Polygamy

The practice of polygamy has been in the news some, lately, and, even though it is a controversial subject, I thought that I would weigh in on it. It has been pointed out that it was generally accepted in the Old Testament, and never specifically forbidden in the New Testament. Let me first point out that just because something isn’t specifically forbidden, it doesn’t necessarily follow that it is okay.
Let me also say that it may not have been as common as you may think, even in the Old Testament. Granted, David had multiple wives, and so did Solomon, but they were both kings, they were not commoners. Abraham had a wife, Sarah, and a concubine, Hagar. He did marry another wife, but not until after the death of Sarah(?) It’s an interesting discussion, because Keturah had six sons by Abraham, and he was already old when Sarah died, so perhaps Keturah was a concubine (in fact, 1 Chronicles 1:32 refers to her as such), that had sons while Sarah was still alive—possibly even while Abraham was still young. I have to question that, though, because if Abraham had sons when God promised to make a great nation from Abraham’s seed, then wouldn’t Abraham and Sarah have assumed that God meant from his existing sons? There would have been no point in enlisting Hagar as a concubine, if Abraham already had a concubine that had already given him children. Isaac only had one wife, Rebekah. Jacob had four wives, or two wives and two concubines, depending on who you listen to. Gideon also had multiple wives. Very rarely is there any mention of anyone else having multiple wives. (Some have said that Moses had two wives, but the Bible only names one: Zipporah. Zipporah’s father has two names, though, and is sometimes called Reuel, and sometimes called Jethro).
The question arises, though, what is the difference between a wife and a concubine? Easton’s Bible Dictionary says that a concubine was a wife of secondary rank (it says more than that, but I only have so much space, and I don’t want to get sued for plagiarism). Smith’s Bible Dictionary points out that a wife could be divorced, whereas a concubine could not. Smith’s goes on to catalog four types of concubines: A Hebrew girl bought from her father, a gentile captive taken in war, a foreign slave bought, or a Canaanitish woman. The first two had rights under the Law of Moses, the third did not, and the fourth was actually prohibited by the Law (not to suggest that it didn’t happen, though). I should point out that, although Zilpah and Bilhah are mentioned as being Jacob’s wives, they were only with Jacob because they were Leah and Rachel’s slaves, and, in fact, Bilhah is mentioned as being Jacob’s concubine in Genesis 35:22. Apparently there wasn’t considered to be much difference between a wife and a concubine at that time.
By the way, from what I understand, a supporter of Biblical polygamy once challenged Mark twain to find any place in the Bible where polygamy was forbidden. Twain responded with Matthew 6:24. Quite frankly, though, even though one of the parables that Jesus told seems to support the idea of polygamy, Jesus also made it clear that when God created marriage, he created Eve to be Adam’s wife. He did not create a harem for Adam, he created a wife. The parable was intended to convey the idea that although many people can be saved, only those that are ready when He comes will be. Keep in mind that Jesus used parables to relate spiritual things to physical things that people could understand, but not necessarily physical things that he approved of; remember the unjust judge?

The Wedding Model

Maybe it’s just because of the way that I was raised, but I tend to look at my parents’ relationship as the model for marriage. Don’t misunderstand me, I know that my parents don’t have the perfect marriage, but neither does anyone else. There were some things my parents were very, very good at. I don’t remember them arguing very often when I was a kid. Usually their arguments were not serious, there were a few times when they went and locked themselves in their bedroom so as not to argue in front of the kids. We could hear angry voices, sometimes (they tried to argue quietly when they did that), but we couldn’t understand the words. I can count on the fingers of one hand (without using my thumb) the number of times that happened.
One thing that’s interesting about my parents’ marriage: They grew up in different churches together. They have both attended my father’s church for many years now, but my mother has never formally joined the church. She’s been going there long enough that I don’t think too many people remember that she isn’t, technically, a ‘member.’ From what I understand of the church that my mother grew up in, and did formally join, none of the doctrinal differences have anything to do with salvation. The differences are the sort of thing that I imagine Jesus would refer to as ‘straining at a gnat.’ There will always be people that want to make a big deal over something that really doesn’t matter. (Do you believe in transubstantiation or consubstantiation? I’ve always been more of a transmogrification man, myself. What difference does it make? Do you really think that, at judgment, God is going to say, no, you can’t come in, because you have a basic misunderstanding of communion—even though you did everything else right?). It occurs to me now that maybe I shouldn’t bring up my mother’s religious affiliation, because someone may read this that wasn’t aware and then start giving her a hard time. I would hope that my readers have better sense than that, though.
I think that a lot of people that knew my parents when I was growing up thought that my father was henpecked. To be honest, most of the time, if my mother asked my father to do something, he did it. Usually, there wasn’t even any discussion about it. That certainly supports the theory that he was henpecked. Of course, most of the time, what she asked of him was normal day-to-day stuff. A lot of it he probably would have done on his own if she hadn’t asked. Some of it he wouldn’t have thought to do on his own, but didn’t have any objection to. I was around enough to know that, occasionally, she would ask him to do something that he really felt strongly was not something that he should do. Most of the time, when that happened, he could tell her ‘no’ in a tone of voice that made it clear that the matter was not open for discussion, and she would drop the subject (although, occasionally, they would go lock themselves in the bedroom…).
The Bible says that the man is the head of the household. I think that many men have taken that to mean that the family is an autocracy. What the husband/father says, goes. Period. I don’t think that is what God intended. If two Godly people have joined together in matrimony, they are one flesh. They are partners. If they are truly God-fearing people, that diligently pray for guidance, then they are going to agree most of the time. When they disagree, then one of them is wrong (possibly both of them, but that should be very rare). When one of them is wrong, hopefully the other one can be persuasive enough to get them back on track. News flash! Sometimes the man will be the one that is wrong. That puts the woman in a very difficult position. The Bible says that a woman should not usurp authority over the man. The wife can only do so much to persuade her husband, if he’s messing up, before it becomes usurpation. If he’s stubborn about it (and convinced that he is right) she may have to simply go along with him, even though she knows he’s wrong. The husband will answer to God for his sin, but the wife has to answer for her obedience to her husband as well. In some cases, she may simply have to walk away from the marriage. That should be an extreme last resort, but if she feels that her husband’s leadership is threatening her salvation, then she needs to pack up and go.