Chapter 18. Covetous and Lusty Christians




Men with multiple wives are often accused by other Christians of being 'covetous' and filled with 'lust' as though these were sins. In using these words they display their ignorance of Scripture. It is not a sin to covet or lust - it is only a sin to lust and covet something that isn't rightfully yours.


The trouble is the English language has evolved (even if Yahweh's marriage laws haven't). These days the words 'covet' and 'lust' have an exclusively negative meaning, which causes problems for those reading the old King James Version (KJV) of the Bible which uses these words differently from today. Modern versions use words like 'desire' or 'eagerly desire' which is what the words 'covet' and 'lust' used to mean. Thus it is, in modern English, to 'eagerly desire' a woman with a view to marrying her but if you 'lusted' after her you would be considered a sexual pervert. Thus from the point of view of old English it is perfectly acceptable to lust after a single woman whereas to lust after a married one is an abomination. The words 'covet' and 'lust' are morally neutral words in KJV English.


Is it wrong or a sin for a single woman to desire, eagerly desire, covet or lust to be a part of a family where there is already one or more wives? No, it is not. Is it wrong or a sin for a married man to desire, eagerly desire, covet or lust after a single woman to make her his wife? No, it is not. [N.B. I hereby state that anyone wishing to quote this paragraph must quote the two paragraphs above as well so as not to distort the meaning of what I am saying]. But if he is a righteous man, walking in Yahweh's commandments and seeking to please Yah'shua (Jesus) his Messiah (Christ) he will, of course, not only be obedient to Yahweh's wishes in the matter (God may say 'no') but also be sensitive to his existing wives' concerns before taking another wife. He will be a Christian gentleman.

Chapter 19. The Lamech Red Herring



The first mention of plural marriage in the Bible is of one of the patriarchs who was an evil man (Genesis 4:19-23). Thus, it is claimed, polygamy is evil.


By the same token we can claim that nobody ever passed urine or stools until the days of Eglon in the Book of Judges because nobody is ever described as urinating or defecating until then. Furthermore, it can be 'proved' from the Bible that people only ever urinated against walls since that is the only method that is mentioned in the Bible (though you'll only find it in the KJV since for some reason modern Bibles find it too embarrassing to include):


"For the whole house of Ahab shall perish: and I will cut off from Ahab him that pisseth against the wall, and him that is shut up and left in Israel" (2 Kings 9:8, KJV).

The fact that Lamech is the first named polygamist in the Bible doesn't mean that he was the first one or that the practice is evil. If it was evil, would Yahweh legislate in favour of plural marriage in His Law (Torah) or tell David that He gave him his wives?


We see that to advance such a proposition that the anti-polygamists are grasping at straws.

Chapter 20. Abraham the Monogamist?



A common objection I hear from people concerns Abraham's polygamy. Herbert Armstrong, the late leader of the Worldwide Church of God, declared that Abraham was a monogamist. And I have heard many Protestant ministers say the same thing. They argue that Hagar, Sarah's servant girl, was never Abraham's wife but that she was 'used' adulterously to get the promised seed 'ahead of time'. Well, this is a half-truth. Yes, Sarah was in a hurry to have the promised seed and didn't believe she could conceive as she had had her menopause and was old. Yes, she lacked faith. Yes, she was wrong to expect the promised seed to come through Hagar. Yes, Abraham was wrong not to discourage her in that thought. But was the relationship between Abraham and Hagar adulterous - a disastrous mistake? See what the Bible says:


"Then Sarai, Abram's wife, took Hagar her maid, the Egyptian, and gave her to her husband Abram to be his wife" (Gen.16:2-3, NKJV).

If someone tells you that Abraham was an adulterer or a fornicator, get them to read out this passage and challenge them to prove from the Bible that being married to a wife is a sin!


Fact: Sarah was Abraham's wife and Hagar was Abraham's wife. They were both his wives and nowhere is he accused of being an adulterer by Yahweh or anyone else. True, Hagar was a concubine or a wife of lesser status than a full wife, but she is nevertheless called a wife in the scriptures, the same Hebrew word used of Sarah ('ishshah).


Similar attempts are made to 'prove' that Jacob had two wives and not four because he married his two first wives' maidservants who became concubines. But again they are referred to as 'wives' (Gen.30:9; 37:2).


Detractors also say that after Sarah died Abraham married monogamously to Keturah. But they seem to read their Bibles with their sunglasses on or in a dark closet for it is written:


"Abraham again took a wife, and her name was Keturah. And she bore him Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak, and Shuah. Jokshan begot Sheba and Dedan. And the sons of Dedan were Asshurim, Letushim, and Leummim. And the sons of Midian were Ephah, Epher, Hanoch, Abidah, and Eldaah. All these were the children of Keturah. And Abraham gave all that he had to Isaac. But Abraham gave gifts to the sons of the concubines which Abraham had; and while he was still living he sent them eastward, away from Isaac his son, to the country of the east" (Gen.25:1-6, NKJV).

After Sarah's death he married Keturah as a full wife. We know he had concubines (Heb. pilegesh) at this time which he could conceivably have had before or after Sarah's death, or both. In any case, Abraham had at least two wives before Sarah passed on and a minimum of 3 afterwards, two of them being Keturah and Hagar.


Amazingly, there are some who even claim that King David was a monogamist who sinned! Do they don their sunglasses when they read 2 Samuel 12:8? It is true that David legally lost his wives after his sin with Bathsheba (2 Sam.12:11) but that was not because he had been living in sin for having had many wives before but because he had committed sin with another man's wife and then murdered the husband.

Chapter 21. A Salvational Issue



I can understand why some people might not want plural marriage to exist. I can understand why it might upset some people. I accept that. But to then deny the very plain teaching of the Bible and still claim to be a Bible-believing Christian is most definitely not acceptable. Someone who denies the plain sense of the Word of God is living in a delusion. To try and change the sense of scripture to mean something other than what it says is called twisting the Scriptures. And the biggest irony of all is that the monogamy-only people accuse those of us who have more than one wife of doing this very thing! This is a most serious sin and is called "bearing false witness" - it is a violation of the 9th Commandment (Exodus 20:16). To lie in this fashion by denying the Word of God is as serious sin on its own but then to persecute those with multiple wives is, I would suggest, to put the salvation of souls on the chopping block.


I am sometimes asked if I think plural marriage is a salvation issue. At first I hesitated, not wanting to be understood to mean that if you don't practice it you won't be saved, because that is not true. Marriage is not a salvation issue. But in an indirect way there is no doubt that it can be. And I would cite two instances at least.


First, if a woman is forced to marry an unbeliever because there aren't enough godly men to go around in a monogamy-only culture she is opening herself up to spiritual destruction. Marriage to an unbeliever is forbidden:


"Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness? And what accord has Christ with Belial? Or what part has a believer with an unbeliever? And what agreement has the temple of Eloah (God) with idols? For you are the temple of the living Eloah (God)" (2 Cor.6:13-16, NKJV).

That leaves her with the option of remaining an old maid - a spinster which is hardly attractive. And if she cannot control her natural sexual urge for intimate union with a husband, what will she do? Marry the next best thing to a believer. Paul recognised this problem when he advised:


"... if they [single people] cannot exercise self-control, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion" (1 Cor.7:9, NKJV).

It is a fact that more women are coming to Christ than men. It has always been that way (where conversion has been non-compulsive). Logically, polygamy is the only solution. To deny a woman a multiple marriage is therefore to risk her salvation.


In the second place, those who preach monogamy-only may actually be damning souls to hell because they are denying believing women a legitimate place in a plural marriage. And what, do you imagine, Yahweh will say to them on Judgement Day?


"Then He said to the disciples, "It is impossible that no offences should come, but woe to him through whom they do come! It would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones" (Luke 17:1-2, NKJV).

The monogamy-only doctrine is an offence to Yahweh because it damns souls to hell. Such a person refusing plural marriage because of false doctrine will probably wish he had never be born when he faces the truth in heaven if he then learns that his doctrine has destroyed souls for eternity. Be warned.

Chapter 22. Monogamy-Only Vows



Christians raised in our monogamy-only culture enter into wedding covenants or vows in which the husband promises to be faithful to his wife and to forsake all others. What if he then discovers the truth about biblical marriage? Are those vows still valid? Or is he freed from them?


There are two schools of thought in Christian polygamy - one is true and the other is false. One says that a man cannot unilaterally break a monogamy-only marriage vow, and the other says he can. Let us see what the Bible teaches on the subject.


"And even as they did not like to retain Eloah (God) in their knowledge, Eloah (God) gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of Eloah (God), despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenant-breakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgement of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them" (Rom.1:28-32, KJV).

Unfortunately, the Greek word asunthétos ('covenant-breaker') has been diluted in most modern English versions in such a way as to obscure the actual meaning. Thus the NASB and NKJV use 'untrustworthy', the NIV 'faithless', etc., which - whilst certainly not 'wrong' nevertheless do not convey the true meaning because these words can have alternative meanings. The fact of the matter is we cannot just break vows or covenants when we want to. There are some exceptions so let's carefully look at these.


The first is the rash or careless oath which can :


"... if a person thoughtlessly takes an oath to do anything, whether good or evil -- in any matter one might carelessly swear about -- even though he is unaware of it, in any case when he learns of it he will be guilty. 'When anyone is guilty in any of these ways, he must confess in what way he has sinned ..." (Lev.5:4-5, NIV).

Under the Old Covenant a person could be released from such an oath with the appropriate sacrifice. A marriage covenant or vow can hardly be considered to be 'careless' or 'rash' though doubtless some may consider some to be. I was admin- istering to a woman who was in love with a young man, and he with her, and they had a big row. To 'punish' her the young man went and married another women whom he did not really love. The result was that everyone was miserable. Nevertheless that man entered marriage vows which the second woman received in good faith. He was stupid - very, very stupid. But did he have the right to renounce those vows?


"You ask, "Why?" It is because Yahweh is acting as the witness between you and the wife of your youth, because you have broken faith with her, though she is your partner, the wife of your marriage covenant. Has not [Yahweh] made them one? In flesh and spirit they are his. And why one? Because he was seeking godly offspring. So guard yourself in your spirit, and do not break faith with the wife of your youth" (Mal.2:14-15, NIV).

Marriage vows, once entered into - even if they are monogamy-only ones - are binding, and neither of the parties has the right to change them without the agreement of the other. This applies equally to the men (as in Malachi above) as to the woman "who forsakes the companion of her youth, and forgets the covenant of her Elohim (God)" (Prov.2:17, NKJV).


A marriage covenant is an agreement between three persons: husband, wife and Yahweh. If either the husband or wife break it unilaterally they are "worthy of death". It is no small matter. However, if the nature of their covenant is found to contain a clause such as "forsaking all others" which is unbiblical, binding the man to a monogamy-only contract, husband and wife may together renegotiate the marriage covenant to make it polygamy-inclusive because such is biblical and in harmony with Yahweh's will.


But a warning must here be given: when a couple enter bona fide marriage covenants they must BOTH be willing. Yahweh does not recognise marriage covenants made by force any more than He recognises conversions to the faith by force. Throughout Europe a millennia ago or shortly thereafterwards millions of people were forced on pain of death to become Catholics or Eastern Orthodox. Performing a rite against one's will does not make one a 'Christian' any more than forcing someone into a marriage contract makes them 'married'. Both following Yahweh and getting married must be based on a freewill choice.


Thus no matter how scripturally wrong a monogamy-only vow may be it is legitimate in Yahweh's eyes and takes precedence. However, a woman opposing such a contract when confronted with the Biblical truth of plural marriage, must be prepared to receive a judgement at the hands of the Almighty if she resists the truth. The husband at the same time does not have the right to 'pressure' her into his taking extra wives: his only obligation as head of the family and its teacher is to point out the truth of what the Bible teaches and leave his wife to wrestle with her conscience whilst in the meantime deeply loving her as Christ loves the Church (Messianic Community). He is not to withdraw his love from her!


Marriage vows are deadly serious - literally - and no man or woman dare ever lightly treat them. We all may regret some promises we have made but as Christians we are obliged to keep our word (Jas.5:12). Such are honourable and trustworthy men and women.

Chapter 23. The Abuse of Marriage



A charge commonly levelled against polygamists is that they are abusive of women. And it is partly true. Some men living plural marriage are abusive. But so are a good many men in monogamous marriages. If abusive polygamist men makes polygamy wrong then abusive monogamous husbands makes monogamy wrong as well.


The fact of the matter is that you will find abuse wherever you find men and women in a conjugal relationship with each other, irrespective of whether the relationship is biblical (monogamy or polygamy) or not (polyandry, polyamory, homosexual and lesbian relationships, swinging, etc.). There is, however, no evidence that plural marriage is more abusive than monogamy. Indeed, the reverse is usually proven to be the case.


Women (and sometimes men too) must be protected from abuse no matter what kind of relationship they are in. If the truth be known, most of those who hate plural marriage are women who have a feminist agenda and who deep down hate all men. And attacking multiple marriage just becomes a smokescreen hiding a sinful tendency in women who want to rule. The issue is not, therefore, so much monogamy vs. polygamy but of patriarchy vs. matriarchy. It boils down to power and who has it.


This was the issue that consumed Miriam, the wife of Moses, and for which Yahweh punished her with leprosy (Numbers 12). Just as it is dangerous for a man to try and force his way into plural marriage without his first wife's consent so it is equally dangerous for women to challenge Yahweh's headship Order (patriarchy). Rulership is man's responsibility, not women's. At the same time, there are checks and balances to ensure that patriarchy is not abused, just as there are checks and balances to ensure that marriage is entered into in the right way.


As ever, we must obey Yahweh. And those who challenge His Torah (Law) are risking the same kind of judgement as Korah and those who followed in his rebellion.

Chapter 24. Plural Marriage and Testosterone



As you will by now have realised, we are now dealing with the weakest arguments offered by the monogamy-only people. Indeed, when Scripture fails them, they invariably turn to slander and character-assassination.


I have been accused many times of entering plural marriage because I am "sex mad". And no doubt there are some people who enter this marriage lifestyle because they genuinely have a sex life out control. However, plural marriage is probably one of the worst ways to fulfil a libido out of control because of all the added responsibility it brings and all the persecution it provokes. Those who are sex-mad tend to prefer a Cassanova-type of life of jumping from one bed to another without the responsibility and expense of children and home.


I have met many people who both live plural marriage and those who want to. Amongst the latter there are undoubtedly many who are sex-mad. Interestingly enough, this category of testosterone-led (rather than Ruach/Spirit-person) man either never enters the principle (because the women see through him) or do so only to discover they are hopelessly unprepared to live it. Those who do slip through the moral net usually burn themselves out, and deservedly so. And Christian women are (thank goodness) getting wise to them. Plural marriage is not for sex-mad men.


When plural marriage is measured and compared with monogamy in terms of sex all kinds of difficulties result. Obviously, if he is going to perform his duty properly, a man with several wives will be expected to engage in much more sexual activity than your average monogamous man. This can work both ways for him. If he is sensible he will learn the lesson of a friend of mine who worked in a chocolate factory in Accra, Ghana.


As you may know, workers in chocolate factories can eat as much chocolate as they want to but they are not allowed to take any chocolate out of the factory home with them. They must eat it on the premises. My friend, like most in his position, I suspect, went crazy and just stuffed himself with all the chocolate he could get his hands on. After two weeks of eating his heart's desire, he got so ill that he never ate another bar of chocolate again.


To be a man living plural marriage with several wives you have to have self-control. If you don't, plural marriage will either kill you or turn you off sex for life. And if the latter happens, guess who is going to suffer the most? The wives. This means that Christian plural marriage is absolutely NOT for sex-mad men!


If you are interested in plural marriage for extra sex, then run a mile - preferably two - both for your sake and for the sake of the women who you might be starving because of your greed. Yes, you will need to have a stronger libido than most men but you must have it under control.


Fortunately, Yahweh has given strict laws about sex. He has forbidden sex during a woman's menstruation. And for those who are stronger, you may abstain from sex for a week after menstruation too. Many abstain from sex during pregnancy (though that is not required by Torah) and others during lactation (again, not required by Torah). The Bible does require that a man does not have sex with a woman for a minimum period of time after the birth of a child.


The purpose of sex is (1) to have children, and (2) to make strong bonds between husband and wives. Sex-mad men usually aren't interested in having children or in creating lasting bonds. Christian plural marriage may therefore be said to be a means by which godly men and women can raise strong families in Yahweh. And if that is what it is being used for (as it should be) then sexual self-control is required of both the men and the women.

Chapter 25. The Canaanite Warning



"Yahweh said to Moses, "Speak to the Israelites and say to them: 'I am Yahweh your Elohim (God). You must not do as they do in Egypt, where you used to live, and you must not do as they do in the land of Canaan, where I am bringing you. Do not follow their practices" (Lev 18:1-3, NIV).

From this passage and the other warnings given in the 18th chapter of Leviticus, many anti-polygamists claim that as the Canaanites practised plural marriage so the Israelites should not. But this chapter does not forbid plural marriage - it merely says who you can marry and who you cannot. Indeed, taken together with all the other passages on marriage, it is clearly seen to be protecting plural marriage, not legislating against it!


As these statutes are important, let us list them and be careful to obey them:


4 You must obey my laws and be careful to follow my decrees. I am Yahweh your Elohim (God).
5 Keep my decrees and laws, for the man who obeys them will live by them. I am Yahweh.
6 "'No-one is to approach any close relative to have sexual relations. I am Yahweh.
7 "'Do not dishonour your father by having sexual relations with your mother. She is your mother; do not have relations with her.
8 "'Do not have sexual relations with your father's wife; that would dishonour your father.
9 "'Do not have sexual relations with your sister, either your father's daughter or your mother's daughter, whether she was born in the same home or elsewhere.
10 "'Do not have sexual relations with your son's daughter or your daughter's daughter; that would dishonour you.
11 "'Do not have sexual relations with the daughter of your father's wife, born to your father; she is your sister.
12 "'Do not have sexual relations with your father's sister; she is your father's close relative.
13 "'Do not have sexual relations with your mother's sister, because she is your mother's close relative.
14 "'Do not dishonour your father's brother by approaching his wife to have sexual relations; she is your aunt.
15 "'Do not have sexual relations with your daughter-in-law. She is your son's wife; do not have relations with her.
16 "'Do not have sexual relations with your brother's wife; that would dishonour your brother.
17 "'Do not have sexual relations with both a woman and her daughter [from a previous marriage]. Do not have sexual relations with either her son's daughter or her daughter's daughter; they are her close relatives. That is wickedness.
18 "'Do not take your wife's sister as a rival wife and have sexual relations with her while your wife is living.
19 "'Do not approach a woman to have sexual relations during the uncleanness of her monthly period.
20 "'Do not have sexual relations with your neighbour's wife and defile yourself with her [adultery].
21 "'Do not give any of your children to be sacrificed to Molech, for you must not profane the name of your God. I am Yahweh.
22 "'Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman [homosexuality]; that is detestable.
23 "'Do not have sexual relations with an animal and defile yourself with it [bestiality]. A woman must not present herself to an animal to have sexual relations with it; that is a perversion.
24 "'Do not defile yourselves in any of these ways, because this is how the nations that I am going to drive out before you became defiled.
25 Even the land was defiled; so I punished it for its sin, and the land vomited out its inhabitants.
26 But you must keep my decrees and my laws. The native-born and the aliens living among you must not do any of these detestable things,
27 for all these things were done by the people who lived in the land before you, and the land became defiled.
28 And if you defile the land, it will vomit you out as it vomited out the nations that were before you.
29 "'Everyone who does any of these detestable things -- such persons must be cut off from their people.
30 Keep my requirements and do not follow any of the detestable customs that were practised before you came and do not defile yourselves with them. I am Yahweh your Elohim (God).'" (NIV)

As we can see, the Canaanites were a depraved people and fully ripened in iniquity so it was necessary for Yahweh to clearly state what kinds of sexual relationship the Israelites could have, and what they could not. Notice, however, that He does not limit a man to one wife!


Many of the things that happened in Canaan before the Israelites conquered it are happening today. Yahweh says that sexual immorality defiles the land. Little wonder there is so much disease. Look at the AIDS epidemic. It is important, therefore, that Christians separate themselves from the heathens defiling everything around them and gather into communities where the land can be kept pure. That way Yahweh can bless them and make them prosperous.


It is our apostolic council that Christians families gather together and form large colonies separate from the heathen world where purity and holiness can prevail, and thus invite Yahweh's blessings.

Chapter 26. From Eden to the New Jerusalem



Another argument of the anti-polygamist is that we should be trying to return to the ideal state of paradise that was once in the Garden of Eden. As the first humans were a monogamist couple, we should therefore have monogamy as our ideal for marriage, they say.


However ideal the Garden of Eden was in some respects, it was not ideal in others. Our first parents went naked because they were innocent. Should we go round naked too? (I suppose in a sin-free, innocent world it would not matter). Also, Adam and Eve's children married each other contrary to the laws Yahweh later gave in Leviticus 18. It wasn't a sin then because that was the only way to multiply the human family - there wasn't anyone else to marry - but it is a sin now because there are others who are not close relatives to marry. If we are to imitate our first parents, then it should be all right for brothers and sisters to marry too. And we should offer animal sacrifices as well.



The point is we don't live in Eden, we aren't allowed to be nudists, and we are forbidden to marry brothers or sisters, and animal sacrifices have been done away with. We can never return to the simple innocence of Eden, and never will. As Christians our eyes are on the New Jerusalem (Rev.3:12; 21.2) which is polygamous both in our allegorical relationship as the Church (Messianic Community) to Christ, and in our own personal marriages (Isa.4:1).


All marriage begins with one man and one woman, and that is precisely how earth life began in Eden. Later, men took more wives and Yahweh wrote laws protecting multiple marriages. We are supposed to be looking forwards, not backwards:


"And Yah'shua (Jesus) said unto him, No man, having put his hand to the plough, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of Eloah (God)" (Luke 9:62, KJV).

We can none of us retreat to our childhood. We have to grow up and become mature:


"When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things" (1 Cor.13:11, NKJV).

Plural marriage is "grown-up" marriage for the spiritually mature. Not everyone is called into it because not everyone can manage it. But under no circumstances should those who are called, and who are mature, be bound to the cradle by the false doctrines of the immature and be forced to remain as infants because they can't manage such a lifestyle themselves or because they choose to be wilfully blind to what the Bible clearly teaches.


We are not supposed to be looking at the first Adam for our spiritual guidance but to the second one, the Lord Yah'shua (Jesus):


"And so it is written, "The first man Adam became a living being." The last Adam became a life-giving spirit. However, the spiritual is not first, but the natural, and afterward the spiritual. The first man was of the earth, made of dust; the second Man is the Lord from heaven. As was the man of dust, so also are those who are made of dust; and as is the heavenly Man, so also are those who are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly Man" (1 Cor.15:45-49, NKJV).

And what is the allegorical marriage lifestyle of the second Man? Plural marriage!

Chapter 27. Did David Marry a Mother and Her Daughter?



Well, that is what they would like you to believe so that they can heap sexual sins on David that he did not commit, and thus tarnish plural marriage. David sinned in committing adultery with Bathsheba - that was his only sexual sin. But did he marry a daughter and her mother contrary to Leviticus 18:17?


David's first wife was called Michal and her mother was called Ahinoam, the daughter of Ahimaaz (1 Sam.14:49-50). However, the Ahinoam David was married to was a Jezreelite (1 Chr.3:1; 2 Sam.3:2). Moreover, the Ahinoam David married was before Saul, to whom the other Ahinoam belonged, died (2 Sam.3:2; 12:7-8). Saul's wives were given by Yahweh to David after his marriage to Ahinoam so David cannot have been married to Saul's wife of the same name.


Again, the anti-polygamists are clutching at straws.

Chapter 28. Put Away Your Plural Wives!



"He (Yah'shua/Jesus) said to them, "Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so" (Matt.19:8, NKJV).

How easy it is to read a preconceived doctrine into a passage of Scripture! And the monogamy-only people sometimes do that here in Matthew 19:8 by claiming that "wives" here actually means "plural wives". They claim that wherever scripture speaks of "wife" it is referring to monogamy, of "wives" that it is talking about polygamy. But the context of Matthew 19:8 (and its parallel in Mk.10:5) is divorce and marriage, not the kind of marriage (for there is, in any case, only one kind: a man married to one or more women). All Yah'shua is saying is that before Moses, divorce wasn't allowed at all! Divorce, then, is only permissive in the Old Covenant, but in the New, Yah'shua (Jesus) tightened up the regulations again and restored the divorce laws to where they were before. Finally, the Greek word gune is uniplural and can be translated as either 'wife' or 'wives' and thus, when used, means actually both. Thus the passage should read:


"He (Yah'shua/Jesus) said to them, "Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wife/wives, but from the beginning it was not so" (Matt.19:8, NKJV).

There is no scriptural dichotomy between 'wife' (monogamy) or 'wives' (plural marriage). Where the context does not clearly indicate, gune (and the Hebrew equivalent ishshah) should always be translated "wife or wives".

Part 3: Bypassing the Churches



Ever since the Jews returned from their captivity in Bablyon, monogamy-onlyism has been on the rise. Influenced by the surrounding pagan religion in which they were forced to spend their exile, the Jews - who had hitherto moreorless practiced plural marriage without any qualms - began to experience a subtle pressure to imitate the nations (which they had been warned strictly against prior to entering the Promised Land under Joshua) and to restrict matrimonial union to simple couples. The practice of polygyny amongst the Jews nevertheless continued up until the time of Christ but became more and more restricted to the wealthy classes and was subject to many non-biblical rules invented by the Rabbis. After the expulsion from the Holy Land by the Romans, plural marriage continued amongst the Jews principally in North Africa and Arabia but was eventually outlawed by the Rabbis in Germany under influence from the Catholic world they inhabited in Europe. A few Jews still practice plural marriage, mostly those from Muslim Yemen and North Africa.


As for the Christians themselves, plural marriage was, as far as we know, not restricted and indeed we find signs of it having been lived even in the New Testament narrative. That it became a 'problem' for those in the Roman Empire who did not approve of it (though who predictably did little or nothing to eliminate prostitution and sodomy) is suggested by the fact that the Roman Emperor Justinian eventually felt it necessary to make polygamy illegal in the 6th century A.D.


Today very few people practice polygamy outside Africa and Asia. Those in Europe who do tend to be, for the most part, Muslim immigrants from Africa and Asia, and those in the Americas dissenters from the liberalised Mormon religion who retained a separate identity when their Church made the practice illegal under pressure from the United States government. It is believed that as few as ½ million live polygamy in Europe and about 100,000 in the United States, of which Bible-believing Christians constitute somewhere in the order of 5,000 to 10,000 in the whole West. This contrast sharply with the rest of the world where tens of millions live this practice.