tyreth said:
I do not think polygyny is a sin. I think that:
* Christians should avoid polygyny in western society where it is illegal - we are told to respect and obey the law, so long as it does not prevent us from worshipping and obeying God. Polygyny is not a commandment in the Bible, it is a freedom - a freedom we must freely forfeit when the law of the land says so
Good point, but there is a problem: There is no law on the books of any state prohibiting a man from having a plurality of wives in the eyes of God. In other words, there is no law requiring that a couple acquire a license/certificate for their marriage, unless they wish the state to recognize their marriage. In other words, there are no moral implications attached to that piece of paper from City Hall.
* It is undesirable in western society - most people, non-Christians included, find it abhorrant. Therefore, in order to reach those outside the faith, we must empathise and understand them. We would not wear shoes in the house of one of the reprobate if they asked us to remove them. We should therefore not alienate ourselves so strongly from witnessing to them by making ourselves uneccessarily despised.
Pushing this idea to the point of removing our freedom that we have in Christ, especially in the area of marriage, is a gross misapplication of scripture, for it is reflected in no one place of which I am aware.
As Paul said, "For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win the more; and to the jews I became as a Jew, that I might win Jews; to those who are under the law, as under the law, that I might win those who are under the law; to those who are without law, as without law (not being without law toward God, but under law toward Christ), that I might win those who are without law; to the weak I became as weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means save some." - 1 corinthians 9:20-22. So while polygyny may not be sinful, we prevent ourselves from becoming the best we can to reach others
The problem with your application of Paul's words is that you are trying to slap them against the side of marriage, and hope that they stick. It is fallacious to apply his words to any and all aspects of life by the subjective standards of your own thinking, especially those that clearly are the right of all believers and unbelievers alike (speaking of marriage in general), even if they violate the social sensibilities of those around us. The fact that we speak of Christ in public is an offense to many who disbelieve Christ. Do we then stop speaking of Him in public? No.
I would say that a man who parades his having a plurality of wives, using it like a battering ram to prove a point, has a problem that he needs to deal with before it does harm to himself and/or his family. To those who would disagree with anyone having a plurality of wives, he is simply a married man without his having to place his wives on display for the purposes of offense.
THAT is the thrust behind Paul's words, as is evidenced in his dissertation about meat sacrificed to idols. He did not say that one cannot eat such meat, only that he not do so in front of those who are easily offended (weaker) over such meat being eaten by professing believers.
* We have no infrastructure - there is not the support, financially, culturally or emotionally, for people to deal with polygyny. Therefore it is much harder to maintain a stable polygynous relationship (I speak from my own musings here, and stories I have read, not from experience) in western society.
Based upon my own observations of polygyny, which includes 17 families I have met thus far, they have plenty of support from many within the culture around them, and they have no more problems from an economical standpoint than monogamous couples, and some are living a lifestyle of which most monogamists can only dream (not because they are rich, but because they have a multi-income household).
Don Dean