The Polygamy Question

Recent court cases in Utah as well as the "slippery-slope" argument many Christians make based on current mostly-secular attempts to re-define marriage (e.g. "same-sex" or "gay" marriage) made me think about polygamy.  No, it didn't cause me to consider polygamy for myself...but it caused me to think about the history of the institution and whether it might be employed or accepted again in the church as well as outside of the church.  For the record, I am NOT an advocate of polygamy nor do I believe the Bible approves in it in the same way it does man+woman marriage.  However, I think there are several issues that we need to be aware of - especially Christians who either will lump polygamy in the same Biblical category as same-sex marriage or who will caution that it (polygamy) is just the next step in the slippery slope down from acceptance of same-sex marriage.  Below you will some thoughts of mine, lifted and edited from (as usual) some Facebook comments I made to a post. 

One would expect that the Scripture would have a stronger condemnation against heterosexual polygamy - akin to the indisputable and obvious condemnation (death sentence for example) it offers against homosexual activity.  Since a marriage implies sexual activity, it stands to reason that a homosexual "marriage" would be equally condemned by God even though the Bible itself is silent concerning the prohibition of same-sex/homosexual marriage - but this is because marriage is already defined in Scripture by Jesus in Matthew 19 and Genesis 2 as a union between a man and a woman.  Therefore, the Bible simply does not consider same-sex "marriage" to be marriage, so it doesn't talk about it.  However, even though Scripture defines marriage as a union between TWO of the opposite sex, we often find instances of one man + multiple wives which are not condemned outright.  In fact, often these same men are praised by God - albeit for things other than their plural marriage.  To make a thought comparison, one would not expect a homosexual Jacob or other patriarch, or a homosexual King David (No, don't even try and suggest he and Jonathan had a homosexual relationship) to receive like praise and blessing from God as the Biblical polygamous Jacob and David do.  I believe one could even envision a church or churches, otherwise orthodox, and especially those strongly advocating "patriarchy" (father-rule) becoming either tacitly or boldly accepting of polygamous marriages in the near-future provided that the husbands in such marriages do not seek church office - (since there is explicit Biblical instruction regarding that those seeking and keeping church office be husbands of ONE wife.)

If the Church is faced with polygamous families and men seeking church membership, I think families and men should be welcomed.  Divorcing or "putting away" wives who are probably significantly dependent on the husband's financial provision - not to mention the damage caused by severance of children/mother ties that would necessarily ensue, would be cruel and sinful in God's eyes unless it were a direct command coming from Him. However, those in such marriages should not seek church office and should also be confirmed to acknowledge that the God-given design of marriage is 1 man + + 1 woman.  Traditional, Biblical, Jesus-defined 1 man + 1 woman marriages should continue to be promoted by the Church as God's preferred arrangement.   

What about polygamous marriage and the secular culture?  What about polygamous marriages and theologically liberal churches?  I think the modern mainstream/liberal "Church" will be loathe to accept polygamy even though they are quick to accept and embrace homosexuality and same-sex "marriage." In other words, though acceptance may be a logical slippery slope, the logical slippery slope would not necessarily result in acceptance. Why? Homosexuality and same-sex marriage is acceptable to the secular culture of the West - and the churches who follow the "world" rather than the WORD (or who follow the WORD only when it agrees with the "world") object to polygamy not because it doesn't conform to Scripture's definition of marriage, but because they believe it subordinates women. In other words, it goes completely against the Feminist agenda and would move womens' rights (as they see it) backward more than Biblical man-woman marriage.  Therefore, polygamy and polygamous marriage would be abhorrent to them.  For them (these churches) polygamy would always be extreme and unacceptable; homosexuality and same-sex marriage loving and acceptable.

Here's another thought: Even though the The LDS "Church" is known historically for its past practice of polygamy, the LDS church (now) actually has better grounds to militate against polygamy than traditional Bible-believing Christians - especially Sola Scriptura Reformation-minded Protestant Christians. Why? They (Mormons) don't have a closed canon. They always have a living "apostle" to steer the ship - doctrinally and otherwise. So, when their then-living prophet said that polygamy was to be no more, they were internally consistent when they subsequently abandoned it and forbade it.  The Roman Catholic Church also will have an easier time being internally consistent regarding prohibition of polygamy; they have the Magisterium and the pope.  Biblical Protestant Christians on the other hand don't have that handy "thus saith the Lord" type of condemnation ready to issue.  It will be interesting to see history unfold.  For as for me and my house, we're staying non-polygamous!