Hehe. So, I've finally found a nice little topic: polygamy, what does the Scripture have to say about it? Is polygamy really a sin?
After researching it, I take the negative.
After researching it, I take the negative.
Polygamy
- Thread starter Groundzero
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Brother James
Active Member
It is certainly not the model God ordained for people. To the extent that men in the Bible had more than one wife, they paid a significant price for it. I don't believe it to be a very good idea.
I am a woman, and all I want to ask is....
WHO in their right mind would want more than one woman as a wife!?
Seriously, you are just asking for it there! LOL
... But for real...
Just because the culture back then allowed for it doesn't mean it is best case scenario. Much of the tradition back then that allowed for more than one wife was put in place to ensure that a man's lineage was protected... It was important for a man's family to have sons, so that their family could pass on inheritance... It was considered prudent to have more than one son, so that way there was always a back up plan.... And if a woman could not bear many sons, then it was better to have another wife or 4 to help with the job... The sons who were to inherit the head of household was then responsible for those that were in his father's household...
In most of the world, the need for sons to continue a family lineage is obsolete now. There is no real purpose in these areas for a polygamous relationship. I don't necessarily think such families are sin, but I don't think this is the best way of making a family work...
I think we are blessed to live in a time that we can marry the one person who can share a spiritual purpose with us, such as Christ does with the Church. We can marry for love, not necessity. We can marry someone we choose, and not someone, or someones, that our parents choose for us.... I think this is really a better option in so many ways.
WHO in their right mind would want more than one woman as a wife!?
Seriously, you are just asking for it there! LOL
... But for real...
Just because the culture back then allowed for it doesn't mean it is best case scenario. Much of the tradition back then that allowed for more than one wife was put in place to ensure that a man's lineage was protected... It was important for a man's family to have sons, so that their family could pass on inheritance... It was considered prudent to have more than one son, so that way there was always a back up plan.... And if a woman could not bear many sons, then it was better to have another wife or 4 to help with the job... The sons who were to inherit the head of household was then responsible for those that were in his father's household...
In most of the world, the need for sons to continue a family lineage is obsolete now. There is no real purpose in these areas for a polygamous relationship. I don't necessarily think such families are sin, but I don't think this is the best way of making a family work...
I think we are blessed to live in a time that we can marry the one person who can share a spiritual purpose with us, such as Christ does with the Church. We can marry for love, not necessity. We can marry someone we choose, and not someone, or someones, that our parents choose for us.... I think this is really a better option in so many ways.
I voted not sin for a couple of reasons .... first it was OK in the old Testament .... but somewhere in the new testament it also says that church elders should have but one wife .... it did not say everybody else should have only one wife.
Personally , I found taking care of one wife was impossible God forbid trying to keep two happy.
I also feel that modern day polygamy in various sects amounts to old men lusting after young girls and they do it under the umbrella of religion. Many of the women (girls) are brainwashed with tactics of a cult. I am completely against this. If mature women (on their own) wish to share a husband ... I feel that is their own business , not mine.
Many Canadian Indian girls and women have multiple children .... all with different fathers .... and remain unmarried all their lives. I expect the Lord sees that as adultery (sin).
Personally , I found taking care of one wife was impossible
God forbid trying to keep two happy. I also feel that modern day polygamy in various sects amounts to old men lusting after young girls and they do it under the umbrella of religion. Many of the women (girls) are brainwashed with tactics of a cult. I am completely against this. If mature women (on their own) wish to share a husband ... I feel that is their own business , not mine.
Many Canadian Indian girls and women have multiple children .... all with different fathers .... and remain unmarried all their lives. I expect the Lord sees that as adultery (sin).
Interesting. . The poll was more to do with if it is a sin. Acceptable in our eyes is a completely different matter.
The bit about a church elder having one wife, can be also taken as this: he cannot be a divorcee or whatever it is that they are called
Of course, as I was reading in one article, it's a great strain financially and therefore not very viable anyway.
. The poll was more to do with if it is a sin. Acceptable in our eyes is a completely different matter.The bit about a church elder having one wife, can be also taken as this: he cannot be a divorcee or whatever it is that they are called
Of course, as I was reading in one article, it's a great strain financially and therefore not very viable anyway.
Christ is our example. What did He do and teach?
Galatians 5
16 I say then: Walk in the Spirit, and you shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh.
Luke 20
35 But those who are counted worthy to attain that age, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage;
Matthew 19
11 But He said to them, "All cannot accept this saying, but only those to whom it has been given:
12 For there are eunuchs who were born thus from their mother's womb, and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He who is able to accept it, let him accept it."
Galatians 5
16 I say then: Walk in the Spirit, and you shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh.
Luke 20
35 But those who are counted worthy to attain that age, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage;
Matthew 19
11 But He said to them, "All cannot accept this saying, but only those to whom it has been given:
12 For there are eunuchs who were born thus from their mother's womb, and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He who is able to accept it, let him accept it."
Agreed .... like I said I do not think it's a sin , but cannot reconcile it personally.Interesting.
I wonder if maybe in earlier (bible) times there was a shortage of men (husbands) .... thus the multiple wives ....
Why else would a woman want to share a husband .... why not get one exclusively for herself ....
"What did He do " ..... Jesus had zero wives .... "what did he teach" .... I am not sure (regarding one or more wives) .... do you know ? thanks.
For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one.' So they are no longer two but one. (Mk 10:7-8)
How can a man become one with two women?
The OT compares the relationship between God and the Jews as being husband and wife. God only took one people as his bride.
Jesus only takes one bride now – the Church.
In Eph 5:31-33 Paul makes the same point:
"For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." This mystery is a profound one, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church; however, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.
It is about Christ and His church, a man and a wife, singular. There is no suggestion of multiples.
It is a sin because it contradicts what God intends for us.
“Because of the hardness of your hearts Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery.” (Mt 19:8-9)
As Jesus says about divorce, I think multiple wives was not God’s intention from the beginning but allowed because of their hardness of heart
How can a man become one with two women?
The OT compares the relationship between God and the Jews as being husband and wife. God only took one people as his bride.
Jesus only takes one bride now – the Church.
In Eph 5:31-33 Paul makes the same point:
"For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." This mystery is a profound one, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church; however, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.
It is about Christ and His church, a man and a wife, singular. There is no suggestion of multiples.
It is a sin because it contradicts what God intends for us.
“Because of the hardness of your hearts Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery.” (Mt 19:8-9)
As Jesus says about divorce, I think multiple wives was not God’s intention from the beginning but allowed because of their hardness of heart
Well I think statistically, even now, there has always been more women since men traditionally go to war and therefore more men die.
I wouldn't be too quick on that last statement. Polygamy is never condemned. Divorce is clearly shown that it's not God's intention. Polygamy is another issue again. If polygamy is a sin, then many men who were great leaders and great men of God were sinners. David is a very good example. He was a polygamist, yet he was a man after God's own heart. Polygamy comes with it's unique set of problems, but it's not a sin. There are many examples of God-fearing men who followed God far more than most Christians today, who were polygamist. And I'm sure that there were plenty of men in their day too who were monogamist. Either is acceptable in God's eyes.
Hi folks,
Interesting discussion.
There is quite a lot to do with childbearing which comes to mind when considering Jacob situation. After Judah was born, Leah 'left off bearing'. Under the law, after every childbirth a woman was 'unclean' for either forty, or, eighty days. Would this play a part in a man taking another wife, or a concubine? I'm not clear what a concubine could expect - except board and lodging. A wife could expect a clothes allowance as well, and, her husband's marital duty to her was to be undiminished if he took another wife. A wife had entered a contract which a concubine had not. A wife could also expect a legal settlement and document to prove it, if she was divorced, but she did not have the power to divorce her husband. It was against the law to put a wife out on the street (so to speak) without her legal entitlement having been settled, (including the 'bill of divorcement').
Perhaps the greatest difference since Jesus Christ came, is that marriage is considered a covenant, not a contract any more?
Interesting discussion.
There is quite a lot to do with childbearing which comes to mind when considering Jacob situation. After Judah was born, Leah 'left off bearing'. Under the law, after every childbirth a woman was 'unclean' for either forty, or, eighty days. Would this play a part in a man taking another wife, or a concubine? I'm not clear what a concubine could expect - except board and lodging. A wife could expect a clothes allowance as well, and, her husband's marital duty to her was to be undiminished if he took another wife. A wife had entered a contract which a concubine had not. A wife could also expect a legal settlement and document to prove it, if she was divorced, but she did not have the power to divorce her husband. It was against the law to put a wife out on the street (so to speak) without her legal entitlement having been settled, (including the 'bill of divorcement').
Perhaps the greatest difference since Jesus Christ came, is that marriage is considered a covenant, not a contract any more?
A concubine was not as we think of one now. She was a half-wife, a wife of inferior social status (such as a servant).
Keturah is referred to both as Abraham's concubine and his wife.
The sons of Jacob, some by full wives, some by concubines, seem to have all been treated equally.
Brother James
Active Member
David was indeed a sinner. He committed murder in order to cover up his adultery with another man's wife, and then he married her. David was a man after God's heart, but I don't think we want to look to him as the model for how we should live our lives.
Paul writes a lot about husband and wives in 1 Corinthians. He always speaks in the singular. For example:
"It is a good thing for a man not to touch a woman,” but because of cases of immorality every man should have his own wife, and every woman her own husband. The husband should fulfill his duty toward his wife, and likewise the wife toward her husband. A wife does not have authority over her own body, but rather her husband, and similarly a husband does not have authority over his own body, but rather his wife. Do not deprive each other, except perhaps by mutual consent for a time, to be free for prayer, but then return to one another, so that Satan may not tempt you through your lack of self-control. (1 Cor 7:15)
and
But I want you to know that Christ is the head of every man, and a husband the head of his wife (1Cor 11:3)
Note:- The man is head of his wife not wives.
Also "polygamy" is either a man having multiple wives or a woman having multiple husbands. What we have talked about is "polygyny" - one man, many wives
So what about "polyandry" - one woman - many husbands?
"It is a good thing for a man not to touch a woman,” but because of cases of immorality every man should have his own wife, and every woman her own husband. The husband should fulfill his duty toward his wife, and likewise the wife toward her husband. A wife does not have authority over her own body, but rather her husband, and similarly a husband does not have authority over his own body, but rather his wife. Do not deprive each other, except perhaps by mutual consent for a time, to be free for prayer, but then return to one another, so that Satan may not tempt you through your lack of self-control. (1 Cor 7:15)
and
But I want you to know that Christ is the head of every man, and a husband the head of his wife (1Cor 11:3)
Note:- The man is head of his wife not wives.
Also "polygamy" is either a man having multiple wives or a woman having multiple husbands. What we have talked about is "polygyny" - one man, many wives
So what about "polyandry" - one woman - many husbands?
The males would have to want that before it would ever happen. They would have be quite emasculated too.
Paul's discussion about remarriage at the start of Romans 7, is entirely based on a woman not being able to have more than one husband - while we all know that in the OT - as long as the procedures set down in the law were followed, any man could add another wife.
I agree Brother James. Jesus Christ is our standard. We want to look to Him. David does not live in us, Christ does.
Axehead
Selene
New Member
It is a sin because the marriage between a man and a woman resembles the marriage between Christ and His Church. The Church that Christ built is supposed to be one with Him and worship no other gods. In the beginning of the Bible is Genesis, which shows the marriage between Adam and Eve. At the end of the Bible shows the marriage between Christ the bridegroom and His Church, the bride.
(In Old testament times) if a man wanted a lot of children (offspring) it would make sense to have many wives. Lets face it , when a woman is pregnant she no longer can have more babies , same as with a second wife who also was pregnant , then he would need a third and so on.
In earlier times it was desirable to have many children , it was mostly for self preservation , the larger the clan , the better.
Having several wives was probably done for practical reasons (lots of offspring) , whereas in modern day we would automatically think it was for lots of sex..
In earlier times it was desirable to have many children , it was mostly for self preservation , the larger the clan , the better.
Having several wives was probably done for practical reasons (lots of offspring) , whereas in modern day we would automatically think it was for lots of sex..
Yes, in today's age, everything is about sex...
Now, with sex taking the spotlight over families, acceptance of polygamy has become unfathomable... Why would anyone want to share their sex partner with another?
... But just as marriage should not be about sex now, marriage was not about sex in the Old Testament. Back then it was about family.... Women understood the desire for more children just as much as the men did, and so that is why it wasn't such a terrible fate to have to share the title of wife with other women.
Back then, women were property of their parents before they became property of men... Men couldn't just go out and marry the woman he loved, he had to bargain for her... and many times he wouldn't end up with the woman who could be flesh of his flesh... Or in Jacob's case, a man could end up with the woman he loved, but only after allot of grief.
So, if you did not have the option to be with your soul-mate, would it be such a hard fate to endure many spouses per household? If I was a woman paired with a man who was not my soul-mate. I wouldn't really care if he had other women to occupy his attention... And I think that if a man couldn't be with the "Flesh-of-his-flesh", what better distraction/consolation than many children?
With the New Covenant, and a new and truer example of what a Marriage could be... Honestly, why would we want anything different than the 2 partner model?
In much of the world, women are not considered property anymore. People are allowed to find their soul-mate, and people are allowed to arrange their own marriages... We have a privilege now that many OT personages did not have. So, I agree, we should follow Christ's example and find true oneness with someone.
I've never researched that, but I'm going to make one observation: men are the God-established leader of the family (if there are objections to this, start another thread
), therefore, a family CANNOT operate with more than one leader anyhow.I think polygamy wasn't actually that common back in the Bible times either. And as you pointed out, today is not much better. People divorce so often it's not funny. In fact, quite alot of people have thrown the idea of marriage out altogether, as you can see from the current youth attitudes. Now it's called getting laid, blah, blah, blah. In other words, we nod our head to the sexual immorality that exists now, but if it's a slight variation of an institution that God approved, with no Scriptural condemnation, we suddenly get all stiff?
While the Scripture talks of marriage in the singular, it NEVER condemns polygamy.
Similar threads
