• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Isaac, Abraham, and polygyny

aineo

Moderator
Staff member
Real Person*
Male
As I have studied out polygyny, I've often read that Isaac and Rebekah are a model of monogamy and how marriage should be. I've quickly written that off, as there are way too many other examples of polygyny among the patriarchs, as we all know. However, I encountered a verse lately that caught my eye. When Isaac was blessing Jacob (instead of Esau), he stated the following:

Genesis 27:29 Be master of your brothers, And may your mother’s sons bow down to you.

As far as we are told in the Bible, Esau and Jacob were Isaac's only sons. However, here Isaac blesses Jacob to be master over his brothers. He further specifies that his mother's sons would bow down to him.

First off, I realize that brothers does not always mean brothers, but could also mean cousins or even descendants. Even so, it does say brothers. The same goes for sons - that could easily be explained as future generations, but it does say sons. That is not all that caught my eye though. Why first say "master of your brothers" then follow up by saying, "may your mother's sons bow down to you." Was there a difference? Were there brothers who were not his mother's sons?

I don't suppose we could ever prove this, but I do think it is interesting to consider. If nothing else, it makes it plausible that Isaac was also had multiple wives or concubines.

One other interesting point I found while reading about this. Some say that Abraham only had one concubine, Hagar, and two wives: Sarah and Keturah. However, look at this verse:

Genesis 25:5 Now Abraham gave all that he had to Isaac; but to the sons of his concubines, Abraham gave gifts while he was still living, and sent them away from his son Isaac eastward, to the land of the east.

I suppose one could argue that Keturah was a concubine too, but that isn't what the Bible says. Even if that were the case, it would add to the position that Keturah and Hagar are not the same person, which I don't believe they were anyhow. I think, however, it makes the point that Abraham had more than one concubine in addition to his wives.

* Note: I've searched the Bible for evidence that Rebekah was Isaac's only wife, and I've been unable to find that evidence without adding to what the Bible says, but I might be missing something. If so, please correct me.
 
Hmmmm, interesting. Could very well mean other siblings from other mothers, but yeah, we'll likely not find out in this life. Certainly not what I'd label as a strong argument when debating anti-poly people, but plausible. In many cases the full family just wasn't mentioned unless it was important to the events at hand. Like places we can *assume* there were multiple wives because the guy had 30 sons, but it doesn't specifically say.
 
I think Isaac is more valuable as a monogamist anyway. The mainstream likes to point out all of the turmoil in polygynous families and I think it's useful to point out that there is turmoil a-plenty in their monogamous examples.
 
Some time ago someone suggested here that Isaac may have had Downs or something similar. It's highly speculative. But, he seems unable to find himself a wife, Abraham specifically requires the servant not to take him to find a wife (was there a risk they wouldn't agree if they met him?), he is never mentioned to have any other wives or concubines other than the wife his father gives him, never seems to actually achieve much compared to his father and sons, late in life he is taken in by an incredibly simple deception most people would see straight through - and his mother was very old, increasing the likelihood of downs. If so, he illustrates how absolutely everyone is important, doesn't matter what their personal limitations may be. But again, we won't know in this life.
 
Re: Jacob's 'brothers' vs. 'mother's sons'

Here's a different train of thought about the variation of wording in Genesis 27:29: The 'brothers / mother's sons' passage is an example of chiasmus, in which it's normal to not repeat exact phrases.

Chiasmus is a literary form in which a pair of clauses (A and B) is repeated in reverse order (A,B/B,A). In this case:

A: master of
B: your brothers
B: your mother’s sons
A: bow down to you

Variations aside, A refers to a master/subject relationship and B refers to a certain cohort of males within the immediate family.

Wikipedia's article on chiastic structure suggests that it aided memorization of texts delivered orally (particularly since it can be applied to entire narratives; see the article's discussion of the book of Daniel).

Chiasmus also neatly correspondends to the teaching that 'the first shall be last, and the last shall be first'.
 
Back
Top