In the eighth century Charlemagne, holding power over both church and state, in his own person practiced polygamy. St. Augustine seems to have observed in it no intrinsic immorality or sinfulness, and declared that polygamy was not a crime where it was the legal institution of a country. He wrote in The Good of Marriage (chapter 15, paragraph 17), that polygamy …was lawful among the ancient fathers……..". He declined to judge the patriarchs, but did not deduce from their practice the on going acceptability of polygamy.
During the Protestant Reformation, Martin Luther said, “I confess for my part that if a man wishes to marry two or more wives, I cannot forbid him for it does not contradict the Scripture.” African churches have long recognized polygamy. Early in its history, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints practiced polygamy in the United States. Splinter groups left the Church to continue the practice after the Church banned it. Polygamy among these groups persists today in Utah, neighbouring states, and the spin-off colonies, as well as among isolated individuals with no organized church affiliation.
No church council in the earliest Christian centuries opposed polygamy. St. Augustine clearl)'[sic] declared that he did not condemn it. Luther tolerated it and approved of the bigamous status of Philip of Hesse. In 1531 the Anabaptists preached polygamy and the Mormons of today believe in it (see Abd al Ati, The Family Structure in Islam, American Trust Publications, 1977, p 114 : Until this very day, the church in some African countries conducts the marriage of men to more than one wife. In Europe, the attempt to legally enforce monogamy and outlaw polygamy took place as late as the late sixth and early seventh centuries.
During the Protestant Reformation, Martin Luther said, “I confess for my part that if a man wishes to marry two or more wives, I cannot forbid him for it does not contradict the Scripture.” African churches have long recognized polygamy. Early in its history, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints practiced polygamy in the United States. Splinter groups left the Church to continue the practice after the Church banned it. Polygamy among these groups persists today in Utah, neighbouring states, and the spin-off colonies, as well as among isolated individuals with no organized church affiliation.
No church council in the earliest Christian centuries opposed polygamy. St. Augustine clearl)'[sic] declared that he did not condemn it. Luther tolerated it and approved of the bigamous status of Philip of Hesse. In 1531 the Anabaptists preached polygamy and the Mormons of today believe in it (see Abd al Ati, The Family Structure in Islam, American Trust Publications, 1977, p 114 : Until this very day, the church in some African countries conducts the marriage of men to more than one wife. In Europe, the attempt to legally enforce monogamy and outlaw polygamy took place as late as the late sixth and early seventh centuries.
Excerpted with alterations from: Is it Islam alone that allows polygamy? By May Saleh and Magdy Abd AL-SHafy. See here for the entire article:
http://www.quran-m.com/firas/en1/index.php/fakes-about-islam/352-is-it-islam-alone-that-allows-polygamy.html
Under the Old Testament Law Polygamy was never banned. It was simply regulated
If he marries another woman, he must not deprive the first one of her food, clothing and marital rights. [Exodus 21:10]
15 If a man has two wives, and he loves one but not the other, and both bear him sons but the firstborn is the son of the wife he does not love, 16 when he wills his property to his sons, he must not give the rights of the firstborn to the son of the wife he loves in preference to his actual firstborn, the son of the wife he does not love. 17 He must acknowledge the son of his unloved wife as the firstborn by giving him a double share of all he has. That son is the first sign of his father’s strength. The right of the firstborn belongs to him. [Deuteronomy 21:15-17]
So this clearly shows the Old Testament did not prohibit the practice of Polygamy, it simply regulated it by giving rules of equal treatment.
Thus further showing the one-man one-woman doctrine is something new while Polygamy is certainly present in the Bible.
According to the Bible, God gave David wives
Mark Henkel says Moses had two wives., Abraham had three wives and that the twelve tribes of Israel were born of Israel's four wives.
Mark Henkel says David had numerous wives and according to the Bible, God gave David those wives and if he wanted more God would have given more:
8 I gave your master’s house to you, and your master’s wives into your arms. I gave you all Israel and Judah. And if all this had been too little, I would have given you even more. [2 Samuel 12:8]
Matthew 25, as mentioned by Mark Henker, contains a parable of a polygamous bridegroom.
Mark Henkel: Clearly the Bible never taught the anti-polygamy doctrine.
Adultery and One Flesh?
The prohibition on adultery is not given in English, it was given in Hebrew. Mark Henkel teaches the Hebrew word for 'adultery' means WOMAN who breaks wed-lock. Thus through the Hebrew we see that polygamy of a man marrying more than one wife is not adultery.
And we must also keep in mind Mark Henkel's important reminder of Christian belief, Moses is believed to have written down the Law prohibiting adultery yet he had more than one wife thus showing to Christians and Jews that polygamy of a man marrying more than one wife is NOT adultery.
As for the two will be one flesh. Mark Henkel states this does not mean you cannot be one flesh with more than one woman as Moses was.
Mark Henkel points out that the Bible also teaches one can become 'one flesh' with a prostitute. Mark Henkel contends this means that the person can be 'one flesh' with his wife and 'one flesh' with a prostitute.
16 Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body? For it is said, “The two will become one flesh.”[b] 17 But whoever is united with the Lord is one with him in spirit. [1 Corinthians 6]
Mark Henkel believes the understanding of adultery and the one-flesh passage are not in contradiction with Polygamy.
Ruling for Kings in Deuteronomy 17?
The king, moreover, must not acquire great numbers of horses for himself or make the people return to Egypt to get more of them, for the Lord has told you, “You are not to go back that way again.” 17 He must not take many wives, or his heart will be led astray. He must not accumulate large amounts of silver and gold. [Deuteronomy 17:16-17]
Some Christians may use Deuteronomy 17:16-17 to argue against polygamy but is this an intellectually honest argument?
Firstly, the passage is speaking about kings (not everyday people) and secondly the instructions are do not take a great number of horses and many wives. Of course, a king will have more than one horse so it does not seem to be a teaching of do not take more than one. Perhaps it's a teaching of do not be extravagant and have a great number of horses and wives. So it seems like the kings can have more than one wife and more than one horse.
The Husband of One Wife and 1 Timothy
1 Timothy 3:2, 1 Timothy 3:12 and Titus 1:6 are not general prohibitions of polygamy. Mark Henkel says these are instructions only for Bishops, Elders and Deacons. Mark Henkel offers a further interpretation referring to the Greek, he believes this is a prohibition against divorce.
Something that Mark Henkel did not mention that I will touch on. 1 Timothy 4:12 is said to be teaching pastors to be an example to the believers. The anti-polygamy Christians will use this verse. However, is this really a teaching of direct imitation? If it was, then wouldn't all Christian believers have to become pastors? So to hang one's hat on this verse does not seem to be the best of logics. On top of this, the acceptance of 1 Timothy being from Paul is in question - New testament scholars dispute whether Paul wrote this. Professor Bart Ehrman believes it to be a forgery. Here's a little piece online that you may be interested in reading:
1 Timothy is one of the three epistles known collectively as the pastorals (1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, and Titus). They were not included in Marcion's canon of ten epistles assembled c. 140 CE. Against Wallace, there is no certain quotation of these epistles before Irenaeus c. 170 CE.
Norman Perrin summarises four reasons that have lead critical scholarship to regard the pastorals as inauthentic. Read more
Christianity and Polygamy
Synoptic Gospels and the Idea of a Pre-Existant Jesus?
Why Islam
