Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | 1 Kings 11:3 He had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines, and his wives turned his heart away. |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | 1 Kings 11:3 He had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines, and his wives turned his heart away [from God]. |
Subject: Does God endorse polygamy? |
Bible Note: Dear friends, please understand that I am not a Mormon. I am a Southern Baptist. Polygamy existed as a foundational marriage structure LONG before Mormonism was ever known on this planet. It is interesting that many will jump onto the bandwagon of condemnation when the issue of polygamy is brought up. Many say that God's Law prohibited a man from having more than one wife, and yet they say this at the expense of ignoring the fact that God's Law made governing provision for a man to have more than one wife in Deut, 21:15. Lev. 18:18 is not in any way a prohibition against a man having more than one wife. God Himself gave king David five of his 18 wives as is revealed in 2 Sam. 12:8. Is God therefore sinning against His own moral absolutes? Also, the use of the verses dealing with a man multiplying wives to himself is also a common blunder made by many. The same context deals with a man multiplying horses and chariots to himself. Are we then to assume that it is wrong for a man to own more than one horse, or more than one car (chariot)? Not so. The idea of multiplying women, horses and chariots had to do with pride in one's wealth. If one multiplies these things (or anything else for that matter) as a form of pride in one's social "status", then he has done so for the wrong reason. The patriarchs fell not because they had more than one wife, but because they sinned. If having more than one wife were a sin, then one would have to accuse God Himself of sin, especially when He provided imagry of His being a polygamist Himself when He called Judah and Israel His "wives". God would certainly not associate Himself with that which He considered to be sin, and He certainly would not have given king David several of his already multiple wives. Where it is true that God gave Adam only one wife, this is an argument with no merit when applying it with such broad meaning that stretches it FAR beyond the intent within Genesis. God also gave Adam a Garden to tend, but He did not give the rest of us a Garden. Have we been cheated? Not at all. God aldo gave Elisha power that He did not give to Abraham. Does that mean that Abraham was cheated because he was not given the same power. It is my hope that the many falacies in the reasoning presented against polygamy can teach us all to be more succinct and powerful in our reasoning and presentation. Then we move on to Titus and Timothy. Suppose that we leave the popular translation intact. The prohibition is only against bishops (overseers) and deacons from having more than one wife, not the laity. Translating the Greek word (mia) as "one" is actually inconsistent with the context of these verses. It makes more sense to translate (mia) as "first" wife, just as the Greek Lexicons show us. This gives greater consistency to Paul's instructions. It makes far better sense to say that a bishop and a deacon should STILL be married to his first wife, therefore not having been divorced since divorce is a poor example to the Church, and VERY anti-family. To think that Paul would suddenly throw in the issue of plural wives out of nowhere is beyond textual consistency and introduces incontinuity. Many people try to speak authoritatively by declaring that God intended there to be only one man and one woman in marriage, but this is a declaration with no real teeth. It denies God's clear teaching on this issue. It rests itself upon the grounds of misinterpretation and transliteration of the root texts from which our Bibles were translated. Yes, God has many "brides". If we are the "bride" of Christ, that "bride" is still composed of MANY individuals. The imagry is consistent. Several wives are joined togeher into one family unit through a common husband, just as we are joined together into one body through a common Lord. If God did not look favorably upon polygamy, then He certainly did a good job of saying absolutely nothing against it to all the prophets and patriarchs who practiced it across more than 1000 years. Does this sound absurd? It is my thought that we would do better to abstain from pitting God's word against itself and read it for what it says. I can reasonably take to task any who add meaning into key verses that clearly is not there. Any of us can weave a doctrinal tapestry by pulling verses out of context. The REAL challenge is keeping that tapestry from unraveling when pulling on the many wild threads hanging loose. |