Here is my argument:
1)Polygamy is ruled out effectively because Christ calls marriage with another "adultery," since the original marriage is not actually severed. Adultery is the act of having sex with someone elses spouse. IOW, the second marriage is not recognized by God.
2)Polygamy is marriage to two or more people.
3)Therefore, marriage to two or more people is adultery.
You’re not supposed to read into the bible what is not there (not that I imagine that would ever stop you but whatever).
Well, there are lots of things we know are wrong that are not spelled out exactly in the Bible. We know child molestation is wrong, but it is not discussed in scripture. We know that inside trading is wrong, because we know that deception is also wrong. In the same way, we know that polygamy is wrong, because we know that marrying another woman after "putting away" your wife is called "adultery."
You are not quoting Christ— you are at best paraphrasing what you think Christ said which is believed to be written down.
Your statement 3 does not logically follow from statements 1 and 2. Your argument, whatever it is, breaks down and becomes rather tiresome at that point, no matter how many different ways you phrase it and toss in less relevant stuff.
You are conflating adultery with polygamy in an illogical way. Your definition of adultery seems OK but you do not show it necessarily precludes polygamy. Apples and oranges. A guy marries two unmarried adult women. No adultery since both women are unmarried before tying the knot with him. Hence, not condemned by the bible.
These are consensual adult relationships. Nothing I know of the bible precludes consensual adult relationships between individuals, the women of which are previously unmarried.
Your point that insider trading is not condemned by the bible is somewhat invalid. Insider trading is a form of dishonesty leading to theft of someone else’s investment.
Stealing is condemned by the bible. As for child molestation, I do not know the bible well enough to say if that is or is not condemned. But no one I know of is arguing for NAMBLA so it is moot.
Child molestation and insider trading are more irrelevant strawmen arguments— nothing to do with polygamy. (Which reminds me, look! Look at the squirrel!)
Hey I believe that people should be free to believe whatever religiou beliefs that they want. I would just recommend that you do not force your religious beliefs on anyone else. I will do the same for others including you.
Someone can probably go through something the length of the bible and find support for just about any point of view. Jesus could and did provide a summary. I really do not care to argue how many angels can dance on the head of a pin with anyone else. IMHO people who do are indulging in the theological equivalent of masturbation. Presuming one is not of the militant zealot variety, there is not much point to it beyond a temporary feeling of moral superiority. Peace.