?

He is nowhere negative about it. Nowhere. Indeed, He specifically states to one King of Israel (David) that He has given him his wives (2 Samuel 12:8). And this through a prophet of Yahweh (Nathan) who was rebuking him for other sins (adultery and murder). So if the King had been living as an adulterer or in sin because of polygamy, you can be sure that the prophet would have upbraided him about polygamy along with his other sins. But he didn't. Instead, He not only said that Yahweh had given the King his present wives but He would, if necessary, give him more. To me that is polygamy-positive. If polygamy is a gift of Yahweh then it cannot possibly be anything other than a blessing and for all concerned (for husbands as well as wives).

It is usually at this point that those, steeped in the monogamous tradition, go into an inner catharsis. If that is so, then I urge you to PRAISE YAHWEH because He is revealing to you how far you have departed from Him even if you think you are walking with Him. It is at such moments of crisis that we have to make really fundamental decisions and either embrace Yahweh or wage war on Him. The issue is really about the personality of El Elyon (Almighty God). If you are turned off by this revelation (and indeed any other biblical revelation) then there is a pretty good chance that you are not worshipping the God of the Bible but some other god.

I say this not to destroy your faith but to seek further. Yahweh will not force you to follow Him but He will most certainly challenge you to be honest about His claims even if you are not about your own. The God of the Bible is represented allegorically as a polygamist and so are all His followers, whether they are married in one-wife or several-wife families. What we are actually facing here is of such fundamental importance that I believe it will be used as one of the touchstones of true faith in the last days. Again, I repeat, accepting that Yahweh is allegorically polygamous and that all true Christian marriages are polygamous does not necessarily mean that all Christian marriages should have more than one wife. In fact, it is my conviction that the majority of Christian marriages will only consist of one man and one woman. What is important, however, is that you understand and accept that a one-wife marriage is no different from a one-child family and that if a family wants several children, then that's fine too. Families have children, right? There's no such thing as a mono-children or a poly-children family, is there? They're not two different types of family! In the same way, families with one wife or more than wife are not "two different kinds of marriage" either. That is the lie we have been made to believe by an apostate church for centuries. That lie, however, is now being exposed by this and other polygamy websites. And this truth will spread as Christian men and women return to the Word and abandon the traditions of the whore of Babylon who loathes polygamy but adores fornication and adultery.

Now you'll be wanting concrete biblical evidence for all of these statements. This you can read at the Królewiec Wives Site and in other articles on FICP. You'll not only be surprised by just how much there is but how anyone could have been so blind to the truth. Ultimately the issue is not, as I have already said, about how many wives a marriage may incorporate but the personhood of God. Men and women, ever in rebellion against truth, have preferred to invent their own gods rather than go to He who is the source of all life, joy and peace.

To know the truth is to enthrone men and women as true patriarchs and matriarchs and not to emasculate men and defeminise women which is the result of turning to falsehood. The trend of our modern paganism is to turn men and women into a single sex - a unisexual being - which is out of harmony with itself and which is bleeding to be free and come alive. True polygamy is about freedom for men and women - and I underline the word "true" deliberately because there is a false form of polygamy too which is degrading to women and destructive of the true man. We under no circumstances stand for the latter. We at this site do not defend all forms of polygamy (whether secular, Muslim, Mormon, Hindu, Christian, or whatever) any more than we defend all forms of monogamy - we are defenders of New Covenant Echad Patriarchal Marriage. And it is important that our readers make this distinction and do not require us to defend other paradigms, for we will not.

May Yahweh-Elohim, the Lord God of Israel, enlighten you - men and women - and free you from any kind of mental or emotional bondage as you read these pages, especially those of you who believe the Bible to be the Word of God.

The whole point of the Bible talking about Israel's kings was that the people didn't listen to God and it brought on trouble and heartache.

Q. Why did the Babylonian exile come 490 years after the coronation of Saul?
A. To provide the land with its missed sabbaths. Before installing an overweening central government, the Israelites let the land rest for one year out of seven. (Imagine being able to take a whole year off every seven years!). Afterwards, saddled with kings who demanded more than God Himself did, they could no longer observe sabbattical years.

Actually they mattered a little bit when the Law was given--Leviticus 18:18, "Do not take your wife's sister as a rival wife and have sexual relations with her while your wife is living." Marrying an unrelated rival wife is not condemned anywhere, though.

Polyandry, however (more than one husband at a time) is strictly forbidden. The wife and all husbands after the first would be guilty of adultery, a capital offense.

If a man marries ten wives, every child will be of known parentage. Each will be descended from the husband and from the particular wife who gives birth.

If a woman were to marry ten husband, her children would not be of known parentage. She would be the mother of all, but the fathers would be indeterminate.

One thing I'm surprised hasn't been touched upon is the transition from "bride prices" to dowries. When polygyny was at least somewhat permissible, a man seeking marriage would have to pay the girl's father (at least if she was a virgin). Later, when polygyny was forbidden, things reversed and, if anything, the girl's father would pay the groom to take his daughter.

Supply-and-demand economics would explain this pretty well. I don't know what sum would usually be demanded as a bride price, but I would expect that even if polygyny would be permitted for those who could afford it, it would in practice probably not have been terribly common.

BTW, the Old-Testament rules surrounding adultery were not symmetrical between men and women: adultery was specifically the crime of a man (married or not) having relations with another man's wife. A man who had relations with a virgin could be compelled by the girl's father to marry her, and such compunction would not be affected by any existing marriage the man might have. There are clearly logical reasons behind the assymetry in Old-Testament law; some of those reasons still exist while others do not.

I have to admit that Polygamy creeps me out a little.

But, it is clearly not condemned in the Bible. Anyone who makes that argument can easily be repudicated.

And Lawrence v Texas makes it clear that any law prohibiting polygamy (in at least the informal sense) is unconstitutional.

There are plenty of good arguments against polygamy.

It's just that the Bible isn't gonnna be much help..

One of the criteria for Overseers (aka Elders) and Deacons is that they live a blameless life. As far as wives go, the critera is such:

1 Timothy 3:1 The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. 2 Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife....

1 Timothy 3:12 Let deacons each be the husband of one wife, managing their children and their own households well....

Seems to me that one wife is the expectation for all.

Seems to me that one wife is the expectation for all.

I agree with you on every count. However, just for argument's sake, how do you respond to a "christian" ( note the quotes ) who says he is exempt from the Timothy instruction because he isn't interested in being an Elder, Minister or Deacon ?

Just interested in hearing your response.

You forgot a word.

"...One wife is the expectation for all..." Should be:

...One wife is the expectation for all... elders.

How you get all 'people' out of that is a mystery. lol!

I know this wasn't directed to me, but as to the question:

"How do you respond to a "christian" ( note the quotes ) who says he is exempt from the Timothy instruction because he isn't interested in being an Elder, Minister or Deacon?"

The answer is, first lose the scare quotes around the word Christian as it's a gratuitous cheap shot.

And secondly, and perhaps more painful for some, the answer is that there is NO prohibition against polgyamy for those who don't want to be an elder or deacon.

I was hoping someone would post that.

Isn't it amazing how Biblically ignorant people are on FR?

Just because people in Biblical times disobeyed God and what He wanted doesn't mean disobedience is right. But hey, you know how people are today ... they still thumb their nose at Him for the same reasons.

In the case of Sarah and Abraham, Sarah was barren. It was upon HER suggestion that Abraham "know" Hagar. This wasn't God's idea. It didn't work out very well either. Later God did grant her Isaac which means laughter in Hebrew. So just because Sarah encouraged Abraham to "know" her maid didn't make it right and in my mind serves as an example of how polygamy doesn't work.

"Just because people in Biblical times disobeyed God and what He wanted doesn't mean disobedience is right."

You are correct sir. Disobedience will never...ever...ever bring God's best and could yield a lot less.

But, some people, for whatever reason, determine that certain things are disobedience when they are not. For example, many people believe because of the prohibition found in Acts 15:20, that it would be 'disobedient' to receive a blood transfusion.

So, they don't because they don't want to be 'disobedient.'

But there is NO prohibition against blood transfusions in the Bible.

Same with polygamy. (except for in the case of elders.)

"In the case of Sarah and Abraham, Sarah was barren. It was upon HER suggestion that Abraham "know" Hagar. This wasn't God's idea. It didn't work out very well either. Later God did grant her Isaac which means laughter in Hebrew. So just because Sarah encouraged Abraham to "know" her maid didn't make it right and in my mind serves as an example of how polygamy doesn't work."

Call be crazy, but I'm getting the distinct impression that some people say polygamy is denounced in the Bible for no other reason than they want it to be!

LOL!

I mean, when I read comments like "Oh, they're just stupid, ignore them." or someone using the Abraham/Hagar debacle (which was one of the worst decisions made in the history of mankind) as arguments against polygamy, it should give pause to any rational/reasonable person..

Trust me on this folks: There are many legitimate reasons to not be a fan of polygamy.

But the Bible's condemnation is not one of them.

Ps And either is 'it's against the law.'

Fair question that I answered in my head, but not here.

Others have made the case for one wife/one husband in the O.T. Here in the NT, where Christianity is moving into Pagan cultures where polygamy may be the norm, the guideline for Christian behavior is being laid out. Granted this is for church leaders, but the principle of one wife/one husband for everyone is an underlying there. Mature Christians, the type who led churches, are to have one spouse.

Elsewhere in the NT all are exhorted to grow into maturity. I see that as the point to refute those who don't aspire to become elders/deacons.

There are plenty of good arguments against polygamy.

It's just that the Bible isn't gonnna be much help ...

There is plenty of evidence against the practice of polygamy in the Bible.

There is no express prohibition/condemnation of polygamy in the Bible.

Of course, ... there is also no express prohibition/condemnation of sticking a fork into a live electrical outlet in Bible either.

But we are counseled (commanded) ... to be wise ... and to live lives (as christians) ... free from even the appearance of selfishness and sin.

Every single example of polygamy in the Bible is portrayed as having negative results ...
... wives and children are cast out

... half-brothers and sisters enslave, rape and kill one another

... struggle between competing wives
With these as the fruit of polygamy protrayed in the Bible, I don't think that anyone could claim that such a lifestyle could be considered a 'wise' choice.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.