Pastor Randy's Blog

It should be recognized that God does not “condone” polygyny. I believe that it is important to make this as clear and as accurate as possible. As you will see, God doesn’t merely “condone” the practice of plural marriage. God approves of plural marriage throughout the Bible!

Dictionary.com - “Condone”

1. to disregard or overlook (something illegal, objectionable, or the like).

A. God does not consider polygyny illegal or objectionable. If this were the case, He would not have made provision for polygyny in His Holy Law, nor used Himself as an example of a practicing polygynist!

B. He does not disregard or overlook sin. If this were the case, then the Cross of Christ has no value! God does not condone sin in His people! He never has and never will. God is 100% Holy. God brings people to repentance over their sin through many means, but that is not the same as “overlooking sin".

2. to give tacit approval to: By his silence, he seemed to condone their behavior.

A. God actually gave more than tacit approval to polygyny. He regulated it in His Law. In fact, He made it so that in some cases men were forced to practice polygyny (Levirite Law).

B. God’s silence against His people doesn’t give “tacit approval", for there was not need for God to speak against a practice that He allowed for in His own Law. His approval was already given. The silence of God merely confirmed it!

3. to pardon or forgive (an offense); excuse.

A. There isn’t any passage where God informed His people that they needed pardon or forgiveness for practicing polygyny.

B. Pardon or forgiveness was never necessary for practicing polygyny.

4. to cause the condonation of.

The actions of practicing polygynists did not require an action of condonation.

5. to forgive or act so as to imply forgiveness of (a violation of the marriage vow).

There was never a need for God to forgive an action that He made provision for in His Law. So, in reality, based upon the primary definition of “condone", God does not condone, that is, overlook sin. God approves of plural marriage - period!

“Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with [your wife(s)] according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.” (1 Peter 3:7)

Chivalry[1] is a term “associated with the ideals of knightly virtues, honour and courtly love”.[2] Today we apply the term to describe courteous behavior of men towards women. There was a time that chivalry was broken down into Warrior Chivalry, in which the knight’s chief duty was to his lord. Religious Chivalry, in which the knight’s chief duty was to protect the innocent and serve God; and Courtly Love Chivalry, in which a knight’s chief duty was to his lady.[3] These knights represented a noble class of people who were considered trusted servants of their king. It was their duty to give honor not only to their leaders and God, but to also give honor towards their lady.
As men of God, we husbands, like the knights of old, also represent a noble class of people. We are not only part of a chosen generation, but we are also part of a royal priesthood,[4] and are considered trusted servants of the King of kings. As trusted nobility we have a specific calling from God towards our wives, which brings me to “The Call to Biblical Chivalry”. Although chivalry isn’t mentioned in the Scripture, the practice of chivalry is encouraged by the passage above, that is, the practice of “giving honour unto the wife”.
What does it mean to give honor to our wives? “Honor” comes from the Greek word “timē ” (pronounced tee-may’), to “esteem”, give “dignity” and to give “recognition”. In fact, it is the same Greek word the angels use when describing the worth of God in their worship.[5] Ancient Greece used the word to ascribe “regard” or “respect” to “an exalted personage”.[6] It means God expects His Royal Priesthood, His Christian Nobility, to honor their wives as if they were honoring God! Is this really what God expects? Absolutely! Do you remember when Christ was sharing about the difference between the sheep and goats in Matthew 25? He made it abundantly clear that how we treated others was how we treated our King! He said “…inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye have done it unto me.”[7]
In practical terms, it is the act of showing deference for the needs of our wives over our own needs.[8] Let me tie the above concepts together for us. If the King of kings came to live with us, would we open the door for Him when getting into the car? If He asked us to take out the trash would we tell Him, “I will get to it later?” If He came from the store after buying groceries, would He need to ask us to help Him bring in the groceries? If during a televised football game He asked us to do something, would we tell Him that we would do to it later? I know that I certainly wouldn’t!
We are called to be “continuously giving honor”(Gr.)[9] to our wives. This isn’t something that we are to do only when we are at church, or a retreat, or in public. How we treat our ladies not only reflects upon how we treat our king, it also reflects upon our king. Just as the knights were reflections of their king, we are reflections of our King! So, showing honor is “Biblical Chivalry!” It is the act of Christian Nobility selflessly deferring to our ladies by loving them as Christ loves the Church!

1 It is derived from the French word chevalier, indicating one who rides a horse (Fr. Cheval).
2 Chivalry. (2008). In Wikipedia [Web]. Retrieved May 31, 2008, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chivalric
3 Chivalry. (2008). In Wikipedia [Web]. Retrieved May 31, 2008, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chivalric
4 1 Peter 2:9: But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:
5 Revelation 7:11-12: And all the angels stood round about the throne, and about the elders and the four beasts, and fell before the throne on their faces, and worshipped God, Saying, Amen: Blessing, and glory, and wisdom, and thanksgiving, and honour, and power, and might, be unto our God for ever and ever. Amen.
6 Kittel, G. (Ed.). τιμή, τιμάω. In Theological Dictionary of the New Testament Grand Rapids: Vol. VIII). Wm.B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
7 Matthew 25:40: And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.
8 Matthew 25:40: And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.
9 απονέμοντες = nom. pl. masc. Part. Pres. Act. from απονέμω. The Present Tense includes the concept of “continuous action”.

Men, we who believe in plural marriage need to be the standard bearers of “loving leadership”. The world has already seen enough examples of “domineering leadership”, but knows very little of loving leadership. The Word of God tells us that husbands are to love their wives as Christ loves the Church (Ephesians 5:25). What does this look like in practical terms? The following comparison is designed to help you and me to become those leaders that God has called us to be!

Loving Husband

*Leads family towards God’s goals
*Has family’s best interest in mind
*Provides an example to follow
*Recognizes others’ limitations
*Demonstrates personal concern
*Shows sacrificial love
*Releases others’ potential
*Is a humble channel of Holy Spirit
*Remains open to correction
*Values others’ opinions
*Evidences a humble spirit
*Demonstrates a servant’s heart
*Gives credit where credit is due
*Brings others to maturity
*Uses discipline to help others

Domineering Husband

*Leads family towards self-interests
*Has own best interests in mind
*Expects conformity with no model
*Drives others beyond their limits
*Takes people for granted
*Takes advantage of people
*Stifles others’ development
*Proclaims self-assumed authority
*Is not adjustable
*Ignores others’ opinions
*Evidences an air of superiority
*Expects others always to serve him
*Takes credit for what others do
*Makes others dependent on him
*Uses discipline to punish

{Adapted from (Iverson, Dick (1979). Principles of Family Life. Portland: BT Publishing.)}

I know all of us men who love the Lord understand how important it is to allow the Holy Spirit to develop His fruit in our lives. I hope this helps you think through your own attitudes as a man, leader or husband.

Britain is opening some interesting doors for those of us who believe that polygyny is allowable. The leading British Newspaper website, Telegraph.co.uk, just reported April 4th, 2008, that Britain is giving the go ahead to husbands with multiple wives to claim extra welfare benefits! The only stipulation was that the polygamous weddings had to have taken place in countries where plural marriage arrangements are legal. The article suggests that the estimate is that it may represent as many as 1000 families.

The article also reports that all the income support will be paid directly into the husband’s bank account if the family makes this request. Moreover, a husband with plural wives may be eligible for additional housing benefits as well as council tax benefit to reflect the larger property needed for a larger family.

Many people are up in arms over this because polygny is illegal in the United Kingdom, and this will certainly work towards eroding away any laws against polygamy. In Britain, bigamy is punishable by up to seven years in prison. Chris Grayling, the shadow work and pensions secretary in Brtain said, “This sets a precedent that will lead to more demands for the culture of other countries to be reflected in UK law and the benefits system.”

If the reason for this major change is merely because of Muslim pressure, then I would disagree with the reason for their decision, but I believe that women and children who legitimately have financial needs should receive the same benefits as those who are in monogomous households, or single parents. Please do not misunderstand me. I do not advocate lazy husbands not assuming responsibility for their families, whether they represent monogomous or polygynous households. If a man “provide not for his own, and especially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel (1 Timothy 5:8).” However, if there are legitimate needs, then all those who need them should have them available.

I do hope the overall effect of this change is that polygyny is recognized as a legitimate union between loving partners. It is about time that any prohibition against polygyny be banished from all civilized countries!

A few years back, Pastor Louis P. Sheldon, Chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition wrote an editorial titled “Constitutional Attorney Sees Polygamy As Next Stage Of Sexual Revolution". In it he shared his fears over America’s future if the “traditional marriage” isn’t preserved. His article was specifically inspired by the arguments of the constitutional scholar at George Washington Law School, Jonathan Turley, “that polygamy is the next logical step in the goal of social activists to overturn any remaining barriers to the redefining of marriage”.

Pastor Sheldon substantiates why one should be afraid for America’s future if polygamy (along with other non-traditional unions) is legalized. He begins with Historian J.D. Unwin in 1934, “Sex and Culture". “Unwin surveyed the destruction of 86 different cultures throughout history.” He “discovered something very shocking: Every society that rejected monogamy in marriage and pre-marital chastity, did not last longer than a generation afterward.” Pastor Sheldon also cites Sociologist Pitirim Sorokin, “writing in The American Sex Revolution, found essentially the same thing in his study of sexual immorality as it relates to cultural decline. He predicted in the late 1960s that America was committing “voluntary suicide” through unrestrained sexual indulgence.” His third proof is from Historian Edward Gibbon, in The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, where he “observed that the empire crumbled in large measure because of sexual immorality. A similar decline befell Greece when it degenerated into sexual orgies, homosexuality, and drunkenness.”

As Sheldon see it, “The battle over traditional marriage is, in fact, a battle to preserve our civilization from tumbling into the ash heap of history—as many civilizations have gone before.” He then explains that the fate of this nation is one generation from a complete moral and social collapse, unless we heed 2 Chronicles 7:14: “If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land.”

Although I would agree with Sheldon that immorality breaks down a culture, I think that it is intellectually dishonest for someone to place polygamy, especially polygyny, in the same category. Now I understand, that with his presuppositions, he can’t help but view polygyny through the grid of immorality. However, if he would review the books that he quotes, intellectual honesty would force him to see that the breakdown of the past civilizations did not result from Biblically practiced polygyny. It came from violations of Biblical principles outside the categories of polygyny.

By lumping polygamy in with sexual immorality, he forces himself into some real problems. He fails to recognize distinctions between God approved Biblical marriages and immorality. He makes unwarranted associative jumps from what is written in those he cites by including Biblically authorized polygyny on his immorality list. He practices the art of “non sequitur”, making conclusions which “do not follow”, by saying that the downfall of America will result, at least partly, from the practice of polygamy. I don’t know about you, but it seems to me that if one is going to write so condemning of a practice, one should be careful with precision.

I suppose that one of the most interesting ironies of his article is the quote from 2 Chronicles about God’s people turning from their wicked ways. Does he not realize that the antecedent for this passage is the Law, which allows for polygyny? The Bible does not require one to turn from a Biblically allowed practice!

Since healing of the land is tied to turning from wicked ways, and since Biblical polygyny is allowed, I believe it is included as one aspect of healing for our culture. For example, to quote my friend Nathan, “some say that all the good men are taken. If the good men are suddenly not all ‘taken” but available, the guys that treat women poorly will quickly realize they better shape up if they want to have a woman in their life.” Women who run to make “easy money” as prostitutes would have a legitimate option for a caring provider. Widows and single women would not be forced to a pool of available men from the dregs of society. To be honest, I haven’t even begin to elucidate on all the cultural benefits of responsible Biblical polygyny.

Even though Sheldon proclaims that polygamy is one of the “looming threats to traditional marriage”, and if legalized will help to ensure “America will tumble into the ash heap of history”, I believe that turning from our wicked ways includes embracing all of God’s Laws,* including acceptance of plural marriage. Returning to God’s Law is the beginning of national healing!!

*Subject for future blog.