Can faith and love thrive in polygyny?

[SonoLumen]

Isn't that what we want to see?

It seems to be that scripture is largely silent on the issue of the practicality/superiority/inferiority of polygyny. I see cases of where it is fruitful, and cases where it presents difficulties and challenges. In my search, I can’t find a single, explicit, sure verse defining polygyny as sinful. Those that want to make it immoral, have to take license for interpretation. In other words, the arguments against it largely seem to be based on the philosophies of the individual arguing, and not on explicit scripture itself. Likewise, and in a similar manner, I can’t find verses that explicitly and surely promote it as a lifestyle worthy of pursuit. It seems the outcomes are as broad and dynamic as the characters and personalities in scripture. On the one hand, I find peace in this, because I do love it when faith has room to live and thrive, especially in the family. On the other hand, given my inclination to guilt in the area of desiring something such as this, I feel a slight tinge of fear that I am somehow betraying something sacred. All of these changes have added a fascinating dynamic to my personal life. I find on many levels I have the dual struggle with guilt and hope that is making me exceptionally driven in ways that I have never experienced in my life. I’m doing better at work, working out more ( have lost 40lbs ), and my spiritual life is definitely on the upswing, as I feel more desperately dependent on the Word of God then ever. With that said, I think that to live in this whirlwind of a place for the rest of my life would be unbearable, so I am praying for some type of resolution. I have checked my motivations very closely, and can say pretty surely that I would indeed want a polygynous family if God were to provide a way, but not at the expense of the psychological and spiritual health of my current wife and children. So, as you can see, I am back at the dual motivators of guilt and hope/faith, that seems to be made possible by the bibles lack of either assured approval or explicit invalidation of polygyny as an option. So I breath out, and fall back to faith and desire again.

I’m not sure I am able to get over the guilt because, I come from a very loving family with a very long history of monogamy that would probably be pretty hard to convince and might even embarrass them. Because I have a wonderful wife that I love dearly, and would never want to send the message “your not enough” to.

I’m not sure I am able to get over the hope because I know the love I have to give is real, and the idea of being able to have a larger, more diverse and different type of family and a decent number of children is invigorating. I would love to work and provide serving a big family, pouring real work love into all my relationships.

I’m about a year into researching this subject now. I hope I settle soon, but honestly I need scripture to settle me, it’s just how I believe. I try to just keep focusing on serving where I am at and enjoying what I have.

Isn’t this issue amazing, its 2016 and marriage is still one of the hottest and most contentiously debated issues in existence, a true testament to the preeminence of God’s word if you ask me, since he came up with it. Do you think it’s possible on some level that God left this subject ambiguous intentionally to see how we would treat each other in its debate and understanding? I mean, isn’t it ironic that the church deacons will always be monogamist who, if they were interpreting scripture honestly, would need not condemn polygyny?

So basically, is faith the key to this? Why else would God leave it without obvious endorsement or condemnation? Thoughts?

 

[The Revolting Man]

Keep searching the forums. You will find the answers to every question imaginable there. A few quick points, the consensus in poly circles is that deacons have to be the husband of at least one wife, they are not restricted to only one wife. There is some pretty convincing reasoning behind this.

As for endorsements in scripture if polygyny, they are mostly implied. But there are no endorsements of monogamy either. And in fact as far as I know there aren't even any positive monogamous marriages described in the Bible. Marriage is endorsed and that includes both kinds, monogamy and polygyny. Its refreshing to see your passion. I always suggest men study a lot about the metaphor behind marriage and what God realm wants from men.

It is a scary and exhilarating to realize how blinded the Christian world has been for so long.

 

[FollowingHim]

In my search, I can’t find a single, explicit, sure verse defining polygyny as sinful or blessed.

As Zec pointed out, try and find this for monogamy. It doesn't exist for either. Don't let that bother you.

The only marital status praised as particularly blessed is actually celibacy - for particular individuals who are specially called to it. Those who are not are to marry - and there is no preference for monogamy or polygamy stated in scripture. Noting however that it is statistically impossible for everybody to marry without at least some women sharing a husband, so any encouragement of marriage for all does carry some implicit endorsement of polygamy.

I think the lack of verses simply reflects that this is an unimportant issue. It's just life. We're not even supposed to be debating it, it's just obvious that this is how people have always lived. Scripture takes this as a given, not even needing discussion, and moves on to talk about more important matters like salvation.

 

[SonoLumen]

A few quick points, the consensus in poly circles is that deacons have to be the husband of at least one wife, they are not restricted to only one wife. There is some pretty convincing reasoning behind this.

I did some research on this, and sure enough there are many different ways to interpret that verse. I'm not surprised to find that is the case, as it makes much more sense considering the totality of scripture.

Its easy to see the endorsement of marriage in scripture, from verses like Proverbs 18:22 and 31, and Genesis 2 in going from "not good to be alone" to "bone of bones and flesh of flesh". Basically, the idea of two becoming one flesh, that basic marriage, is a pretty clear blessing to me (through it could be difficult too). So clearly marriage is something that is intrinsically good.

If the case is equality of monogamy and polygamy, then decisions on whether to practice or not should come down to practical things (economics, family building, cultural context) which would be highly subjective. So now the question is, can that goodness be duplicated with additional wives? For some reason I suspect the practical outcomes would be much more difficult to pull off, primarily because the husband would begin to become diluted from a time/money perspective, and possibly because of the social and emotional difficulties that might arise. That would make sense, because one of the verses that seems to allow for polygyny specifically mentions the dilution of the first wife's rights, both economic and time related rights, so you have to be able to provide.

I think the lack of verses simply reflects that this is an unimportant issue. It's just life. We're not even supposed to be debating it, it's just obvious that this is how people have always lived. Scripture takes this as a given, not even needing discussion, and moves on to talk about more important matters like salvation.

I see your point and find some peace in the idea, but I tend to see it as a very important issue as it relates to husbands, wives, children, and the futures of those children. Its amazing to try to imagine the difference the practice of polygyny could mean for families and their futures. I guess I could be reading to much into it, but given the debates happening in our country on marriage and equality and the erosion of the family, etc.. I would think having it be a bit more clear in scripture would have been quite useful to this generation (or maybe just me?). Its no wonder the western world has been against it, because they sorta just tripped over the first few mentions of marriage in scripture and never quite recovered.

 

[The Revolting Man]

I need to look the verses up and not everyone will agree with this, but the part about not reducing the wife's portion is pretty narrowly focused onto slaves you make wives. Full wives are just subject to their husband's will.

The problem may come in from having a modern interpretation of marriage. The modernist Christian will say that marriage is a proving ground and that how we husband our wives is a judge of what kind of men we are. The modernist looks at his marriage as a testing ground and his wife as a spiritual challenge to be overcome. Needless to say this kind of marriage would be difficult to be polygynous in.

But if a wife is a true help meet, that is if she has married in order to help her husband fulfill his goals and not to fulfill some longing in her life, well that marriage would lend itself very well to polygyny. So the question becomes, what kind of first wife do you have and what kind of second wife are you going to hold out for?

 

[FollowingHim]

I think, if you examine them more closely, you will find that the verses you think endorse monogamy actually endorse marriage, not specifically monogamy, you are just reading them through a monogamous lens. For instance, it is not good for a man to be alone - and he's not alone with 1, 2, or 3 wives, this doesn't say anything about the number. Just that he shouldn't be alone. A man who finds a wife finds a good thing - so a man who finds more finds more good things. But since we've read them through monogamy-glasses all our lives it can be difficult to step back and view them that way.

I believe Ecclesiastes 4:9-12 is a direct endorsement of polygamy.

Two are better than one; because they have a good reward for their labour. For if they fall, the one will lift up his fellow: but woe to him that is alone when he falleth; for he hath not another to help him up. Again, if two lie together, then they have heat: but how can one be warm alone? And if one prevail against him, two shall withstand him; and a threefold cord is not quickly broken.

This obviously relates to marriage, business relationships and many things. But it is commonly read to be about marriage. However it is said to refer to "the husband, the wife, and the Holy Spirit" being three strands of the cord. This is a very artificial reading that is designed purely to try and shoehorn monogamy into a phrase that is clearly about polygamy.

Plain reading of this passage: "A team of two is better than one, because they can help each other, keep each other warm, and defend each other. And a team of three is resilient (not quickly broken), because three can help each other even when one is weak, and even if one is lost you still have a team of two."

Now that is sensible advice in business relationships, mountaineering - and marriage.

If you haven't found it yet, I highly recommend you look under the "Resources" menu at the top of this page, particularly at "Books and Links". The book "The History and Philosophy of Marriage" you'll find particularly interesting as a starting point, and it's free online. In that you'll see that the church hasn't read the first example of marriage in the Bible and got stuck there, rather the early church, being Hebrew, was polygamous. But when the church became led by Rome, pagan Roman marriage customs were adopted and then the bible started to be read through that mindset, and polygamy was eventually made illegal in the Empire and enforced by the Catholic church. During the Protestant reformation, a few people tried to bring back polygamy, some rather prominent people in fact, but were ultimately unsuccessful (some being killed for it), and the Protestant churches retained Catholic doctrine on marriage. The reformation is ongoing, we're part of it...

 

[UntoldGlory]

I did some research on this, and sure enough there are many different ways to interpret this.

I haven't even finished the rest of your post, I just wanted to point out how this single line puts you way ahead of many, many believers. Especially pastors. The ability to study the word objectively and allow it to change our minds and views is a skill most do not have. Kudos.

 

[SonoLumen]

Hi again, thanks for the replies. I'd like to state my current position more clearly. I do believe the bible allows for, and thus endorses polygyny, however it must be done in faith and with literal love. With that said, I think whenever I am changing as a person I challenge the changes with learning and honest pursuit of truth (found in scripture first and foremost). So personally I am in that 'challange' stage. I think though, that its pretty obvious that overall scripture allows for polygyny. Just because something is lawful, does not make it beneficial (and I think that specific wisdom is best applied subjectively, on a case by case basis).

So this is the issue to me: the when, where, how, and why. Why would I personally persue polygyny? And that is what I struggle with. Ultimately, I would want God's word to reign in my life, but I would also want Grace to reign - so can we only ignore the verses on the death penalty? I'm joking, but there is a point. Ultimately just because something is lawful doesn't make it beneficial.

Now with that said, if a group or party is adamantly stealing liberties and rights of something the bible obviously endorses, I would side with what scripture says, period. So because in todays society polygyny is so often declared as 'sin' , and I do not see that in scripture, I will lean towards to pro-polygyny side, but overall I am closer to the middle. My personal opinion is that society would probably function best if the majority of the population were monogamist, but if those monogamist begin to persecute polygamist, that is bothersome and wrong, which is why right now I lean pro-polygyny.

On the personal level, of course I would love to try, because I recognize on an intuitive level that love is not so limited, and because I would love to have a lot of children, but this is an ultra complex issue and for me personally I'm not ready to make any commitments to its pursuit.

To FollowingHim

I think, if you examine them more closely, you will find that the verses you think endorse monogamy actually endorse marriage, not specifically monogamy, you are just reading them through a monogamous lens. For instance, it is not good for a man to be alone - and he's not alone with 1, 2, or 3 wives, this doesn't say anything about the number. Just that he shouldn't be alone.

I get what your saying here, and agree, its not limited to one marriage. I think semantics got in the way, what I was trying to point out is the "two become one". I feel this does directly relate to "bone of my bones, flesh of my flesh" which is directly connected in sequence with two becoming one. With that said, your right that this is neither pro monogamy or anti polygamy, but actually an implicit endorement of the nature of the ish / ishshah relationship (which scripture throughout deals with in many ways). So there is the choice, nothing limiting it. You could make that choice with several women. So its allowed, and that theme continues throughout scripture, so that in the end, it can really only be said, that "it was good". Marriage is good. I dare not condemn a single God approved marriage in the history of man.

To ZecAustin

The problem may come in from having a modern interpretation of marriage. The modernist Christian will say that marriage is a proving ground and that how we husband our wives is a judge of what kind of men we are. The modernist looks at his marriage as a testing ground and his wife as a spiritual challenge to be overcome. Needless to say this kind of marriage would be difficult to be polygynous in.

Can you please elaborate on this and provide scripture pointing me in the right direction via attitude I should have towards my wife? I found this interesting because I feel I may have this interpretation in me and want to know more about what you mean.

But if a wife is a true help meet, that is if she has married in order to help her husband fulfill his goals and not to fulfill some longing in her life, well that marriage would lend itself very well to polygyny. So the question becomes, what kind of first wife do you have and what kind of second wife are you going to hold out for?

Honestly this is a bit too personal a question for me at the moment, maybe I'll answer it at a later date, but right now I'm more comfortable discussing scripture and practical outcomes/answers. Thanks for asking though, knowing it is lawful, I have honestly considered these things, but for now I am still in the "challenge" stage I mentioned earlier and since those are my most intimate thoughts I think I'm going to hold onto them.

To UntoldGlory

The ability to study the word objectively and allow it to change our minds and views is a skill most do not have. Kudos.

Thank you for the exhortation,the Word of God is the true light and I'm just trying to find my sight in its illumination. Btw, loved reading your reply to that pastor in another post earlier today, I have not personally had to defend polygyny on the public level but perhaps I am heading that direction.

 

[Lila]

I think the lack of verses simply reflects that this is an unimportant issue. It's just life. We're not even supposed to be debating it, it's just obvious that this is how people have always lived. Scripture takes this as a given, not even needing discussion, and moves on to talk about more important matters like salvation.

What a view. Slightly unsettling for me considering all the issues experienced in a marriage? Is it then the people who are the cause for all the trouble or is it rather the age this world is in if marriages have always been lived (and therefore do not even require such attention in the Scriptures as it's all so "obvious")?

 

[UntoldGlory]

Personally I think the term "unimportant" is not the correct word choice. Marriage in the Bible is important, and is made clearly so by the fact that it is used when explaining Jesus' relationship with the Church (body of believers).

I think instead a more accurate statement might be: "The Bible was written by people who assumed that what they thought of as "marriage" would be understood by future generations without the need to spell certain things out."

For example. If someone in modern times says "He wore a glove to protect his hand", we would take it for granted that it was also okay to wear another glove on the other hand to also protect that hand, should the situation warrant that. Little do we know that a couple thousand years later cultural shifts have happened that for whatever reason make it taboo to wear gloves on the right hand. Stranger things have happened. Someone reading "He wore a glove to protect his hand" would ASSUME the author meant the man wore a glove on his left hand, because wearing gloves on the right hand is wrong! See what I'm getting at?

 

[NetWatchR]

I like that whole glove thing. Puts things in perspective. I think I'll use that in the future.... if I can remember it.

 

[UntoldGlory]

Glad you liked it, I'll admit I was proud of that one, lol!

 

[SonoLumen]

Absolutely, assumption of understanding is a dangerous thing when it comes to properly interpreting anything anyone says or writes. For me, I have to WANT to understand someone to get over my biases, and spend a decent amount of effort reflecting their understanding to help myself gain insight.

In regards to old testament writers not realizing marriage would be understood in the future, I just can't see a definite relationship between the authors ignorance of the future and the misunderstanding of marriage. Its an interesting thought, but I think that scripture is inspired above/beyond the immediate context by him who created time and space (as a whole, obviously context is very important to understanding stories). I think God foresaw the complications that the confusion on marriage and its rightful application would create. This makes me ask the question why he wouldn't just lay it out clearly and literally somewhere, as it would have certainly made the issue less contentious among his modern religious followers. Now I know that God is not the author of confusion, but that sometimes in his glory he can conceal certain things at certain times for certain revelations. I think that polygyny might be one of those things that for God's reasons was allowed to be hidden from the majority of the modern Christian church. Now here we are, and thanks to modern information and technology we are uncovering something that had been discarded as "barbaric" by religious authorities before us. Its rather invigorating to have my worldview shaken up, but I am going to take it on faith because the evidence is in the text. The question is really, honestly, is God opening this back up in a larger way? I think he might be, as the shifts in marriage on the national level are pointing people back to the source.

Which leads me back to the subject of this thread. I think polygyny in practice will rise or fall based on the faithfulness and love and the parties practicing. The environment is slowly improving as society is becoming increasingly liberated, but it's going to take healthy and loving families to prove it to the world. Imagine my surprise to find "Biblical Families".

 

[Lila]

"He wore a glove to protect his hand" would ASSUME the author meant the man wore a glove on his left hand, because wearing gloves on the right hand is wrong! See what I'm getting at?

I see, yes. Thanks for adding to the explanation of FollowingHim. It's undoubtedly true that marriage wise, practical wisdom is not passed from generation to generation as it used to be the case in former times.

 

[FollowingHim]

Lila, Daniel is completely correct, "unimportant" was a poor choice of words, Daniel has explained the point I was making very well. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

This makes me ask the question why he wouldn't just lay it out clearly and literally somewhere, as it would have certainly made the issue less contentious among his modern religious followers.

I think the acceptance of polygamy is stated very clearly and literally throughout the entire scriptures, in the many polygamous marriages that are described (at least 40), and the complete lack of condemnation of any of them - in fact many of those men being lauded as excellent examples of godliness (Abraham, David, Joash etc). The plain reading of it is extremely clear - polygamy is completely acceptable for God's people. You could never get the idea that polygamy was condemned from scripture, it's just not there (unless you take Paul's instructions for church leaders out of context as a proof-text, and that only works in English translations, not in the Greek). You could only get this idea from an external source, and only maintain it by ignoring scripture.

Yes, it would be helpful if it clearly stated somewhere "a man may have more than one wife". But if it said that statement, someone would then come along and say "but can I have twelve?" and we'd then be having the same discussion, asking "why didn't YHWH clearly write down the maximum number of wives a man can have, or state clearly that he can have as many as he can support?". If that was stated, we'd be asking "What is the minimum amount of support he can give, what does that mean, given my financial situation how many can I technically have without breaking the rules?"... My point is that whatever is written in the Bible, there would always be another question that we'd like to have clarified even further. At the end of the day, YHWH has chosen to stop defining everything where he has stopped, which could have been anywhere, and has left the rest to our wisdom - and promised to give wisdom to anyone who earnestly seeks it.

 

[SonoLumen]

Thank you FollowingHim for you honest assessment. You are right in my eyes, but for a large percentage of the Christian body they can't draw those same conclusions. They get that a marriage is between two people (as derived from Genesis 2) but then fail to see later that it can be done multiple times ( often by some of the most praised Heroes of the faith ). Really you have to believe the whole bible to understand that polygyny is endorsed by scripture (which is wise to measure scripture against itself) even though in specific instances, interpreting the text, we might could draw a monogamous conclusion from our interpretation. After all, to me, marriage will always be between a covenant between a man and a specific woman. Later we see men using this relationship covenant to have multiple marriages, and in some instances God uses it as a critical point in his story, through people that he approves. Never is having multiple wives condemned, except in the case of those women leading the men away from YHVH and after their foreign gods.

I find as I am moving forward in this journey of discovery, that I need a place to 'vent', and work through my thoughts, so I am appreciative of your patient replies. If I wanted to get a bit more personal, what do you think would be the appropriate forum for those discussions? Are any of these forums private (just hidden from anonymous users?). I have some other questions and thoughts I would like to have the opportunity to discuss with folks frequenting these boards but am not really sure where to start.

 

[FollowingHim]

The funny thing is that it's all cultural. Even the key "bible stories" we tell our children make it obvious that polygamy is ok - Abraham, Jacob, David etc. The only way to then conclude that it is not is for someone to say "but we don't do that now, now it's wrong" and add stuff to scripture. Our culture does that for everybody, they reject the Bible purely because of their parents / pastor / sunday-school-teacher.

But we're supposed to have the faith of a little child. And this is obvious to children (it is to mine).

 

[SonoLumen]

Hi everyone, I'm checking in and providing an update. I think its fair to say that I believe unequivocally now that the answer to my question is indeed yes, faith and love can live and thrive in polygamous family structures. The practical construction and application of a poly family would present a difficult endeavor indeed in our present time and culture. I am holding out hope that it could happen for me, but like most of the guys on here, its only a dream right now and I really honestly doubt whether God could ever do something like bring me a second wife, simultaneously allowing me to keep my first! Its so unheard of its almost humorous.

That brings me to her. Right now she has laid down the law and I am following it in hopes it will earn me respect. I guess I will see it as an opportunity to try and love her even better, even through my knowledge that loving multiple women would not be sin. I find that even though I am only loving one women, I am the same man that might one day love two, so I can begin living and applying the love I would want to have then, now.

My personal faith has grown, but I feel my wife is struggling deeply. She is definitely infuriated with me and we have had our struggles as I continue to stumble through the process of transition in mind and heart. I wan't us to be ok, but honestly I cannot be sure that we will be. She is a strong woman with a mind of her own. She knows I am not literally seeking to practice this in any way right now, but also knows that I want it.

So here I am. Truth is truth, whether it is convenient and easy or not. I am thankful to continue to gleam insight and encouragement from the posts of many of the regulars here at Biblical Families.

 

[UntoldGlory]

Thanks for the update!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[The Revolting Man]

So many men have been where you are right now. Phase one is to begin applying the steady, measured, constant and all times cautious pressure that will be needed to mold your home and marriage into a patriarchal one. Good luck.