Question: Why did God allow polygamy in the Old Testament?
Question #2: How Could Solomon Perform His Marital Duties to His Wives? ? Question #3: How Could Abraham Favor Isaac Over Ishmael and Yet Be Called Faithful? |
Several prominent men in the Old Testament
were polygamists. Abraham, Jacob, David (2 Samuel First of all, polygamy existed and
that's a fact. But Jesus commented
(according Matthew 19:4-5), "Have you not read that He who made them at
the beginning 'made them male and female,' and said, 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and
be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'?” Someone would ask then, 'Would this not
indicate that multiple wives was not in God's original plan?' If so, then why would God allow
polygamy in the Old Testament? Most
commentators admit that the Bible does not specifically tell why. Some have observed and rightly so that the
best anyone can do is make “informed” speculation. On the one hand,
1some have speculated that
it was the customs of the time for families and economics (but does God just
condone sin because it is a popular custom?); some others speculate that the
need for filling the earth with people might have caused God to allow it (but
does God condone bad [sin] in order to do good [fulfil
His other commands]?); some have said
since God winked at things before Christ (Acts 17) and now commands repentance,
maybe He just winked at polygamy in spite of it being a sin.
But
can not God have His own reasons for doing things and keep them to Himself? And
since it is admitted that He does not reveal why He allowed polygamy, would
this not put it beyond revelation and label it as “secret” from man. Deuteronomy 29:29 "The secret things
belong to the LORD our God, but those things which are revealed belong to us
and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law.” GOD REGULATED MULTIPLE WIVES AND
CONCUBINES IN THE LAW OF MOSES This
we do know from the Law that God sometimes does not like a thing to happen but
He allows it but with regulation. God
has allowed things that He hated. We do
know that God has done this at times with the Israelites.
According to 2
the KJV Bible God told the
Israelites that He hated divorce (Malachi Slavery was allowed and
regulated (Exodus 21: 2-7). Likewise,
God allowed and regulated polygamy: e.g., God chose to regulate it by demanding
that each wife must be treated equally. "If he takes another wife, he
shall not diminish her food, her clothing, and her marriage rights. And if he
does not do these three for her, then she shall go out free, without paying
money" (Exodus In Exodus 21:10, a man could marry an infinite amount of
women without any limits to how many he can marry as long as he can provide for
her living and marital rights. He could
also have female slaves (concubines) but he could not treat them like they were
a male slaves. There
were special regulations for them. 1. ALL WIVES WERE TO BE TREATED AS "DAUGHTERS": Exodus
21 :1 "Now these are the judgments
which you shall set before them: ...7
"And if a man sells his daughter to be a female slave, she shall not go
out as the male slaves do. 8 "If
she does not please her master, who has betrothed her to himself, then he shall
let her be redeemed. He shall have no right to sell her to a
foreign people, since he has dealt deceitfully with her. 9 "And if he has betrothed her to his
son, he shall deal with her according to the custom of daughters.
3 10 "If he takes another
wife, he shall not diminish her food, her clothing, and her marriage rights. (NKJV) 2. In Deuteronomy 21:15-17: "If a man has two wives, and he
loves one but not the other, and both bear him sons...." "If a man have two
wives, one beloved and another hated, and they have born him children, both the
beloved and the hated, and if the firstborn son be hers that was hated, then it
shall be when he makes his sons to inherit that which he has, that he may not
make the son of the beloved firstborn before the son of the hated, which is
indeed the firstborn." Verse 17, "But he
shall acknowledge the son of the hated for the firstborn by giving him a double
portion of all that he has for he is the beginning of his strength; the right
of the firstborn is his." The point is this: you
have two wives. Wife #1, you don't like. Wife #2, you like.
Both have sons; you're prone to give the inheritance to the second wife, to her
son, even though he is not the firstborn because you like that second wife
better. But the Law
says, you cannot do it. WAS POLYGAMY A SIN? Some definitions of “sin” in the New Testament: 1 John 1 John 3:4 “Whoever
commits sin also commits lawlessness, and sin is lawlessness” (“transgression
of the law” -KJV) James The word “sin” literally means to “miss
the mark”. The word that has the
opposite meaning is Old Testament word for "law" ("hitting the mark like an arrow"). If the Law provided for polygamy, how could it be a "sin"? WHY THEY SAY POLYGAMY WAS A SIN 1. The
proponents of those that say that polygamy was a sin under the Law of Moses, say, “Here is a man [Exodus 21] who has two wives in his
lifetime. He may not give the inheritance to the second though she
is his beloved and maybe he's long forgotten the first, but his inheritance
must go to the first. It's a situation here and if you study carefully
through the text and through the verb forms that are used here, you will see that
that is supported by the text. The word “had” is there. The word
“was hated,” past tense, relative to that wife who has died. The argument is: PAST TENSE PROVES IT WAS
NOT A MARRIAGE THAT WAS OCCURING AT THE SAME TIME BUT COULD HAVE FOLLOWED ONE
ANOTHER (e.g., in death). FALSE. The marriages referred
to are not in past tense. EXODUS 2. The proponents of those that say that
polygamy was a sin, say that ABRAHAM'S “WRONG” (hence, sin) WAS ADMITTED BY SARAI. Genesis
16:1-4 states that Sarah instigated it, she
started it and led him into it. After
he lay with Hagar and impregnated her, Sarah became jealous. This is when she first is aware of it as a
mistake. Verse 5 says this: Then Sarai said to
Abram "MY wrong be upon you!...... the Lord judge
you and me.” But
the “wrong” she admitted could and should be applied to her lack of
faith in the promises of God by her intervening with her presumptuous plan for God
to give Abraham an heir. Sarah must
have known polygamy was not correct for some reason, maybe jealousy or moral
conscious. Yes, she could relieve those guilts by sharing them with Abraham. An obvious consequence of this mistake and “running
ahead of God” is that the nations of Abraham have suffered every since. But
using the slave girl Hagar as a concubine could not be classified as a sin on
the basis of what Sarah admitted. Note: What Law would she be
appealing to? The Law had not been given
to Abraham followed either the Hurrian civil law
of If a barren wife gives to her
husband a slave girl who bears children to him, then he may not marry another
wife (section 144); otherwise he might do so (section 145). The slave given to
the husband is bound to show due deference to her mistress; if she does not do
this she loses her privileged position, but she may not be sold if she has
borne a child to the husband (sections
146 f). Incurable
disease of the wife is a ground for the marriage of another wife (sections 148
f). PRESUMPTUOUS SIN? Sarah
and Abraham's action could not have been a sin based on a lack of
"faith" in what God had promised "through" her. The
angels had not appeared to Abraham yet. God had only assured Abraham that
he was to have an heir from his body. Sarah and
Abraham jumped the gun so to speak on God and PRESUMED that He wanted them
to decide on their own how to make this come about. In
this sense then their lack of the Word of God instructions on the subject meant
that they would have committed a presumptuous sin. Psalms 3. The proponents of those that say that polygamy was a
sin, say JACOB SINNED IN TAKING RACHEL AS
HIS SECOND WIFE! Genesis 29. Rachel said to Leah, "Give me of thy son's
love apples, "
4 supposedly a sexual stimulation. She said, "Is it a small matter that thou hast taken my husband?” Do you see there? In her mind, Leah says, “You took my
husband." You see? Had God also looked at it that way? Leah adds, "And would you also take away my
love apples” also: won't you even let me go in unto him? But
what does the Bible say? God's “curse”
of barrenness was not in regard to any adultery or in taking multiple
wives. “He loved Rachel more than Leah
and when the Lord saw that Leah was hated, He opened her womb and
made Rachel's barren.” THIS
'PUNISHMENT' WAS NOT BECAUSE OF
JACOB'S SECOND MARRIAGE BUT WAS BECAUSE HE LOVED THE SECOND AND HE HATED THE
FIRST. God eventually gave Rachel
children as well as giving children to the servant girls (concubines but nevertheless
were Jacob's "women" and hence our interpretation is “wives").
Note that there is
no word in the Hebrew or Greek for "wives." It should
be noted that these men lived before the giving of the Law. Abraham, for
example, was allowed to marry his half sister but the Law would forbid this as
incest (Leviticus 18:9). 4. The proponents of those that say that polygamy was a sin say Solomon's life was a disaster and the Solomon's
sins were specifically violation of the law for CONCLUSION: HAVING
MULTIPLE WIVES, LIKE SLAVERY AND DIVORCE, WAS NOT A SIN IN THE OLD TESTAMENT LAW
BUT ITS REGULATION HAD TO BE OBEYED. It has been observed that often Bible
teachers are embarrassed about people like Abraham, Gideon and David having
several wives and concubines. They may
call David an adulterer. But this is
just not what the Bible teaches. The fact is: prior to the New Testament, God
allowed this practice and it was not adultery! If a man had two wives and two concubines he was expected to be faithful
to them all. But
under the New Testament no regulation is given to suggest to us that God would allow
multiple wives under Christ's kingdom and authority (1 Corinthians 7:1,2; Ephesians 5:22-32).
In fact, whereas God is pictured married to sisters (Israel and Judah, polygamy) in the Old Testament,
in the New Testament,
Jesus is monogamous with His single bride, His church. Marriage of single male and female are compared
to Christ and His church (one body, one church, Ephesians 4:4).
GW Concubinage was practiced in many ancient cultures,
especially in Mesopotamia [where Abraham was from -gw].....where
a private citizen might have one or two concubines in addition to his primary
wife.....a concubine was often a slave or part of the booty of war (Judges
5:30). A man might have a concubine simply as an economical form of marriage,
since no dowry or bride-price was required. A concubine could add to a man's
prestige by giving him two wives and thus an increased capacity for children.
Such offspring were normally delivered onto the knees of the legal wife, thus
establishing their legitimacy as family members. The concubine was also another
servant to add to his work force.' (Baker Encyclopedia of the
Bible, 1997, Vol 1, p504). ^
2Note: some authorities
indicate that in the original it was the man that hated his wife for no Scriptural
cause defined in Deuteronomy 24:1 as (Heb.) "ervah dabar" and God was
upset for this and called it "treachery." This would be in harmony with God's law on
divorce (Deuteronomy 24:1-3; Exodus 21). This corresponds also to what Jesus said in
the sermon on the mount in Matthew
5:31. See Marriages Made In Heaven by Gaylon West. Chapter on
Malachi 2.Available in BN and Amazon.
^
3Note: To my knowledge this is the
only passage of Scripture that
authorizes a wife to "divorce" her husband. Basically, the power to divorce resided in the man
(but for Scriptural cause
of "ervah dabar" (Deuteronomy 24:1). See Marriages Made In Heaven
by Gaylon West. Chapter on Malachi 2.Available in BN and Amazon.
^
4Note: On "love apples": "man'-draks
(dudha'im; mandragoras (Gen. 30:14; Song. 7:13); the marginal reading "love apples" is due to
the supposed connection of dudha'im with dodhim, "love"): Mandrakes are the fruit of the
Mandragora officinarum, a member of the Solanaceae or potato order, closely allied to the Atropa
belladonna. It is a common plant all over Palestine... The plant was well known as an aphrodisiac
by the ancients" according to E. W. G. Masterman, author of articles, such as,
"Notes on some Tropical Diseases in Palestine" in Journal: Journal of Hygiene , vol. 14,
no. 01, 1914 [quoted by ISBE.]
|