Polygamy and Christianity

Zoey <3

Considering Catholicism
Site Supporter
Mar 21, 2017
410
432
Ohio
✟74,215.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Please before commenting read through this whole post.

I am wondering if polygamy is okay according to the Bible. You see many old testament leaders and devotees to God practicing polygamy.

It is a heavy debate in many areas of Christianity- some branches of the church saying it is alright and some not.

I am asking for SCRIPTURE not personal opinions or preference.

I will continue researching on my own on top of this.

Thank you in advance for your input.

LETS KEEP THIS CIVIL PLEASE.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dayhiker

HTacianas

Well-Known Member
Jul 9, 2018
8,520
9,016
Florida
✟325,461.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Please before commenting read through this whole post.

I am wondering if polygamy is okay according to the Bible. You see many old testament leaders and devotees to God practicing polygamy.

It is a heavy debate in many areas of Christianity- some branches of the church saying it is alright and some not.

I am asking for SCRIPTURE not personal opinions or preference.

I will continue researching on my own on top of this.

Thank you in advance for your input.

LETS KEEP THIS CIVIL PLEASE.

Polygamy was practiced by the Jews of the first century. As you have already pointed out, it was allowed under their law. It was also practiced by gentiles of the time. It was found among both Jewish and gentile converts to the Church.

Over time, the secular law prohibited it and so did the Church. It has now become the tradition of Christianity and has become so accepted that any mention of it, especially among protestants, sets off a fervor of off topic and inconclusive bout of scripture quotes that do not resolve the argument.

So to answer your question, the bible does not prohibit polygamy. The Church does. Even Martin Luther wrote that he found no biblical prohibition against the practice.
 
Upvote 0

Sketcher

Born Imperishable
Feb 23, 2004
38,984
9,401
✟380,259.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
1 Timothy 3 has polygamy as a disqualifier for overseers and deacons. This is among other high standards which Christians should all shoot for. Furthermore, the way adultery is spoken of in 1 Corinthians 7 and Matthew 5:27-28, I am not seeing a practical way to obtain a second spouse without committing adultery.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Heavenhome
Upvote 0

grandvizier1006

I don't use this anymore, but I still follow Jesus
Site Supporter
Dec 2, 2014
5,976
2,599
28
MS
✟664,118.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Just because the Bible portrays polygamy as normal for the ancient world doesn’t mean God condones it. Lamech in Genesis is the first man recorded to have two wives, and he boasts about killing someone. Meanwhile, Noah, a righteous man, and his three sons all have one wife. God rejected (by rejected I mean did not want him to be the lineage that would produce Israel, not rejected in an emotional or spiritual sense) Ishmael because he was a child of his slave woman Hagar. Even though Sarah allowed this, God was angry with her for laughing at the idea that she could have a child in her old age. Rachel and Leah make a contest out of having more children and Rachel feels like she is hated by God. Despite the Bible’s patriarchal society, God (even “back then”) did not define a woman’s worth by how many children she had. Solomon and Gideon are portrayed as having strayed from what God told them due to having multiple wives, many of whom introduced them to foreign gods. The Genesis creation account, Jesus, and Paul all affirm and support monogamy between a man and a woman.
 
Upvote 0

Aussie Pete

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Aug 14, 2019
9,081
8,285
Frankston
Visit site
✟727,630.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Divorced
Please before commenting read through this whole post.

I am wondering if polygamy is okay according to the Bible. You see many old testament leaders and devotees to God practicing polygamy.

It is a heavy debate in many areas of Christianity- some branches of the church saying it is alright and some not.

I am asking for SCRIPTURE not personal opinions or preference.

I will continue researching on my own on top of this.

Thank you in advance for your input.

LETS KEEP THIS CIVIL PLEASE.
Polygamy was permitted in the OT. I did not know until recently that Roman law forbade polygamy. Some in the early church accepted polygamy because it is not a cut and dried issue. Monogamy was stated by Paul to be one of the qualifications for elders. (1 Timothy 3:12)

To me, it is a non-issue in the west as polygamy is illegal. It is an issue in cultures that permit polygamy. I don't believe that scripture gives missionaries/churches the right to split up polygamous relationships.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dayhiker
Upvote 0

Chrystal-J

The one who stands firm to the end will be saved.
Site Supporter
Oct 19, 2004
12,811
6,013
Detroit
✟806,518.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
Mark 10:7-9 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, 8 and the two will become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two, but one flesh. 9 Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate.”…

If two are to become one, then they cannot become one with others involved.
 
Upvote 0

SwordmanJr

Double-edged Sword only
Nov 11, 2014
1,200
402
Oklahoma City
✟43,962.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I am wondering if polygamy is okay according to the Bible. You see many old testament leaders and devotees to God practicing polygamy.

It is a heavy debate in many areas of Christianity- some branches of the church saying it is alright and some not.

I am asking for SCRIPTURE not personal opinions or preference.

When I researched this in the Bible with my dad, the first thing we did was look to Jesus, and if His coming in the flesh in any way altered marriage from the way it was defined and practiced by the ancients. We could find nothing anywhere in the Gospels where He ever addressed any changes.

We listened to what others said about biblical sources, and many like pointing at the English translations and the use of the singular mention of "wife" as opposed to the plural "wives" in key passages throughout the NT. No rational theologian ever built their case upon such flimsy and downright manipulative reasoning and fallacies in our English translations, so we could only ignore that juvenile take on proving doctrine.

Others point to the command for bishops and deacons to be the "...husband of one wife." Again, those same apologists from the juvenile section thought themselves empowered to force the context and language into the realm of universal application to us all as opposed to limitations, as the text clearly indicated. They also must assume Paul was too much of a dolt to actually write down what he meant, therefore the need for manipulative interpreters to try and force the text to say whatever they want it to say in order to ensure it conforms to social and cultural dogmas that are the driving forces of their beliefs rather than taking responsibility for what they choose to believe by reading scripture for what it says.

Another favorite go-to is when Jesus addressed DIVORCE, and how "...it was not so from the beginning." I mean, how they make the mental leap from divorce over to a plurality of wives is completely beyond me....unless they are feeling guilty for their own serialized form of polygamy after having been divorced and remarried one or more times at the point of those discussions.

Then you encounter the argument that it's against the law, which it is....but ONLY when it comes to acquiring an active certificate from the local government for more than one at a time. The second stage of that discussion always degenerates into the alleged sin for not having that magical piece of paper from City Hall for a marriage. One will search in vain through the scriptures to find where the Lord ever defined marriage, apart from Genesis 2, as requiring vows, exchanges, acknowledgments, licenses, ceremonies, and all the other trappings that are nothing more than the traditions of men. There are also no laws on the books of any state demanding that all married couples seek governmental acknowledgement. There are many legal avenues for couples without that certificate to acquire the same rights and privileges as what that certificate provides.

So, in the final analysis, we were forced to admit that proving a negative is indeed an impossible task, especially when the texts of the NT make no disallowances for those who are not deacons or bishops. We have family friends with plural wives right here in my town, and they are wonderful people living their lives like any other family. They are NOT mormon, and never were. Ignorant people love jumping on that hole infested trampoline while not realizing what happens when you jump on such long enough that they eventually end up falling through.

Oh, and for those who claim God does not condone it, they might want to explain why the Lord gave to David at least two of his already plural wives as revealed by Nathan the prophet, and that the Lord also commanded the taking of an additional wife in certain situations within the family.

For the sake of clarification, the form of polygamy that I've been talking about is actually called polygyny.

Jr
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

AvisG

Active Member
Site Supporter
Oct 15, 2019
330
259
West
✟23,081.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Solomon, the biblical paragon of wisdom, had 700 wives and 300 concubines. One might logically have expected God to chime in at some point with "You know, Sol, this is getting to be a bit much" - but apparently not.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: dayhiker
Upvote 0

SwordmanJr

Double-edged Sword only
Nov 11, 2014
1,200
402
Oklahoma City
✟43,962.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Solomon, the biblical paragon of wisdom, had 700 wives and 300 concubines. One might logically have expected God to chime in at some point with "You know, Sol, this is getting to be a bit much" - but apparently not.

Oh, and then there are those who argue from 2 Kings (I think is where this is), where there's an injunction against "...multiplying wives..." What the juvenile theologians fail to also admit is that in the verse before or after that one, there's an injunction against "multiplying horses."

So all you fellow horse owners out there who have more than one horse.....we all better watch out for our being out of God's will for our lives.....or NOT. The alternative is to simply say to the Bible manipulators to get a REAL belief system, and stop listening to those false teachers behind the pulpits of what they support, read the Bible for what it says, in proper context, and adjust their beliefs accordingly.

Were we to believe many of the falsehood purveying, tyrannical manipulators, we should all expect to see the Patriarchs of our faith burning in the pits of Hell after we get to eternity.

Jr
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Dkh587

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 6, 2014
3,049
1,770
Southeast
✟552,407.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
A man having multiple wives is not a sin, nor is it adultery.

however, most people, both men and women, are not mentally and culturally equipped to be part of a polygynous marriage in our times. I don’t encourage people to do it, but it is not a sin.
 
Upvote 0

thecolorsblend

If God is your Father, who is your Mother?
Site Supporter
Jul 1, 2013
9,199
8,425
Gotham City, New Jersey
✟308,231.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
1 Timothy 3 has polygamy as a disqualifier for overseers and deacons. This is among other high standards which Christians should all shoot for. Furthermore, the way adultery is spoken of in 1 Corinthians 7 and Matthew 5:27-28, I am not seeing a practical way to obtain a second spouse without committing adultery.
You mention 1 Corinthians 7. Unless I'm missing something, that's primarily directed at laymen. And there's verse 39:

A woman is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband die, she is at liberty: let her marry to whom she will; only in the Lord.
-- 1 Corinthians 7:39

So there's also death.
 
Upvote 0

SwordmanJr

Double-edged Sword only
Nov 11, 2014
1,200
402
Oklahoma City
✟43,962.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
1 Timothy 3 has polygamy as a disqualifier for overseers and deacons. This is among other high standards which Christians should all shoot for.

Standard? Paul said nothing about that being a standard that I can see. It's a simple injunction enforced against those two groups of people, and based upon reasoning the text seems to make clear.

How, then, does anyone acquire license to reapply that injunction against all other believers....simply because it's an injunction? What if only overseers and deacons were told they are ALLOWED something, would that also translate into an allowance for all others, or is the basis of your reasoning a form of situational ethics?

Furthermore, the way adultery is spoken of in 1 Corinthians 7 and Matthew 5:27-28, I am not seeing a practical way to obtain a second spouse without committing adultery.

If you believe the coming of Christ changed the foundation of God's moral absolutes, then where did the definition of adultery change? That would render God's moral absolute not so absolute, correct?

1 Cor 7 clearly addresses divorce. How did you make that enormous leap from divorce over to polygyny?

Besides, if your system of theology were true, then we should expect to see the Patriarchs burning in the pits of Hell for alleged adultery, including David after the Lord Himself gave to David at least two of his already plural wives. You then stand as an accuser of God Himself, especially with Israel and Judah having been His "wives" (plural).

Jr
 
Upvote 0

SwordmanJr

Double-edged Sword only
Nov 11, 2014
1,200
402
Oklahoma City
✟43,962.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Matthew 19:9 English Standard Version
9 And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.”

For the sake of clarification, we are not saying that it's ok to divorce one wife and then marry another. What we're saying is that having a wife, and marrying another as a second wife is indeed an allowance the scriptures not only condone, but also command in certain instances.

So, bringing divorce into this mix is an outlandish gyration and juggling act that does little else than poison the well.

Jr
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

SwordmanJr

Double-edged Sword only
Nov 11, 2014
1,200
402
Oklahoma City
✟43,962.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
In the old testament, but we're to be one with our spouse in the new testament.

Indeed? So, the coming of Christ Jesus changed the face of marriage?

Are you not aware of being one is a reality between a man and a prostitute? I have the very words of Paul in the New Testament on that one:

[1Co 6:16 KJV] 16 What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh.

So, I hope you can appreciate that Jesus made no changes to marriage, its definition, or anything else concerning that union. That was not His purpose for coming in the flesh, and anyone who tries to add to scripture what isn't there is, by definition, in gross error.

So, in the final analysis, Abraham was one flesh with all his wives, as was David, Gideon, Jacob, et al.

Jr
 
Upvote 0

Chrystal-J

The one who stands firm to the end will be saved.
Site Supporter
Oct 19, 2004
12,811
6,013
Detroit
✟806,518.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
John 13:34-35
34 “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. 35 By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”

Marrying another woman is not very loving to the woman or the children.
 
Upvote 0

Sketcher

Born Imperishable
Feb 23, 2004
38,984
9,401
✟380,259.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
You mention 1 Corinthians 7. Unless I'm missing something, that's primarily directed at laymen. And there's verse 39:

A woman is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband die, she is at liberty: let her marry to whom she will; only in the Lord.
-- 1 Corinthians 7:39

So there's also death.
I don't see room for polygamy in 1 Corinthians 7, do you?

Standard? Paul said nothing about that being a standard that I can see. It's a simple injunction enforced against those two groups of people, and based upon reasoning the text seems to make clear.
He's telling Timothy who to nominate based on their conduct and maturity. That's called a standard.

How, then, does anyone acquire license to reapply that injunction against all other believers....simply because it's an injunction?
Because there is no reason to believe that other believers are licensed to be known for poor character, intemperate, greedy, a drunkard, violent, quarrelsome, a lover of money, irresponsible, and ignorant. We are to grow in knowledge and character.
What if only overseers and deacons were told they are ALLOWED something, would that also translate into an allowance for all others, or is the basis of your reasoning a form of situational ethics?
Then Scripture would have clearly denoted it. This is irrelevant to the present case.
If you believe the coming of Christ changed the foundation of God's moral absolutes, then where did the definition of adultery change? That would render God's moral absolute not so absolute, correct?
What's at stake isn't the moral absolute, but the command. He gave the Jews commands about marriage and adultery in the Law, and Jesus clarified their meaning in an age where the Pharisees abused it.
1 Cor 7 clearly addresses divorce. How did you make that enormous leap from divorce over to polygyny?
Because there is no room in 1 Corinthians 7 for polygamy. If you see that room, please point out the exact verse.

Besides, if your system of theology were true, then we should expect to see the Patriarchs burning in the pits of Hell for alleged adultery, including David after the Lord Himself gave to David at least two of his already plural wives.
Not my problem. Besides, there's whatever measure of grace God chose to give them when Jesus was dead.
You then stand as an accuser of God Himself, especially with Israel and Judah having been His "wives" (plural).
No, not at all. First, God was speaking figuratively. Second, God has different rights and privileges than human beings (Romans 12:19 being an easy example of this).
 
  • Agree
Reactions: bèlla
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

SwordmanJr

Double-edged Sword only
Nov 11, 2014
1,200
402
Oklahoma City
✟43,962.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
John 13:34-35
34 “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. 35 By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”

Marrying another woman is not very loving to the woman or the children.

Says who? You?

Well, I fully support you possessing what is no more than merely your opinion along that line, and I will even defend your freedom to hold to that opinion, no matter how irrational it is.

Blessedly, your opinion is only that, and no more.

Now, if you can prove that your opinion is more than just your opinion, we'd all love to see the evidence for such....if you can conjure something up with some sort of substance.

It's interesting that your stab at this with your denial of the "one flesh" reality in all sexual unions has apparently been abandoned, unless you have more to say about that one....

Jr
 
Upvote 0