Why Does the NT not Speak as Much about Polygyny?

[Dr. K.R. Allen]

Ever wondered why the NT seems to say less about the doctrine of polygyny? Ever felt like you have to revert back to the OT law to defend the doctrine of polygyny?

Have you ever heard the argument, Christ is married to one church and thus each man ought to be in union with only one woman?

Well if so this new article in the teaching forum is for you. The NT is actually the most polygynous document and covenant of the whole Bible:

viewtopic.php?f=57&t=2106

Enjoy,

Dr. Allen

 

[Anonymous]

Amen and Amen, Dr. Allen! Well researched and presented. I particularly appreciate the clear distinction between the Roman Catholic and the Evangelical, Biblical understanding of the church and body. What a difference it makes in our understanding of marriage. Thank you for this fine lesson.

 

[Dr. K.R. Allen]

John thank you for those most kind and gracious words there. I appreciate your encouragement.

 

[Tlaloc]

A more practical answer would be Roman 'Monogamy' coupled with the extremely permissive divorce allowed by Hillel and Akiba. Conditions being as they where it wouldn't be as common. That and no law really ever dwells of positives or what is allowed since much more is allowed than prohibited, there wasn't really much need to mention it explicitly. Like you said

He, and not just him but many others as well, failed to grasp why the personal lives or the personal marriages of any of the leading saints in the NT were not the focus of the NT writers. What do we know about Peter's personal union?

This and that pretty much give the short answer.

 

[Anonymous]

Beautiful article! Thank you so very much!