Q. Is it true that God disapproves of polygamy but does not forbid it? I came across a video by an anonymous presenter called, Why Did GOD Never Forbid Polygamy? The One Law That Did Set a Limit which I find very confusing.

A. I am not surprised you were confused as the argument involves a number of dubious logical twists and turns. Without going into all the various theological theories that are in circulation (for I treat these in great detail on my website - it's up to you to dig them out) let me make one or two comments about the video creator's approach.

If God Had Been Opposed to Polygny...

To begin with, if God were fundamentally and totally opposed to polygyny as we are led to believe by most authoritative denominational commentators, the scriptural record would contain a clear, unambiguous, general prohibition rather than the surgical legal regulations found in the Torah. While some view Genesis 2 as a ban (it isn't), the Law of Moses seemingly functions by admitting the practice exists and then establishes enforceable rights for the women involved within the context of the Israelite nation. It clearly lays out what kinds of sexual relations are and are not permitted and leaves it at that (specific Lev.18, 20; cp. general Ex.20:14, Dt.27). Since this is what Heavenly Father permits and forbids, approves and disapproves of, positively and negatively commands, without any sort of distinction that could be taken as permanent or temporary, we are not entitled to therefore go inventing our own categories based on personal or cultural prejudices.

God Never Changes His Mind About Anything in Leviticus 18 & 20

There is not the slightest hint anywhere that God can, would or did change His mind at some time about any of these statutes (because they are a matter of life and death - obedience to them brings life - Lev.18:5), and since we know that His character never changes ("For I Yahweh do not change, therefore you, O children of Jacob, are not consumed" - Mal.3:6 cp. Jas.1:17; Heb.13:8), we are forced to accept these rules as permanent and binding on all of God's people in every age. Rather, He declares without any exceptions being offered in His preamble to His rules about sexual activity in verses 1-5, repeating His Name three times to underscore the absolute, immutable boundaries being discussed, much as He does elsewhere in declaring His holiness (Is.6:3; Rev,4:8):

"My ordinances and My statutes you shall keep, following them: I am Yahwewh your God . You shall keep My statutes and My ordinances; by doing so one shall live: I am Yahweh" (Lev.18:4-5, NRSV).

Rules on Sexual Matters & Divorce are Separate Legal Categories

Please notice for reference later on that Leviticus 18 & 20 do not address the question of divorce at all because this topic falls within a different category that is discussed elsewhere (mainly in Dt.24:1-4; Ex.21:10-11; Mal.2:14-16). These legal categories are known amongst Hebrew scholars as:

• i. Issurei Biah (Prohibitions of Sexual Relations/Intercourse); and
• ii. Gerushin (Divorce/Bills of Divorce).

Common Failures in Polygamy, Monogamy & All Human Relationships

The fact that the shortcomings of plural marriage relationships, which are the result of fallen human nature, are common to monogamous marriage too, only they are amplified in virtue of the fact that many more persons are involved in the equation. The fact that there were failings in the few plural marriages mentioned in Scripture in any great detail is neither here nor there (Abraham's and Jacob's, for instance, the latter complicated by the cruel deception of a devious father-in-law) must be compared with the failings in those few monogamous marriages that are detailed at any length (such as Isaac's) - the vast majority of marriages are not put on display because they are not relevant to the Messianic theme. Thus we are told little to nothing about Joseph's monogamous marriage to Asenath or Moses polygamous marriage to Tharbis (Adoniah) (named in tradition) and Zipporah (claimed by anti-polygamists to have been a monogamous marriage, in which case we need to be reminded of Zipporah's temper tantrum over the circumcision of their male progeny). And yet the anti-polygamous community holds polygamous marriages to a higher standard than monogamous ones as a basis for rejecting plural marriage. There are failures in both and where failures in polygamy are cited it is not to attack what Yahweh has declared lawful and acceptable but to underline human failings in need of reformation. There is no indication of any problems between his three surviving wives after Rachel's untimely death in childbirth as all the persons involved have matured and bonded closer together.

What Exactly Does Yahweh Disapprove of Yet Permit?

Since the video's creator has reverted to legalese, let's do the same by asking ourselves the question: Where in the Bible does God disapprove of something but not forbid it? There are really only two concrete examples but He is not ambiguous about either of them, giving strict, carefully laid out instructions:

• 1. Divorce which we have had occasion to comment on many times before, with its separate legal category called Gerushin (see above). God is crystal clear in Malachi 2:16 that he hates divorce with a passion because it breaks sacred covenant-bonds of trust, shattering and emotionally (and often practically) causing great distress, insecurity and societal disadvanges for children. We are also told in Scripture that Moses allowed certificates of divorce because of the hardness of human hearts (Dt.24:1). This compromise is subsequently rectified by Christ for the New Covenant, without any sort of ambiguity, and states that such was a temporary accommodation to human weakness or failings rather than the original design (Mt.19:8). This is the only marriage statute in Torah Christ annulled, restoring the original ruling that obtained in the Patriarchal Era. If Christ had wished to resolve any polygamy 'problem' He could easily have done so in a similar manner. He did not do so in Scripture nor does tradition hold that He said something to this effect in any record that has survived for if it had, you may be sure that the anti-polygamists would have immediately marshalled it as historical evidence; and

• 2. Kings in Israel. Yahweh originally set up Israel as a Tribal Confederacy under the overall authority of a Prophet (like Joshua and Samuel) and the current High Priest with tribal and clan heads. When God told the prophet Samuel that the people had rejected Yahweh by asking for a human king like the nations (1 Sam.8:7) He quite clearly called this request a rejection of His rule. He gave the people what they wanted and told his prophet Samuel to listen to the people and give them the king (Saul) they desired (1 Sam.8:22). So He permitted the monarchy even though such was not His best choice for them. This is all clearly laid out so that we do not need complicated videos with twistings here and there to justify it. There was nothing 'secretive' about this yet the author of the video makes the claim that there is a "biblical secret" as to why God never forbade polygamy yet nonetheless 'disapproved' of it, a secret which he (the author) said he was privy to and was now revealing to the world. Does this sound like the way Yahweh handles other matters in the Bible? No. He is matter-of-fact and down-to-earth. He bequeathes no ambiguity in Scripture regarding what is, and is not acceptable, in marriage. None whatsoever. It is rebels who complicate matters who then seek out justifications for their rebellions with their monogamy-only invention and modern anti-patriarchy attitudes. We must reject their sinful behaviour and hold them to scriptural account.

There are NO other examples anywhere in Scripture where God disapproves of something but does not forbid it. Sinners not infrequently try to mutate the absolute (with its death penalties for rebellion) into the permissive where no such permission exists, as we see with all the sexual laxity and abomination in our own day. And the two (and only two [1]) examples that do are carefully explained leaving no room for doubt or debate.

The 'Evidence' Marshalled by the Anti-Polygamists Refuted

Those that try to fit polygamy into this special category of 'disapproved but permitted' are forced to twist the Scriptures to make it fit. Four principle lines of evidence are offered:

• A. "God designed marriage for one man and one woman" (Gen.2:24). Nowhere, anywhere in Scrpture, does He says that, any more than He says He designed marriage to include more than one child or for kings to only possess one piece of gold or silver, or only own one horse (Dt.17:16-17). Plural marriage or polygamy is a man carrying out the Edenic mandate (marrying one woman) and carrying on marrying, like a couple having a child to then keep on having more children, or a woman buying one pair of shoes and then buying more pairs [2]. It's the same principle. Likewise Scripture states that a purpose of marriage is to be "one flesh" (Gen.2:24) and to create one or more childern. One-going 'one-fleshing' may thereafter continue to make a small or a large family. Furthermore, there is no evidence that plural marriage would end with the New Covenant in Christ else Isaiah 4:1 would not state that seven women would seek one man with a good reputation to start a family at the beginning of the millennium when, allegedly, there either won't be any more permissive polygamy or any marriage at all;

• B. "Many patriarchs had multiple wives which caused family pain and conflict." True, though this was not the fault of the practice itself but of the very flawed characters that made such families up, at least until they overcame the flesh as Jacob eventually did at the river Jabokk (Gen.32:24-30). In most cases the culprit was selfishness, and on one occasion adultery and murder (David, Bathseheba and Uriah), failure to discipline wayward children (David with Amnon - 2 Sam.13:21 - and Amnon - 1 Ki.1:5-6), and multiplying wives to excess (Solomon - 1 Ki.11:3) or marrying unbelievers (Solomon - 1 Ki.11:1-4, Ahab, etc.). No one who has worked as a marriage counsellor or pastor can deny the exact same problems exist within monogamy. What is the common factor betwween the two? Human nature, carnality, sin;

• C. "The Bible describes bitter results of these multi-wife families." So what? Are we to assume that conflicts that arise in any and all kosher relationship are because those relationship categories are 'disapproved' of, yet permitted by, God? Christ testifies that all families would be divided because of Him (Lk.12:51-53; Mt.10:34-38). Should we conclude that Christ is somehow 'bad', or that God disapproves of families but permits them anyway? You would think so the way most believers view the afterlife (see Eternal Echad Marriage). Or is the issue with individual, sinful human beings? I repeat, all relationships where imperfect, sinful human beings are involved bring conflicts. The bigger the family, potentially the bigger the conflicts, with the nation of Israel (and its final apostacy) being the prime examples, in spite of its advantages as God's own chosen people; and

• D. "God regulates how to treat multiple wives in laws like Exodus 21:10 instead of outright banning the practice." He also tells us how Israel, communities, clans and tribes are to handle their interpersonal relationships with one another in a godly way in His Torah 'instead of outright banning all such relationships' because of their high failure rate. Do you see the utter stupidity of the anti-polygamy train of thought? This is the kind of nonsense people come up with in an attempt to ban something that they hate but which God approves of and blesses when the parties involved are compliant with His laws. The fault does not lie with Father's marriage structure but with sinful human behaviour.

Examining the Difference Between God's Perfect & Permissive Will

Before I end my response it's as well to explore a little deeper this idea of God's 'ideal' or 'perfect will' and His 'permissive will'. There are some who claim such a distinction does not exist but these are usually Calvinists who deny free will. Such a distinction exists but we must be careful not to exploit it to defend unbiblical pet doctrines.

Conclusion

There is a clearly established designed order in God's creation, a divine pattern which is unalterable (this includes the nature of marriage and what the exact boundaries are) and which bring forth blessings when mankind submits to it. Nevertheless it is up to us whether we obey it or not. The following table, which includes an example from what we have been discussing, is a good summary to end with:

Dimension	Yahweh's Perfect Will	Yahweh's Permissive Will
1. Definition	Yahweh's ultimate desire, design and moral commandments (Torah)	What Yahweh allows to happen, despite His grief or disapproval
2. Human Freedom	Requires obedience to align with Yahweh's heart & Torah	Operates through human free agency, often driven by stubbornness
3. Yahweh's Response	Pleasure, blessing and spiritual alignment	Grief, correction and natural consequences
4. Example	Lifelong marriage covenant with one or more wives (Genesis 2)	Provision for divorce due to hard hearts (Mt.19)

Endnotes

[1] The case of alcohol permissions and forbiddings is a little different but perhaps might be included in this category. Under the Old Covenant limited alcohol consumption was permitted to the nation in moderation and only forbidden to the priests on duty in the Tabernacle or Temple. This law changed under the New Covenant because all true believers are now royal priests (1 Pet.2:9) on duty 24/7 in their bodies which collectively become the New Temple under Christ - the Body of Christ (1 Cor.12:12; 12:27; 10:17; Rom.12:4-5; 1 Cor.12:21-22; Col.1:8).

[2] The claim that Christ telling His apostles to take only one tunic, no extra clothes, no money and no weapons (Lk.9:3; Mk.6:8-9; Mt.10:9-10) in defence of monogamy-only breaks down when you consider that this was a requirement for a single, non-repeatable and short training exercise to teach them total trust, simple travel and shared community. After His resurrection and ascension, we find the apostles going on longer missions and taking their professions and even weapons with them to defend against bandits that were common along roads in those days (and in the case of the latter, with Christ's approval - Lk.22:36). Paul took his tent-making business with him so as not to be a burden to the local saints and develop a self-entitlement attitude (Ac.18:1-4; 1 Cor.4:12).

Author: SBSK