When I preached through the book of Genesis at my church a few years ago, one nagging issue I wrestled with was the Old Testament’s seeming tolerance of polygamy.
The Bible may not explicitly condemn polygamy, but it does show the problems it causes. In almost every example in the Bible, there is fighting between wives and/or children. In the case of Jacob, some of his sons were so jealous they wanted to kill their half brother, but then through God's providence sold their brother into slavery. I think these examples were God's warning against polygamy.
One observation is that the polygamous marriages found in Scripture are practically all filled with contention and conflict. The Lord Himself reiterated that polygamy was not the original design.
I think people forget that just because they are iconic names in the Bible, doesn't mean they were perfect. (David, Solomon, Abraham, etc.) Remember that their sins were greatly punished, for Jesus has not saved us from the law yet.
Rape was looked in a much different light back then. In fact, what is in the image is not a bad way to keep single motherhood from skyrocketing out of control like it is today. It puts accountability on the man to be there for the woman and child instead of the liberty to walk away. It may also prevent men from doing such an act if they think of the consequences of responsibility.
I think your post covers the issue well. To those who disagree on the matter, do you have a better idea on how to deal with widowed women, the lack of men for women to marry, (for war was a significant cause to limited men), slaves to be made husbands and wives, and partiality played a big role as well.
Also, I'm quite shocked that the book of Ruth is not covered in the chart/image. If you do your research, do it well.
I appreciate the feedback, Maxine. By the way, Ruth's marriage to Boaz would be considered a levirate marriage, since he was the next kinsman redeemer. Levirate marriage is included in the chart.
I echo Jim's comment, the best explanation I have read.
Also, I read years ago of men in a polygamous culture. When they converted to Christianity and the missionaries required them to put away their other wives, they did so, and the women had nowhere to go. Their own families would not take them back and they were destitute. Their options were paupery or prostitution. So in the end the missionaries allowed converts to keep their other wives.
According to 1 Timothy 3:2 such converts would have been disqualified from later becoming bishops. This passage MIGHT also mean there were some polygamous marriages in the New Testament church, though of course there is no evidence for this. And the requirement of having one wife could be directed against bachelor bishops.
If you look at the graphic through the lens of history, you can understand all of those situations as allowable because of God's mercy on many. For instance a girl who was raped could never be married in those times. She would be seen as unclean and no man would take her. A widow, if she didn't have family willing to care for her would die in the streets. Marrying your brothers widow was saving her life. When God told the Israelites to kill every man woman and child it was because those people's practiced abominable things like child sacrifice. The young virgins could be brought up in a different faith. I don't believe the Israelites took male children except as slaves because they couldn't marry into Judaism. I might be wrong, somebody enlighten me there.
My point is all these things are examples of God sparing those who were able to have some sort of life later on rather than starving to death.
If God told the Israelites to divorce all their extra wives, and get rid of all the concubines and slaves, those people would have probably all died. Or formed their own community of hatred towards the Jews.
Correct. However, notice how humane the story is. This isn't a story of Boaz being a dirty creep over Ruth. It's redemption. Ruth chose to die with her mother in law, never to marry again, but God has better plans for her.
Also by the same logic, those who divorce their spouse without an act of adultery made would also be considered polyamory. I'm not siding on this logic, but to those who make the point may need to wrestle with that.
When we find ourselves offended by something in Scripture, the problem is always us.
Polygamy cleaned up the edge cases. The fact that God allows it (never outlawed in Scripture) indicates that to the Heavenly Father ensuring that every woman was married and every child had a father was more important than the romantic idea of one man with one woman for life. But in no society has polygamy been the majority case because there are not enough women for that to be possible. It has probably never exceeded 10% of any culture.
God describes himself as marrying two women, Oholibah and Oholibamah. God's prophet said God would have given King David more wives if he had asked.
It could mean that your opening assumption is mistaken. The Bible defines adultery as sleeping with another man's wife. Not an unmarried woman sleeping with another woman's husband. Thus a married man taking a second wife was not adultery so long as he continued his duties to the first wife.
Our modern view of Christian marriage was the result of Greeks and Romans becoming the majority of the early church. Their cultures were egalitarian and did not allow polygamy, because they didn't want rich men creating a shortage of women.
Your essay just popped up in my Substack feed today! 👏
Recently I heard a teacher say that God isn’t as concerned about culture as we are, in direct reference to multiple wives and concubines in ancient Israel. St. Paul writes about slavery and soldiering, giving guidance but not condemning. He writes about how women should adorn themselves and ties it (presumably) to Genesis 6. Nothing about wearing jeans or shorts to church.
In the village where the Mrs. and I live in central Mexico, nearly every bride is pregnant or has already given birth to her first child when her wedding takes place. Nobody seems to think poorly of it. The priest is more vexed by couples who have never gotten married but have multiple children.
My overriding thought is western culture has brought many problems upon itself by delaying marriage. The Mexica (Aztecs) considered boys and girls to be men and women at age 15. Warriors and mothers. Promiscuity and/or bottling up sexuality until marriage in one’s mid to late 20s seems conducive to all manner of dysfunctions.
There is only one New Testament scripture against polygamy “ let every woman have her own husband… he is not her own she has to share him.
Other than that there is nothing to forbid, polygamy, except that it was not God‘s original plan. He Once winked at these things, but now commands men everywhere to repent.
I’ve been married 42 years to my childhood sweetheart…. But if I’m about to be honest, One is plenty😂😂😂
The Bible may not explicitly condemn polygamy, but it does show the problems it causes. In almost every example in the Bible, there is fighting between wives and/or children. In the case of Jacob, some of his sons were so jealous they wanted to kill their half brother, but then through God's providence sold their brother into slavery. I think these examples were God's warning against polygamy.
One observation is that the polygamous marriages found in Scripture are practically all filled with contention and conflict. The Lord Himself reiterated that polygamy was not the original design.
For sure
Thanks, Jim!
The best explanation of this that I've read...
Mostly because the men died in battle and there was no government system to support the widows and orphans.
I think people forget that just because they are iconic names in the Bible, doesn't mean they were perfect. (David, Solomon, Abraham, etc.) Remember that their sins were greatly punished, for Jesus has not saved us from the law yet.
Rape was looked in a much different light back then. In fact, what is in the image is not a bad way to keep single motherhood from skyrocketing out of control like it is today. It puts accountability on the man to be there for the woman and child instead of the liberty to walk away. It may also prevent men from doing such an act if they think of the consequences of responsibility.
I think your post covers the issue well. To those who disagree on the matter, do you have a better idea on how to deal with widowed women, the lack of men for women to marry, (for war was a significant cause to limited men), slaves to be made husbands and wives, and partiality played a big role as well.
Also, I'm quite shocked that the book of Ruth is not covered in the chart/image. If you do your research, do it well.
I appreciate the feedback, Maxine. By the way, Ruth's marriage to Boaz would be considered a levirate marriage, since he was the next kinsman redeemer. Levirate marriage is included in the chart.
I echo Jim's comment, the best explanation I have read.
Also, I read years ago of men in a polygamous culture. When they converted to Christianity and the missionaries required them to put away their other wives, they did so, and the women had nowhere to go. Their own families would not take them back and they were destitute. Their options were paupery or prostitution. So in the end the missionaries allowed converts to keep their other wives.
According to 1 Timothy 3:2 such converts would have been disqualified from later becoming bishops. This passage MIGHT also mean there were some polygamous marriages in the New Testament church, though of course there is no evidence for this. And the requirement of having one wife could be directed against bachelor bishops.
I appreciate the kind words, Joe
Great article. Finally an explanation.
If you look at the graphic through the lens of history, you can understand all of those situations as allowable because of God's mercy on many. For instance a girl who was raped could never be married in those times. She would be seen as unclean and no man would take her. A widow, if she didn't have family willing to care for her would die in the streets. Marrying your brothers widow was saving her life. When God told the Israelites to kill every man woman and child it was because those people's practiced abominable things like child sacrifice. The young virgins could be brought up in a different faith. I don't believe the Israelites took male children except as slaves because they couldn't marry into Judaism. I might be wrong, somebody enlighten me there.
My point is all these things are examples of God sparing those who were able to have some sort of life later on rather than starving to death.
If God told the Israelites to divorce all their extra wives, and get rid of all the concubines and slaves, those people would have probably all died. Or formed their own community of hatred towards the Jews.
Correct. However, notice how humane the story is. This isn't a story of Boaz being a dirty creep over Ruth. It's redemption. Ruth chose to die with her mother in law, never to marry again, but God has better plans for her.
Also by the same logic, those who divorce their spouse without an act of adultery made would also be considered polyamory. I'm not siding on this logic, but to those who make the point may need to wrestle with that.
Well done!
Thank you!
Absolutely, that's what family does...
We should acknowledge the time, research, efforts and rightly dividing the Word of Truth, a rare jewel, in these days of deception.
At the very least, we ought to be encouraging and building up each other.
When we find ourselves offended by something in Scripture, the problem is always us.
Polygamy cleaned up the edge cases. The fact that God allows it (never outlawed in Scripture) indicates that to the Heavenly Father ensuring that every woman was married and every child had a father was more important than the romantic idea of one man with one woman for life. But in no society has polygamy been the majority case because there are not enough women for that to be possible. It has probably never exceeded 10% of any culture.
God describes himself as marrying two women, Oholibah and Oholibamah. God's prophet said God would have given King David more wives if he had asked.
It could mean that your opening assumption is mistaken. The Bible defines adultery as sleeping with another man's wife. Not an unmarried woman sleeping with another woman's husband. Thus a married man taking a second wife was not adultery so long as he continued his duties to the first wife.
Our modern view of Christian marriage was the result of Greeks and Romans becoming the majority of the early church. Their cultures were egalitarian and did not allow polygamy, because they didn't want rich men creating a shortage of women.
It wasn’t an endorsement… you can see this by the problems the came from it.
Your essay just popped up in my Substack feed today! 👏
Recently I heard a teacher say that God isn’t as concerned about culture as we are, in direct reference to multiple wives and concubines in ancient Israel. St. Paul writes about slavery and soldiering, giving guidance but not condemning. He writes about how women should adorn themselves and ties it (presumably) to Genesis 6. Nothing about wearing jeans or shorts to church.
In the village where the Mrs. and I live in central Mexico, nearly every bride is pregnant or has already given birth to her first child when her wedding takes place. Nobody seems to think poorly of it. The priest is more vexed by couples who have never gotten married but have multiple children.
My overriding thought is western culture has brought many problems upon itself by delaying marriage. The Mexica (Aztecs) considered boys and girls to be men and women at age 15. Warriors and mothers. Promiscuity and/or bottling up sexuality until marriage in one’s mid to late 20s seems conducive to all manner of dysfunctions.
There is only one New Testament scripture against polygamy “ let every woman have her own husband… he is not her own she has to share him.
Other than that there is nothing to forbid, polygamy, except that it was not God‘s original plan. He Once winked at these things, but now commands men everywhere to repent.
I’ve been married 42 years to my childhood sweetheart…. But if I’m about to be honest, One is plenty😂😂😂
It was the only way to populate the world