From: http://bible.freehosting.net/

(spacing edited for aesthetics)

Does God accept polygamy?

The meaning of the word "polygamy" comes from plurality; hence the plurality or the taking of multiple wives.  This is a subject that can only be addressed from the Bible because it is from the Bible that sincere men will justify having multiple wives.  As we all know, there are numerous examples in the Bible where Godly men had multiple wives.  Therefore we must conclude that God does indeed accept polygamy.  The purpose of this article is not to prove this very obvious biblical fact.  The purpose of this article is to show if polygamy "in the beginning" was the original intent and purpose that God had in mind for Adam and all of Adam kind.  This article will also show from the Bible that these Godly men did not (I repeat, not) "marry" all of their wives in a covenant relation.  

Please understand, a polygamist is forced to base his premise that God has accepted polygamy "from the beginning", simply because God accepted it after the fall of Adam.  This indeed is a very weak theological foundation for "proving" and justifying the life style of men having multiple wives.  A man that "justifies" polygamy from the Bible has put himself unknowingly in a very awkward theological position, and is already on a wrong premise.  Using this logic a man can also "wave the Bible", and declare that he "wants a slave".  There are many examples that could be used.  It may seem extreme to say this, but a man can also feel justified for taking a spear and ramming it through the hearts of an interracial couple!  God not only allowed this act, but blessed it with a everlasting priesthood!

 It is very important to simply believe exactly what Christ explained in Matt. 19: 5-9.  Christ explains the design "from the beginning" that God intended marriage to be for his children.

Matthew 19:5-9 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. 7 They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away?
8 He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.
9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except [it be] for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery. (KJV)

Christ explained "but from the beginning it was not so" (verse 8).  What was Christ referring to?  What God hath joined together as one flesh "from the beginning" can now be legally "put asunder" by a written divorcement.  This is possible because of "hardness of heart" as Christ explained.  The law of joining as one flesh can legally be voided only for the cause of "fornication", as Christ explained in verse 9.  What comes to a child-like mind to understand the term "they twain shall become one flesh"?  A polygamist has no problem with this scripture, simply because he "reasons" that he has joined as "one flesh" more than once by taking on another wife.  God did not take "multiple" ribs from Adam's body and therefore present Adam with "multiple" wives.  This simple example and important point is very valid!

Keep in mind, a polygamist is forced to premise his logic on what God has joined together as "one flesh" in the beginning.  A polygamist simply is not aware of the true meaning of joining as "one flesh" in a marriage relationship, as we shall see.  It is biblically impossible for a polygamist to say that he is "married" in covenant relationship to all of his wives.  It would destroy the true Godly intent for a marriage covenant as "one flesh" in which it is very obvious that only one man and one woman were "in the beginning" joined as "one flesh".  A polygamist will acknowledge it was only one man and one woman, therefore unknowingly destroying his premise.  A true Godly marriage as "one flesh" can only be with one wife.  Let me explain.  The Bible never states that Godly men "married" more than one wife.  The word "married" is found seventeen times in the Old Testament and it is never used where multiple wives were involved, with the exception of just one scripture.  Check it out.  This one exception is found in 2 Chr. 13:21.

2 Chronicles 13:21 But Abijah waxed mighty, and married fourteen wives, and begat twenty and two sons, and sixteen daughters. (KJV)

This type of "marriage" is found in Strongs Lexicon no. 05375, and generally means to "take", or to "bear".

05375 nasa' {naw-saw'} or nacah (Ps 4 : 6 [7]) {naw-saw'} a primitive root; TWOT - 1421; AV - (bare, lift, etc...) up 219, bear 115, take 58, bare 34, carry 30,(take, carry)..away 22, borne 22, armourbearer 18, forgive 16, accept 12, exalt 8, regard 5, obtained 4, respect 3, misc 74; 654

This example is also found in Gen. 2:6 when the sons of God "took" them wives of all which they chose.

Genesis 6:2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. (KJV)

These examples certainly does not imply a marriage covenant.  One example was an Israelite king that "took" fourteen wives, and the other example was that sons of God also "took" wives.  These certainly did not marry in the sense what comes to our minds when we think of marriage, which is why it is stated as "took".  However this word "took" was also used in other places as "married".  Check it out.  This type of "marriage" is far removed from a "what God hath joined together" which is plainly explained in Matt. 19:5-8.  Godly men driven by a natural God-given sex drive therefore "took" wives, simply because it was customary in their societies and was allowed.  It was also allowed by God because of "hardness of heart", but nevertheless it was not so "in the beginning"; as Christ explained.  This is the argument that a polygamist cannot explain.  These Godly men were very careful to not enter into a marriage covenant with all their wives, which is why it is never biblically recorded that they married their wives.  

There are repeated vows all over the Old Testament, but no "marriage vows".  You can do with this as you want, but I cannot find anywhere in the Old Testament men vowing in marriage in ceremonial fashion.  I did not say that there were not marriage vows made; it is just never biblically recorded; which is my point.  Women as a rule went somewhere privately or in some tent with men, and they became their wives, as was the case with Isaac and Rebekah in Gen. 24:67

Genesis 24:67 And Isaac brought her into his mother Sarah's tent, and took Rebekah, and she became his wife; and he loved her: and Isaac was comforted after his mother's [death].(KJV)

Solomon had nine hundred wives, but he never "married" them.  We are talking about the wisdom of Solomon!  As the case with other Godly men, he did not want to make a mockery of the "one flesh" marriage covenant between one man and one woman as it was in the beginning.  However the apostle Paul nevertheless states to join (sexually) with a harlot is still the example of "one flesh".  See 1 Cor. 6:16-18.  I believe Paul stressed the serious wrong in joining to a harlot in what is called fornication, which is why he used the "one flesh" example.

1 Corinthians 6:16-18 What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh. 17 But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit. 18 Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body. (KJV)

Did Solomon join with "harlots"?  The Bible states that Solomon's sin was that he served other gods, and not (I repeat, not) that he "joined" with other women (or "harlots").  The key word that Paul used was "fornication"; which means Solomon therefore was not involved with this type of sin.  Paul's "one flesh" example therefore does not contradict with Solomon's very healthy sexual needs.  Solomon had very many wives, but the Bible never states he entered into a vowed covenant "one flesh" marriage relationship.  Are there examples proving this concept?  See Deut. 24:1

Deuteronomy 24:1 When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give [it] in her hand, and send her out of his house. (KJV)

How can it be explained for a man that "hath taken" a wife, and then he "married" her?  Is a "wife" already married or isn’t she?  Why is she called a "wife" if she is not yet "married"?  Is it biblically possible for a man to have a wife and not be "married" to her?  Deut. 24:1 certainly does imply that possibility.  Just read what it says.  Read also Isa. 54:1 and note the term "children of the married wife".

Isaiah 54:1 Sing, O barren, thou [that] didst not bear; break forth into singing, and cry aloud, thou [that] didst not travail with child: for more [are] the children of the desolate than the children of the married wife, saith the LORD. (KJV)

This scripture most certainly implies that a wife does not have to be in a married covenant relationship simply because why include the word "married".  Is this not true?  Other scriptures could show this concept also.

A polygamist also believes that Israel in reality are two women, and therefore God was actually married to two women.  They will quote this scripture found in Jer. 3:8.

Jeremiah 3:8 And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also. (KJV)

Israel became divided into two nations, and therefore it is very true that Israel  could then be called "two daughters".  However only when it became a divided people.  Divided or not divided, Israel has always been and forever will be, only one people and one nation. Judah was only called a "treacherous sister" when God divorced the house of Israel as explained in Jer. 3:8.  God however was still married to Judah and was therefore not married to both the "daughters".  Israel will never be divided again, and Christ will only marry his one bride.  It is always one people, one God, one Church, and one bride. The Bible never implies or even hints of the possibility of the brides (plural) of Christ.  There is no way this concept can even be explained logically from a polygamist viewpoint.  This would made a complete mockery of the true intent of the "in the beginning, one flesh" marriage.  The law of a marriage covenant can biblically only be made with one people with their one God.  It can never be a "polygamous" covenant shared with other "wives".  

During New Testament times polygamy no doubt was also accepted and practiced.  Indeed it states that men in authority, such as a bishop, deacons, and elders were only to have one wife.  This is explained in the following scriptures.

1 Timothy 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; (KJV)

1 Timothy 3:12 Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well. (KJV)

Titus 1:5-6 For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee: 6 If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.(KJV)

Now why would Paul give important instructions on polygamy?  Simply because these men that held high offices in the Church were to set the example (without polygamy) for orderly family living with children.  That is what it says!  Which means Paul advised against polygamy, but he never forbid it.  However he had to deal with the problem of polygamy, simply because it was practiced.

For those men in today's society that desire more than one wife should seriously reconsider.  If circumstances should be favorable for men to choose that life style, then my advice would be to go for it.  The key word is "circumstances" which certainly is not favorable in today's society.  There definitely would be a loss of friendships, and also from relatives.  They generally would be excluded from Churches that do not accept polygamy, and in some cases there would be more financial burdens, and more or less learning to live a secret life.  Above all, it is well documented that this life style does not have good fruits, and it is very easy to understand why.  There are many reasons not to choose the polygamy life, however simply out of Godly wisdom a man should never consider this type of life style.  There are laws against polygamy simply because society does not want it around.  In some states polygamy is even considered worse than the homosexual life style.  Due to "hardness of heart" and sexual desires generally is the only reason a man wants this lifestyle in the first place.  Theoretically however he can always go to a whore, or have an affair, or whatever.  However he wants to play it smart, so to speak, because he knows he faces a possible divorce or be judged as a "whoremonger" by an angry God; which is why he chooses the polygamy way.  Living the "whoremonger" way is going after illicit sex from woman to woman, and then leaving them.  In some cases he is willing to leave a woman "hanging high and dry" that gets pregnant by him.  The polygamy way is for a man to take multiple women into his own home, and to care for them and love them.  However it is strongly advised not to enter a vowed, using the name of Christ, covenant relationship.  As was explained, this would make a mockery of the true "as it was in the beginning" with one man and one women in a vowed covenant marriage.

Now we come to the crux of this whole polygamy controversy.  What if a man is already in a vowed marriage covenant with a woman, and wants to enter into the polygamy life style?  This is only possible if he can somehow "undo" his vows that he already made to his wife, to God, and many witnesses, to love and cherish his one and only wife "until death do us part".  In the eyes of God a vow is a vow, and he is bound by the law of a vow, as explained in many scriptures.  Why even make a vow if he at will chooses to disregard one vow, and turn around and make another vow.  He will "reason" that he will just have "multiple" vows, and that he will just restate these same vows in ceremonial fashion to another woman, and therefore it will be honored by God.  This is the same principle as God also restating his covenant with another woman other than His one wife Israel.  God swore by himself with an oath to uphold that covenant with His one people called Israel. There cannot be multiple covenants with multiple wives.  The very nature of a vowed marriage covenant law is that it must not be shared with another.  Please understand, this is precisely the reason why Godly men "took" multiple wives because they were never lawfully held to only one woman.  Again I repeat, it is never biblically recorded they ever made marriage vows. However a polygamist on the other hand will just take another woman in his house without making another vow.  This is the way it was done in the Old Testament, but these men never made a marriage vow in the first place. However in his situation he is already in a vowed marriage, and he will just "dig his hole deeper" and will never get out.  For a man to lawfully enter into polygamy he must be "loosed" in divorce, or his wife must die.  However our God is a merciful, forgiving God; and in an deceived ungodly world many mistakes are made.  On the other hand, I believe people will be held accountable if they seek divorce without a just cause in a vowed marriage relationship.  Again I want to say, God is a forgiving God and therefore anything is possible, and there are ways to "cover" sins as the Bible explains.  I am not a judge.  I am just saying that a marriage covenant is a very serious matter and it does become binding.  This article was written as I understand the scriptures and I realize I could be overlooking certain important things.  I certainly do not mean to deceive.  I welcome any suggestions you feel I should know about with this very important subject.

Questions or comments?... Email: [email protected]