Scripture repeatedly commands (Deut. 4:2 and 12:32, Rev. 22:18-19, etc) that man is not to "add to" nor "subtract from" the Written Word of God. Our Savior was likewise critical (Matthew 23 is just one obvious example) of those "Hypocrites!" who took it upon themselves to insert their own "traditions" into "law" and thus make His commandments "of no effect". (Matt. 15:6, Mark 7:13, etc.) But there is perhaps no better example of a false doctrine elevated by tradition alone to the status of unquestioned "Law" than the false idol of Monogamy.
If this concept is new to you, your own reaction may well serve as a proof of just how strongly that tradition is revered. I contend that so "knee-jerk" is the response to any serious challenge to this 'sacred cow' doctrine that it can literally be said to fall into the category of "forbidding to marry" that was the subject of I Timothy 4:1-3. Don't believe me? Then I challenge you to be like the Bereans (Acts 17:10-11) and study for yourself. "Let God be true and every man a liar."
There are some studies in Scripture that might be called "difficult" - after all, the Savior Himself called several things "hard teachings". But this isn't one of them. Honest scholarship will show without question that NOWHERE in the Bible does God prohibit men from taking more than one wife. The converse, however, will almost certainly surprise you. What follows may even shock you, if you have come to believe that this tradition comes from Scripture, rather than false doctrines and even pagan practices.
The stories of the practices, patriarchs, and prophecies in the Bible associated with marriage, and specifically with polygyny, occupy literally hundreds of pages in the Bible. An analysis of all of them would of course require at least a book-length study. But there are a number of observations which are consistent, and readily verified. They all make the point. For example, there IS no specific word in Biblical Hebrew to describe "polygyny" - there is just "marriage", and what is Written about it. "Poly" is a Greek root word, and the distinction is literally foreign to the original Biblical mindset. I use the English word "polygyny" here in preference to the less-specific term "polygamy" because God permits a man to have multiple wives, while the converse is simply defined as "adultery". Whether our own society likes it or not, God's Word makes it clear that a woman is to have only one "covering".
Even most "non-believers" are aware that men like Jacob, Gideon, King David, Caleb, probably Moses, and most certainly Solomon, had more than one wife according to the Bible. But those who claim to "believe the Bible" while somehow accepting "modern" teachings that "monogamy" is now the only allowable form of marriage have to believe "something changed" - in spite of God's assertion to the contrary (Mal. 3:3, Heb. 13:8).
Invariably, those who begin this study also come up with the same predictable rebuttals, since the first reaction to any new information that so utterly contradicts our sacred tradition is DENIAL: "How about Adam and Eve? One flesh?" And, oh, that "husband of one wife" thing?" Once those have been addressed, the next step is just as predictable. "Well, even if it's OK, it can't be God's PREFERRED plan, and - besides - it ALWAYS has HORRIBLE consequences!"
All of these objections are readily addressed - they are the "easy targets". Even so, however, the taboo surrounding this 'sacred' tradition is so strong that many people will recognize the process; it is identical to the stages of grieving - because we have been lied to! ( See Jer. 16:19) After denial and anger begin to give way to eventual acceptance, however, one final objection usually surfaces:
Why does it matter? ("After all," goes the standard caveat, "I don't want to myself"...or, "my wife would never let me!")
What I intend to do in this article is outline the essential case: WHY believing Christians should seek to see what the Bible REALLY says about marriage, WHAT it says, and WHY it is important. The rest is up to you - because His Word is consistent, from Genesis on.
While there are practical answers, such as "you CANNOT understand marriage without knowing the whole Truth of what is Written", and "obedience brings blessings, but those who sow rebellion will always reap curses", there are other, arguably more important, reasons. For example, even those who think, well, polygyny will NEVER be for me, might at least recognize that a society where Biblical patriarchs take additional wives can't help but be superior to one marked by record numbers of single mothers and fatherless children, just as the Bible teaches! Likewise, can it be any surprise that a society that think IT can define marriage in God's place would countenance even "civil unions" that He calls abomination - so long as it's "one at a time", of course!
But there is a far more important reason still.
How can we came to "know Him", and yet deny His Truth about one of the most important and central relationships in all of Scripture!
So let's "cut to the chase".
HIT ME WITH YOUR BEST SHOT
Those who come to understand that "what you have heard it said" that the Bible teaches about marriage is not at ALL what "is Written" will doubtless have several different examples of the "clincher" argument, which finally opened their eyes. My own concept of that hit-me-with-your-best-shot, debate-ending favorite has matured over time.
I was first impressed by a simple, logical Biblical question, when I heard it put this way:
You can't show me ANYWHERE in Scripture where polygyny is prohibited, but I will show you where it can be REQUIRED! *
Even though the honest search for counter-examples takes some effort, the point of the argument is irrefutable. Later still, after I realized that there was even more than ONE such potential requirement in Scripture, I came to conclude that there are far more compelling proofs.
For example, isn't God CONSISTENT? Doesn't He call sin, sin, and ultimately even say, have no fellowship with such? After all, He doesn't ever command thou shalt NOT do something like murder, theft, or adultery, and then give rules or procedures for how to do it anyway, does He? *
Most people who study the many verses in the Torah, or Pentateuch (Books of Moses) will readily conclude that the ONLY way His commandments about marriage can be read as a complete, consistent WHOLE is to acknowledge that He made men and women different, for His purposes. Verses like Lev. 18:7-11, 18:18, Deut. 17:17, 21:11, 22:28, and many others only make sense when one recognizes that a man may have more than one wife. The meaning of Matthew 15:6-9 is clear in this context: those who twist the Scripture in order to make it fit with their own tradition really do make His commands of "no effect".
The "logical" case from Scripture is clear. Those who read the teachings from the New Testament without the filter of man's tradition will find that the Savior was in fact telling the Truth when He said that not "one jot or tittle" of His "torah" or "teaching and instruction" will pass away so long as "heaven and earth" still exist. (Matt. 5:18 ; Luke 16:17)
But, as I indicated in the introduction above, Monogamy Only has become such an idol a doctrine based solely on the traditions of men that, like all sacred cows, it is put away only reluctantly. At least one more question always seems to follow. Well, OK, polygyny may be PERMITTED maybe He reluctantly allows it. but, but it's NOT God's Best, or 'not His original plan!' What about Adam and Eve? Look at Lamech! At Solomon! Polygamy ALWAYS leads to problems in the Bible!"
It no longer amazes me that those who proclaim Monogamy as the "ideal", and who idolize that "First Marriage" can be so double-minded about which "ideals" they elevate, and which they ignore. After all, how much do we learn from examples WITHOUT some kind of problem or conflict? How many demonstrably MONOGAMOUS marriages in all of the Bible can be honestly said to be without such problems? But we cannot ignore the real lessons of the lives of the patriarchs, in favor of twisting them to justify our tradition. I find that the best response to such attempts to "twist" Scripture is to just ask about the obvious:
If Adam is the presumed Original Monogamist isn't he also the Man By Whom Sin Entered the World?
I find it more than a bit humorous that people who talk in other contexts about first use and Original Plan, while claiming that polygyny is often portrayed negatively in the Bible, will then ignore the devastating implications of the most famously failed marriage in all history being Monogamous! What kind of "ideal" is that?
The argument that since Scripture records no other wife for Adam than Eve no one else is allowed to do differently - regardless of what the rest of Scripture says - is not only bad logic and bad teaching, it is down right disingenuous. I could just as easily make the unsupported claim that "if Adam had two wives he might not have been so readily deceived by the one! So God's plan must've been for Monogamy to result in Original Sin!" Give me a break.
But I submit that the most important reason for each of us to understand the whole Truth of what God REALLY Wrote about marriage, ALL of it, is because to do otherwise about something SO important in His Word is an attempt to utterly ignore and even deny the character of God Himself!
Not once, but at least TWICE, God specifically refers to Himself as the Husband of two wives: both the prophets Ezekiel and Jeremiah (in chapters 3, and 23, respectively) tell a strikingly-similar story, whether the polygyny metaphor is a reference is to the nations of Israel and Judea, or to Jerusalem and Samaria. And God Himself gave King David* multiple wives! (II Sam. 12:8)
Can God sin? Does He equate His actions with sin - even in a metaphor? And does He not say He is the same yesterday, and tomorrow?
How can we claim to want to know Him, when we deny obvious Truths He teaches us about Himself?
Speaking of which, our Redeemer Himself clearly confirms that Truth again, when far from condemning polygyny He tells the Parable of the Ten Virgins! When the Bridegroom comes, He takes those five who are prepared with the oil of the Holy Spirit in to the wedding with Him.
I can't help but think that it is important for those who claim to believe in Him, and who claim to eventually want to be Brides of Christ (and, yes, that plural is deliberate, and important) that they must then also want to truly know Him. What could be more important?
EVERY significant relationship that God describes in His Word is ultimately what mathematicians would call of a one-to-many type:
One King has multiple subjects;
One Master has multiple servants;
One Father has multiple sons and daughters;
and One Husband will have multiple brides.
Isn't it a bit presumptuous for a subject of the King to deny that truth? Or for one who claims to be His bondservant to tell the Master how many others he may have? Or for us to say to Him, there can be only one, and you will have no other beside me?
Why else does He so often teach in prophecy of TWO houses, TWO sticks, multiple branches (including those grafted in), FIVE prepared brides, seven letters to SEVEN churches, and TWELVE tribes? Like the marriage supper of the Lamb, they ALL speak of an ending where we are many*, but He is our One King, Master, and Bridegroom. Shouldn't it be obvious that He uses the many examples of polygyny in the Bible to teach lessons about love, provision, covering, and family that a Monogamy Only tradition not only ignores, but denies?
[And, yes - throughout history almost every denomination, from the smallest assemblies to a Church which ruled empires and armies, has wanted to claim the title "Universal", or "One True Church", and declare Itself the Sole Rightful Bride of Christ. Others need not apply. Wars have been fought over less.]
That should be enough. Those who want to truly know Him, much less potentially be invited to enter the wedding feast as one of His brides, should be willing to do so on His terms, and not ours. Anything less is a denial of His Truth, and His character, as Written.
There is obviously much more which could be discussed. But the point has been made. God's teaching is consistent, as a unified whole, He does not change:
The Law of the Lord is perfect (Psalm 19:7 )
We are not to add to it, nor subtract from His teaching (Deut. 4:2, 12:32, etc.). And that includes adding to His teaching about marriage things that He did not put in there! (One could even now understand why some might call such forbidding to marry a very bad thing. See I Timothy 4:1-3!)
Finally, read Isaiah 4:1-3. Can it really be that this time when seven women will take hold of one man for marriage, and in repentance, would hold such a promise, without that, too, being a part of His plan, and a blessing?
The trouble with adding to His Word a doctrine of men based ultimately on a pagan tradition, is that it denies the essential consistent message of His Word. Let God be true, and every man a liar. Those who honestly seek to know Him must seek to remain teachable, and be like the Bereans of Acts 17:11. Search out the Scriptures for yourself, and see if these things be True.
And may God bless you in your study.
-
* The Law of the Levirate; Deut. 25:5-10, is commonly cited.
But there is also I Cor. 7:10-11! Think about the fact that the departed wife may not remarry, but her abandoned husband can. When she repents and returns
Dubious translations, such as the husband of ONE wife of I Tim. 3:2 and Titus 1:6, have been addressed in many places. The Greek article "mia", used there, is just as properly translated as "husband of A wife", or "husband of a FIRST wife". The popular rendering proves only that the translators believed the Monogamy Only Tradition themselves.
* Deut. 21:15 and Exodus 21:10, obviously. If a man has two wives, or If he takes another wife, can hardly be denied.
But the real irony is that the 'church' which gets so worked up about calling something which God permits wrong will then turn around and eventually accept something (like State-licensed marriage, and eventually homosexual 'civil unions') which He flat-out prohibits.
Perhaps that shows the power of mammon, or why He so consistently advises us to be careful to choose this day Whom you will serve. Maybe it's even why He uses the images of harlotry and whoredom to describe what serving mammon has ultimately always done when (another Jesus, which we have not preached, least in the kingdom)
* He also, of course, called David "a man after God's own heart". (I Sam. 13:14, Acts 13:22) And while some so-called "teachers" try to claim that David sinned by his polygyny, the Bible pointedly say otherwise! (I Kings 15:5)
* Ultimately, we are to be echad in Him, of course from the Hebrew word which means 'one', but which is in fact plural.