This article is written as a follow up to my initial treatise titled “On Plural Marriage.” If you have not read that piece yet, I encourage you to do so before reading this follow up.
To those in opposition of Biblical polygyny, many of you have simply responded with Ad Hominem attacks and socially programmed prejudice–this is not an effective nor fruitful means of engaging in debate. If I were caught in a grievous sin as you claim, your goal ought to be to gently rehabilitate me as the Word states “if anyone is caught in any transgression, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness” (Gal 6:1). Fellow followers of Jesus, have you obeyed this command? You should be trying to save me, not destroy me (2 Tim 2:25). For those with ears to hear, I hope you will restore decorum and begin to allow the Word of God to reform your previously held notions, or at the very least, compel you to return to loving your neighbor.
Despite the needless character assassinations, several of my opponents have made a good rebuttal against one of my, albeit small, arguments I put forth in my first post which I am responding to in this brief article. In order for both sides to remain intellectually honest during our discourse on polygyny, we must be willing to concede when one of our postulations is found wanting. Therefore, I must concede to this particular point:
I concede that Mia (G3391) had to be used in 1 Timothy 3:2 and Heis (G1520) in 1 Timothy 5:9 due to their being gendered phrases. In other words, regardless of intent, the Greek language requires Mia to be employed in 1 Timothy 3:2. To my opponents who respectfully pointed this grammatical rule out, thank you.
Does this concession dismantle my primary argument that mia ought to be translated as “first” in this instance? No, the grammatical necessity of using mia in 1 Timothy 3:2 does not negate the fact that mia can be, and in this case ought to be, translated as “first.” For example, mia is translated as an ordinal or sequential “first” in Matt 28:1, Mark 16:2, John 20:1, 19, Acts 20:7, 1 Cor 16:2, and Revelation 9:12. The Greek word is perhaps most obviously rendered as a sequential “first,” without an associated gender, in Revelation 9:12, which reads:
“The first (mia) woe has passed; behold, two woes are still to come.”
Revelation 9:12 (see Interlinear)
In a sequence of three judgements, mia is employed by the Apostle John to signify the “first” has passed. Therefore, in the case of 1 Timothy 3:2, mia should also be translated “first” for the following reasons:
Arguments in Favor of “First”
1. The Regulation Applies Only to Eldership
If the proper translation truly is that an Elder “must be… husband of (numeral) one wife,” it consequently implies that the general congregation of Believers are permitted by the Law of God to be plurally married. 1 Timothy 3:2 would then act as an approval for plural marriage as its peculiar prohibition applies only to Eldership, indicating those outside of office (such as Mormon or Muslim converts) may continue to practice polygyny.
2. Paul Disqualifies Himself… and Jesus…
If “husband of (numeral) one wife” is considered a literal requirement of Elders, the Apostle Paul disqualifies himself due to being unmarried. Do we truly believe that “must be… the husband of one wife” (1 Tim 3:2) is the intent of the passage? If a man “must be” married to serve in the Church, our Lord Jesus is then disqualified from Eldership due to His celibacy. I believe any reasonable mind will agree this is an absurd conclusion. In light of this, demanding a man must be married to be an Elder simply cannot be the intent of this phrase.
3. Serial Monogamy & Hypergamy are the Problem
Oxford Dictionary defines Serial Monogamy as “the fact or custom of having more than one husband, wife or sexual partner in your life, but only one at a time.” Likewise, Wikipedia defines Hypergamy as “a term used in social science for the act or practice of a person dating or marrying a spouse of higher social status than themselves.“
Considering the common practice of Serial Monogamy and Hypergamy among first century Romans and Hellenized Jews, Jesus repeatedly warns men not to divorce their first wife and marry another (see Matt 5:31-32, 19:9, Mark 10:11-12, Luke 16:18). This biblically unlawful practice of serial monogamy continues to this day as 40-50% of first marriages end in divorce in the United States, with many of the divorcees moving onto a new marriage (or sexual cohabitation). Among those filing for divorce, 69% of filings are initiated by the wife. As a result of these trends, how many today are Biblically defined as Adulterers (Mark 10:12) yet remain all too willing to throw stones at the Scripturally lawful practice of polygyny (Rom 2:1-4)?
“Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery.
Luke 16:18
In his letter to Timothy, Paul is addressing the common problem of Serial Monogamy–Elders must not be guilty of this particular sin. The Apostle to the Gentiles is remaining consistent with the Law pertaining to marriage as well as Christ’s teachings regarding divorce by disqualifying men who violate Malachi 2:15-16 by divorcing their first wife.
Did he not make them one, with a portion of the Spirit in their union? And what was the one God seeking? Godly offspring. So guard yourselves in your spirit, and let none of you be faithless to the wife of your youth. “For the man who does not love his wife but divorces her, says the Lord, the God of Israel, covers his garment with violence, says the Lord of hosts. So guard yourselves in your spirit, and do not be faithless.”
Malachi 2:15-16
4. Disqualifying Priests and Prophets is not Paul’s Intent
Paul is neither addressing nor prohibiting polygyny in his letters to Timothy and Titus. He is not, with a single phrase–mias gynaikos aner–disqualifying Abraham, Moses, David, or any other anointed Patriarch from ministry. Paul, a well educated Pharisee, is supremely aware that Levitical Priests presided over plural marriages (2 Chron 24:2-3) while some, like the Priest Elkanah (1 Chron 6:27)–the father of the Prophet Samuel–practiced polygyny (1 Sam 1:2) and remained in ministry with the Lord’s blessing. A sudden deviation from this lawful family structure endorsed and practiced by the Priesthood is inconsistent with the Biblical narrative as a whole.
What Paul is actually addressing in his regulations for Overseers remains a problem today, he is preventing Believers from divorcing their believing spouse and marrying another as this is true adultery. Elders who divorce their first wife then marry another, without repentance, cannot remain in ministry as they’re an adulterer. It does not matter that they’re technically monogamous, they’re disqualified from the pulpit. In a society that pays little attention to divorce and remarriage, the Holy Spirit remains eager to reveal this common sin of Adultery to the flock in order to protect us from judgement (Rom 2:5).
Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous.
Hebrews 13:4
5. Unprecedented Deviation from Scripture
The Word of God is consistent, it doesn’t contradict itself. When considering the whole of Scripture, 1 Tim 3:2’s sudden deviation from the plethora of Laws and narratives permitting polygyny in the Bible is simply inconsistent with the other inspired texts (e.g. Ex 21:10, Deut 21:15-17, 2 Chron 24:2-3, 2 Sam 12:8, Matt 25:1-12, 2 Cor 11:2, 1 Cor 7:2 see Greek, Jer 3:8, Gen 4:19, 16:3-4, 29:21-30, 30:4, 9, 18, Judges 8:30, 1 Sam 1:2, 1 Sam 25:43, 1 Chron 14:3, 2 Chron 11:21, 13:21, Isa 4:1, Song 6:9-10, Ruth 4:11).
For a major change of Marriage Law to occur, there would need to be additional witnesses beyond Paul–including Christ and the other Apostles (see Gal 2:2)–demanding numeral “one” wife among the flock. There is no such requirement from any other author of Scripture. Instead, their collective focus is on compelling men not to divorce their first wife to marry another–they never give any prohibition for marrying both (Ex 21:10).
“…Every fact is to be confirmed by the testimony of two or three witnesses.”
2 Corinthians 13:1
The consistent goal of the Old Testament and New Testament regarding marriage is that a man faithfully provides for any lawfully available woman he enters as well as any children he creates. For example, Exodus 22:16 requires a man to pay the bride price and marry any virgin he seduces. Meanwhile, Exodus 21:10 requires the married man who enters a second woman lawfully to continue providing for both (hence Jesus commanding men not to divorce their first wife in Matt 19:9 and elsewhere). Likewise, Deuteronomy 21:15-17 commands the plurally married man to provide the inheritance to the firstborn son of his first wife.
If he takes another wife to himself, he shall not diminish her food, her clothing, or her marital rights.
Exodus 21:10
The Scripturally consistent requirement of men in the Old and New Testament is for them to take responsibility for any lawfully available woman they enter as well as any offspring they produce. This is so significant a requirement that Jesus warns us that men who divorce their wives are adulterers (Matt 5:31-32, 19:9)–and no unrepentant adulterer has eternal life (1 Cor 6:9). Paul warns men who don’t provide for their families have become apostates and fallen from the faith:
But if anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.
1 Timothy 5:8
For the Record
In light of the many commandments and responsibilities placed upon a Husband, my answer is “No” you will not compel me to divorce a first or second wife to maintain socially imposed monogamy while the Scriptures require me to provide for both wives and their children. In the same manner, I say “No” you will not compel me to make any of my children fatherless by putting a wife away, nor will I subject them to being raised by a man not their father when I am enthusiastic to do so myself.
In this matter I share the same sentiment as the Reformer Martin Luther:
“My conscience is captive to the Word of God. Thus I cannot and will not recant, for going against my conscience is neither safe nor salutary. I can do no other, here I stand, God help me.”
Acta et res gestae D. Martini Lutheri in Comitiis Principum Wormatiae
(Acts and Deeds of Dr. Martin Luther at the Diet of Worms)
What if Polygyny is God’s Work?
If you have read my first article on the topic, then you’re now aware that our Father in Heaven explicitly states He gave David multiple wives, and that He would have given him more if He felt it was necessary (2 Sam 12:7-8). In expressing His displeasure with David’s adultery, the Lord contrasts the righteousness of David’s lawful plural unions with the wickedness of uniting with another man’s wife.
… Thus says the Lord, the God of Israel, ‘I anointed you king over Israel, and I delivered you out of the hand of Saul. And I gave you your master’s house and your master’s wives into your arms and gave you the house of Israel and of Judah. And if this were too little, I would add to you as much more.
2 Samuel 12:7-8
At the very least, this passage reveals that Plural Marriage can be a divinely ordained event alongside Celibacy (Matt 19:12) and Monogamy (Gen 2:22). Considering Jesus’ definitive statement “God has joined” in Matthew 19:6, it is evident that all lawful unions between a man and a woman are divine as each individual marriage is its own unique Genesis 2:24 “one flesh” union (e.g. Gen 29:23, 29:30).
So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.
Matthew 19:6
Furthermore, it is God’s Word which says that a man finding a wife is good, and that she is a sign of favor from the Lord.
He who finds a wife finds a good thing and obtains favor from the Lord.
Proverbs 18:22
In the same way, His Word declares children are also a good gift from Him. Among those who claim to be Pro-Life, I’ve seen very little celebration of the precious life forming in my second wife’s womb–is that child not a gift from God? King Solomon, the polygamist our Lord selected to build the Holy Temple and write a substantial amount of Scripture, writes:
Behold, children are a heritage from the Lord,
Psalm 127:3-5
the fruit of the womb a reward.
4 Like arrows in the hand of a warrior
are the children of one’s youth.
5 Blessed is the man
who fills his quiver with them!
He shall not be put to shame
when he speaks with his enemies in the gate.
Solomon sinned on account of his taking foreign wives who turned his heart from the Lord in his latter days (see Nehemiah 13:26). Nevertheless, his being plurally married and proliferating children for Israel is never construed as evil by Scripture. In fact, his wives set a good example for plurally married women by enthusiastically welcoming and praising one of Solomon’s new wives in Song of Solomon 6:8-10.
With so much Biblical support for polygyny, and not a single verse prohibiting its practice, it would be wise for those in opposition to heed the words of Gamliel. When the High Priest and Pharisees were passionately opposed to the Apostle Peter and the other Disciples regarding their beliefs about the Messiah, he warned:
So in the present case I tell you, keep away from these men and let them alone, for if this plan or this undertaking is of man, it will fail; but if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them. You might even be found opposing God!” So they took his advice…
Acts 5:38-39
Love Thy Neighbor
When considering sensitive matters such as these, we must be “quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger; for the anger of man does not produce the righteousness of God” (James 1:19-20). Too many have responded with emotion rather than prayerful consideration and careful study of the Scriptures (Acts 17:11). Polygyny is most certainly presented as a righteous family structure practiced by many of our fathers in the faith. Furthermore, it is evident in Scripture the Lord can give a plurality of wives (2 Sam 12:8, Luke 18:29-30), the Lord brings a lawful wife (Gen 2:22, Prov 18:22), and the Lord creates our precious children (Ps 127:3-5, Ps 139:13-16). If the Lord is at work in this matter, and the majority are in error on His Word, then many have declared His good works as evil and brought shame upon themselves at the Judgement (Matt 12:36-37).
Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!
Isaiah 5:20
Likewise woe to those who intend to do our family harm–they neglect to remember the Royal Law which compels all believers to Love Thy Neighbor and do them no harm (Rom 13:10, Luke 6:27). Do you want hundreds to scream adulterer (in error) at you online? Do you want others to attempt to have your children removed from your home? Do you want others to try and cut off your income to ensure your family becomes homeless? Do you want to be wrongly accused of criminal misconduct when none has been done? Do you wish to be excommunicated from attending church? Then do not do these things to your neighbor, particularly your Brethren in Christ!
So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.
Matthew 7:12
I am convinced the Lord brought both of my wives to me in the same way He’s given me many children, I am not ashamed of His good work. Those failing to understand the Divinity of Marriage doctrine do so to their own dismay. Their refusing God’s Word regarding plural marriage is producing their own internal distress resulting in further rebellion evidenced by their engaging in gossip, slander, and in some cases, harm to our family. Are these behaviors no longer regarded as sin by the faithful?
Do not go about spreading slander among your people.
Do not do anything that endangers your neighbor’s life. I am the Lord.
Leviticus 19:16
Farewell
In the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus declared “I did not come to bring peace, but a sword” (Matt 10:34-36). No doubt about it, the Word is a Sword (Heb 4:12) which divides those who believe from those who do not (1 Cor 11:19). Furthermore, proclaiming and practicing God’s Word is always right, even when it causes backlash (2 Tim 4:2). My fellow Believers in Jesus, I urge you to believe the Word of God on any matter it discusses, including polygyny, and you’ll have internal peace and we will walk in peace with one another as well–“turn away from evil and do good; seek peace and pursue it” (Ps 34:14).
In closing, thank you for taking the time to read this response, there will be more. Be sure to subscribe to my newsletter in order to receive notification of new articles and the release of my book Smash the Matriarchy (I’ve written over 50k words)! May the Lord Jesus bless you in your walk with Him.
If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all.19 Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.”20 To the contrary, “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head.” 21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.
Romans 12:18-21
So if it’s okay/good for a man to have multiple wives (with procreation as the goal), is it also okay/good for a woman to have multiple husbands with the same goal in mind?
No, male and female regulations differ throughout Scripture. Procreation is the primary purpose of intercourse (Gen 1:28) and of marriage itself (Mal 2:15). Naturally, a man may physically procreate with several women yet a woman can only procreate with one at a time (see Augustine ‘On the Good of Marriage’). Legally, a woman can only have one believing husband at a time and is only released when he dies.
“For the married woman is bound by law to her husband while he is living; but if her husband dies, she is released from the law concerning the husband. So then, if while her husband is living she is joined to another man, she shall be called an adulteress; but if her husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is not an adulteress though she is joined to another man.” – Romans 7:2-3
There are many who claim to be very good at Greek and many are, but what was understood 2000 years ago vs today may very well not be the same. I have taken mia to be “a” in 1 Timothy 3:2. Better said the verse just means an Elder must be married. It is a positive must be statement. I believe that in the Hebrew and Greek there is unity of faith and doctrine. In this regard “must be married” is consistent with the rest of scripture.
[…] In 1 Timothy 3:2, Paul utilizes the Greek word “MIA” (G3391) which we translated as “one” in English. Although mia may translate as an indefinite “one” or “a”, in the context of marriage in 1 Timothy 3:2, “mia” means ordinal “first” (Matt 28:1, Mark 16:2, 1 Cor 16:2, Rev 9:12 all translated mia as first). If Paul intended to communicate a man must have numeral “one” wife to be in ministry, he would have employed the word “HEIS” (G1520) as he did in 1 Timothy 5:9 (the same epistle) because “heis” exlplicitly means numeral “one” (e.g. “one God” – Eph 4:6). — Mia must be used in 1 Timothy 3:2 as a grammatical rule, read my response titled “The Mia & Heis Saga.” […]