Biblical Gender Identity: Polygamy (Jayden12 Mobile)

Biblical Gender Identity

Site: Jayden12.com › Rock › Gender Identity › Polygamy (Mobile) - Full Site

Section: Intro ⋅ Single ⋅ Marriage ⋅ Adultery ⋅ Living Together Not Married ⋅ Prostitution ⋅ Cross Dressing ⋅ Homosexuality ⋅ Animals ⋅ Incest ⋅ Self ⋅ Cycle ⋅ Polygamy ⋅ Divorce ⋅ Abortion ⋅ Adoption ⋅ Style ⋅ General ⋅ Conclusions

Disclaimers:

1. This is a mature topic only intended for people who've at least begun puberty. If you are less than 13 years old then I pray you don't have any reason to concern yourself with this yet, and you should ask a trustworthy adult before reading this. (My Family in the Bible page (here) is meant for all ages.)

2. This summary is not intended for general counseling, it is for those who want to know what the Bible says on this topic, and for those who claim the Bible is silent or says the opposite, plus a little commentary to get us started on what it means and how all this fits in a Biblical worldview.

Polygamy

The original design was one man and one woman. No other option is offered to us, we made up all the rest. Any time there is instruction about marriage it's clearly patterned after the Genesis 1:27-28 & Genesis 2:24-25 model (one male and one female) despite however many examples there are of people who deviate. However, it's true there is no explicit command on the number of wives a man may have. Remember, monogamy is the custom of being married to (or having sex with) only one person at a time, and polygamy is marriage in which a spouse of either sex may have more than one mate at the same time. We can make many inferences from the indirect verses in the Bible, but since they're all indirect, there's room for debate.

Indirect

Exodus 21:10 hub

The presence of the unqualified word "if" implies it is at least acceptable.

Deuteronomy 17:17 hub

There's a big difference between "must not take many" and "must not have more than one." And it's not a stretch to think a higher standard could be set for the leaders than for the rest.

Deuteronomy 21:15-17 hub

Here polygamy is mentioned nonchalantly. And it doesn't say "at most two," it just says "if he has two."

Deuteronomy 25:5-10 hub

Notice it does not say "after he dies then the next brother in line should marry her, unless he's already married, in which case the second next brother should marry her."

2 Samuel 12:7-8 hub

Nathan is relaying that God would have given David even more wives if David had just asked (rather than going about it the way he did with Bathsheba). He already had a bunch at the time.

1 Kings 11:3-4 hub

While this blames Solomon's straying from God on his wives, notice it doesn't explicitly say it's because he had more than one. As if they all were great honorable Jews and he just couldn't handle the volume. His wives turned to other gods and their straying leaked into his heart too. Like a sexually transmitted disease, which can be contracted when we are with one or many partners.

Isaiah 4:1 hub

Maybe Isaiah was speaking non-critically of polygamy here, maybe he was just describing a winner-take-all contest between multiple maidens. But the use of the word "our" would indicate an acceptance of polygamy. Especially in the context (Isaiah 3:25-4:1) that not accepting polygamy in this situation would condemn some women. However, when we look at more context (Isaiah 3:16-4:1) that condemnation was actually intended. But be careful, the condemnation was for a very specific group of women and wasn't a generalization, nor was the condemnation limited to those women (see all of Isaiah 3).

Matthew 19:8-9 hub

Notice that Jesus doesn't specifically say to have only one wife. He just says if you divorce for any reason (but the one valid reason) then you may not marry anyone else. There's no mention of a numerical limit here. For example, if we take this literally then if a man has three wives and divorces one then he's expected to be content for the rest of his life with (at most) the other two he already has. This isn't necessarily to say in the positive that polygamy is good or even acceptable, it's saying divorce is negative, serious, and even has a penalty.

The following passages are from the writing of Paul. God's word must be taken seriously, but we must be very careful not to read into the scriptures what we want to find. Even though Paul uses a singular term here, he's not explicitly saying a man should only have one wife, nor does he specifically say a man should not have more than one. He's saying sex is reserved for a husband and a wife. Even a polygamous man can be said to have "a wife." If there didn't happen to be any polygamists in the churches he was writing to then it would make sense that it would not have come up.

1 Corinthians 7:2-16 hub
Ephesians 5:23 hub
Ephesians 5:28 hub
1 Timothy 3:2-4 hub
1 Timothy 3:12 hub

Bible Stories

Genesis 4:19-24 - Lamech, Adah, & Zillah
Genesis 16:1-5 - Abram, Sarai, & Hagar
Genesis 29:16-30:3 - Jacob, Rachel, & Leah
1 Samuel 1:2-8 - Elkanah, Hannah, & Peninnah

Worldview

To be clear, all I'm saying is God, in His word, doesn't seem to have a really strong opinion on this. He's not one to dance around topics, and if He really cared I don't think He'd have waited until Paul came around to say so. (Based on genealogical records, Jesus and Paul probably both walked the Earth about 4,000 years after creation week.) God isn't in the business of dictating our every decision (Luke 12:14). He does care how we treat each other though (Matthew 22:34-40, Mark 12:28-34) and don't forget the way He designed it was one man and one woman (Genesis 2:24), anything else we made up on our own.¹

This perspective doesn't mean it's "right" for a man to have more than one wife. It just means the Bible doesn't forbid it (like it does other things). Still, American, European, Asian, and many other societies have long since decided it's not appropriate, and they aren't obligated to get that opinion from the Bible. It's easy to argue that allowing a man to have multiple wives devalues women. The first guy recorded as doing this was Lamech (Genesis 4:19), and there was Solomon (1 Kings 11:3). There were a few stories in the Bible where this worked fine for the guy and crummy for the girl. That being said, here's the best conclusion I've found to reconcile the difference we find in the Old and New Testaments. Notice how Pharaoh and Abimelech (leaders of nations back in Genesis 12, 20, & 26) had many wives, but the kings of Babylon (Ester 1) and Judea (Luke 1:5, Mark 6:17) only had one. Though Xerxes did have more than his share of compulsory one night stands (Ester 2:2-4). Babylon was far bigger than either of the aforementioned nations and surely the King of Babylon would have been able to support as many wives as he wanted, so what's the change? Even the jerks who came up with Xerxes "nomination" process assumed the end result should be only one queen. Clearly the culture (even pagan culture) had changed for reasons other than Jewish/Israelite law. Besides the obvious simple male greed and disrespect of females, perhaps polygamy was another early form of Social Security safety net (similar to how a rapist was required to marry his victim since he had just ruined the girl's chances of ever getting married to anyone else, Exodus 22:16-17, Leviticus 21:13). The idea here is that the balance of men & women in the world is typically about even, but in ancient days war didn't involve ammunition & missiles but only men. Killing off all the men of your enemy and sparing the women was normal, allowing the female population to stay noticeably higher than the male. That was a very patriarchal society and most women weren't allowed to provide for themselves, so they needed someone, at least anyone, to take care of them. The alternatives were prostitution, slavery, or starvation. (The conversation between Naomi, Orpah, and Ruth, in Ruth 1:1-14, was a great example of this, and an even better example that also might have had an allowance of polygamy was Isaiah 4:1.) So while not ideal, polygamy could be seen as a "lesser of two evils," hence the lack of divine criticism (and even endorsement). But by the time of the Jewish exile, the situation may have changed enough (and how much more so now, after the Scientific Revolution) and it's easy to rationalize that polygamy is a deprecated practice that devalues women.

Today, regardless of whether we feel it's disgusting or unfair or beautiful, polygamy dilutes the concept of marriage. Marriage needs to remain defined as an institution originated by God as between one man and one woman, as recorded in Genesis 1 and 2. All other definitions are distractions and disrespectful of our Creator. That doesn't exclude the possibility of civil unions or the like, for governments aren't limited to the Bible for all their policies and laws. But good governments won't contradict the Bible, and marriage, specifically, is from God, not the government. (Governments have an earthly right to track them for accounting purposes, but not to redefine.)

Polygamy Footnotes

Just because marriage is defined as one man and one woman for life doesn't necessarily mean only one person is born for every other one person. That's an unwarranted extrapolation. This is important because we aren't stuck by fate with someone. We are bound by commitment, loyalty, and choice, not fate. Even arranged marriages are a matter of choice, it's just a matter of whose. (return)

Last Modified: Friday, December 08, 2023


	Biblical Gender Identity Site: Jayden12.com › Rock › Gender Identity › Polygamy (Mobile) - Full Site Section: Intro ⋅ Single ⋅ Marriage ⋅ Adultery ⋅ Living Together Not Married ⋅ Prostitution ⋅ Cross Dressing ⋅ Homosexuality ⋅ Animals ⋅ Incest ⋅ Self ⋅ Cycle ⋅ Polygamy ⋅ Divorce ⋅ Abortion ⋅ Adoption ⋅ Style ⋅ General ⋅ Conclusions Disclaimers: 1. This is a mature topic only intended for people who've at least begun puberty. If you are less than 13 years old then I pray you don't have any reason to concern yourself with this yet, and you should ask a trustworthy adult before reading this. (My Family in the Bible page (here) is meant for all ages.) 2. This summary is not intended for general counseling, it is for those who want to know what the Bible says on this topic, and for those who claim the Bible is silent or says the opposite, plus a little commentary to get us started on what it means and how all this fits in a Biblical worldview.

	Polygamy

	The original design was one man and one woman. No other option is offered to us, we made up all the rest. Any time there is instruction about marriage it's clearly patterned after the Genesis 1:27-28 & Genesis 2:24-25 model (one male and one female) despite however many examples there are of people who deviate. However, it's true there is no explicit command on the number of wives a man may have. Remember, monogamy is the custom of being married to (or having sex with) only one person at a time, and polygamy is marriage in which a spouse of either sex may have more than one mate at the same time. We can make many inferences from the indirect verses in the Bible, but since they're all indirect, there's room for debate. Indirect Exodus 21:10 hub The presence of the unqualified word "if" implies it is at least acceptable. Deuteronomy 17:17 hub There's a big difference between "must not take many" and "must not have more than one." And it's not a stretch to think a higher standard could be set for the leaders than for the rest. Deuteronomy 21:15-17 hub Here polygamy is mentioned nonchalantly. And it doesn't say "at most two," it just says "if he has two." Deuteronomy 25:5-10 hub Notice it does not say "after he dies then the next brother in line should marry her, unless he's already married, in which case the second next brother should marry her." 2 Samuel 12:7-8 hub Nathan is relaying that God would have given David even more wives if David had just asked (rather than going about it the way he did with Bathsheba). He already had a bunch at the time. 1 Kings 11:3-4 hub While this blames Solomon's straying from God on his wives, notice it doesn't explicitly say it's because he had more than one. As if they all were great honorable Jews and he just couldn't handle the volume. His wives turned to other gods and their straying leaked into his heart too. Like a sexually transmitted disease, which can be contracted when we are with one or many partners. Isaiah 4:1 hub Maybe Isaiah was speaking non-critically of polygamy here, maybe he was just describing a winner-take-all contest between multiple maidens. But the use of the word "our" would indicate an acceptance of polygamy. Especially in the context (Isaiah 3:25-4:1) that not accepting polygamy in this situation would condemn some women. However, when we look at more context (Isaiah 3:16-4:1) that condemnation was actually intended. But be careful, the condemnation was for a very specific group of women and wasn't a generalization, nor was the condemnation limited to those women (see all of Isaiah 3). Matthew 19:8-9 hub Notice that Jesus doesn't specifically say to have only one wife. He just says if you divorce for any reason (but the one valid reason) then you may not marry anyone else. There's no mention of a numerical limit here. For example, if we take this literally then if a man has three wives and divorces one then he's expected to be content for the rest of his life with (at most) the other two he already has. This isn't necessarily to say in the positive that polygamy is good or even acceptable, it's saying divorce is negative, serious, and even has a penalty. The following passages are from the writing of Paul. God's word must be taken seriously, but we must be very careful not to read into the scriptures what we want to find. Even though Paul uses a singular term here, he's not explicitly saying a man should only have one wife, nor does he specifically say a man should not have more than one. He's saying sex is reserved for a husband and a wife. Even a polygamous man can be said to have "a wife." If there didn't happen to be any polygamists in the churches he was writing to then it would make sense that it would not have come up. 1 Corinthians 7:2-16 hub Ephesians 5:23 hub Ephesians 5:28 hub 1 Timothy 3:2-4 hub 1 Timothy 3:12 hub Bible Stories Genesis 4:19-24 - Lamech, Adah, & Zillah Genesis 16:1-5 - Abram, Sarai, & Hagar Genesis 29:16-30:3 - Jacob, Rachel, & Leah 1 Samuel 1:2-8 - Elkanah, Hannah, & Peninnah Worldview To be clear, all I'm saying is God, in His word, doesn't seem to have a really strong opinion on this. He's not one to dance around topics, and if He really cared I don't think He'd have waited until Paul came around to say so. (Based on genealogical records, Jesus and Paul probably both walked the Earth about 4,000 years after creation week.) God isn't in the business of dictating our every decision (Luke 12:14). He does care how we treat each other though (Matthew 22:34-40, Mark 12:28-34) and don't forget the way He designed it was one man and one woman (Genesis 2:24), anything else we made up on our own.¹ This perspective doesn't mean it's "right" for a man to have more than one wife. It just means the Bible doesn't forbid it (like it does other things). Still, American, European, Asian, and many other societies have long since decided it's not appropriate, and they aren't obligated to get that opinion from the Bible. It's easy to argue that allowing a man to have multiple wives devalues women. The first guy recorded as doing this was Lamech (Genesis 4:19), and there was Solomon (1 Kings 11:3). There were a few stories in the Bible where this worked fine for the guy and crummy for the girl. That being said, here's the best conclusion I've found to reconcile the difference we find in the Old and New Testaments. Notice how Pharaoh and Abimelech (leaders of nations back in Genesis 12, 20, & 26) had many wives, but the kings of Babylon (Ester 1) and Judea (Luke 1:5, Mark 6:17) only had one. Though Xerxes did have more than his share of compulsory one night stands (Ester 2:2-4). Babylon was far bigger than either of the aforementioned nations and surely the King of Babylon would have been able to support as many wives as he wanted, so what's the change? Even the jerks who came up with Xerxes "nomination" process assumed the end result should be only one queen. Clearly the culture (even pagan culture) had changed for reasons other than Jewish/Israelite law. Besides the obvious simple male greed and disrespect of females, perhaps polygamy was another early form of Social Security safety net (similar to how a rapist was required to marry his victim since he had just ruined the girl's chances of ever getting married to anyone else, Exodus 22:16-17, Leviticus 21:13). The idea here is that the balance of men & women in the world is typically about even, but in ancient days war didn't involve ammunition & missiles but only men. Killing off all the men of your enemy and sparing the women was normal, allowing the female population to stay noticeably higher than the male. That was a very patriarchal society and most women weren't allowed to provide for themselves, so they needed someone, at least anyone, to take care of them. The alternatives were prostitution, slavery, or starvation. (The conversation between Naomi, Orpah, and Ruth, in Ruth 1:1-14, was a great example of this, and an even better example that also might have had an allowance of polygamy was Isaiah 4:1.) So while not ideal, polygamy could be seen as a "lesser of two evils," hence the lack of divine criticism (and even endorsement). But by the time of the Jewish exile, the situation may have changed enough (and how much more so now, after the Scientific Revolution) and it's easy to rationalize that polygamy is a deprecated practice that devalues women. Today, regardless of whether we feel it's disgusting or unfair or beautiful, polygamy dilutes the concept of marriage. Marriage needs to remain defined as an institution originated by God as between one man and one woman, as recorded in Genesis 1 and 2. All other definitions are distractions and disrespectful of our Creator. That doesn't exclude the possibility of civil unions or the like, for governments aren't limited to the Bible for all their policies and laws. But good governments won't contradict the Bible, and marriage, specifically, is from God, not the government. (Governments have an earthly right to track them for accounting purposes, but not to redefine.) Polygamy Footnotes Just because marriage is defined as one man and one woman for life doesn't necessarily mean only one person is born for every other one person. That's an unwarranted extrapolation. This is important because we aren't stuck by fate with someone. We are bound by commitment, loyalty, and choice, not fate. Even arranged marriages are a matter of choice, it's just a matter of whose. (return) Last Modified: Friday, December 08, 2023