Christian Polygamy:

Most Christians today claim that Polygamy is un-biblical, I do not agree with this teaching. The Bible clearly teaches that Polygamy is an acceptable and holy lifestyle.  The reason I hear most often is that the Bible says a man is to only have ONE wife, Again this is just not true – In fact MANY godly people in the bible have multiple wives. Today I am going to deal with the most common barrier to polygamy.

The “One Wife” Argument:

The “Argument”: there are three “One Wife” Bible Verses 1- “A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one [3391] wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; ” (1_Timothy 3:2.) 2-“Let the deacons be the husbands of one [3391] wife, ruling their children and their own houses well. ” (1_Timothy 3:12.) 3-“If any [who would be an ELDER] be blameless, the husband of one [3391] wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.” (Titus 1:6.) These three “one wife” verses, of course, are only instructions to bishops, deacons, and elders and to no others in the Churches. Still, though, these three “one wife” verses are often the only “barrier” to help fellow Christians be able to see the Spirituality of Christian Polygamy.

A closer study of the Greek texts provides some deeper insight, that the translation to the word “ONE” is not necessarily an absolutely accurate translation for those “one wife” verses In the original texts of the Scriptures, the Greek word being translated to “one” in those three “one wife” verses is MIA. This may be quickly discovered by way of the “Strong’s number” for the translation of “one” in those verses. According to Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, that “Strong’s number”, in those verses, is [3391], which is, MIA. That Greek word, MIA, was, IN FACT, also translated as FIRST in a number of other passages throughout the Scriptures. The Bible simply teaches and establishes a  “first wife” principle of how bishops, deacons, and elders should not be divorced, that they still be married to their “FIRST wife”, namely the “wife of their youth” (Malachi 2:14,16), all in still naturally following the requirements of Exodus 21:10 and the doctrine of not putting away a wife as per Deuteronomy 24:1-4. (The principle of how the Scriptural reference, “wife of thy youth”, refers to a man’s “first wife” Indeed, while many see the “first wife” understanding, others take the view that the verses mean ” A wife”, while others still insist the passages mean ” ONE wife”.

It would seem that, even among those who already know that Christian Polygamy is Scriptural, there have also become varied denominational views as to the actual meaning of the “one wife” verses — a sort of new set of denominational divisions even among fellow believers in Christian Polygamy. Some suggest that if Paul had wanted to communicate “first wife” in those passages, he would have used “protos” instead. Could be. Perhaps. But that’s not a definitive. For indeed, there’s no definitive basis to say that it HAD to be “protos”. Why so? Because it could indeed just as easily be that he could use “MIA” for first. This is because other verses (e.g., Acts 20:7 and others) were also translated as “first” –and rightly so.

Matthew 28:1,

Mark 16:2,

Luke 24:1,

John 20:1,

John 20:19

Acts 20:7,

1_Corinthians 16:2,

Titus 3:10

Except for the last one there, all of those are about the “FIRST day of the week”, translating “MIA” as “FIRST”. In Titus 3:10, it is truly clear and correct that “MIA” had been translated as “first”: Example: “A man [444] that is an heretick [141] after [3326] the first [3391] and [2532] second [1208] admonition [3559] reject [3868] (5737);” (Titus 3:10.) So now while I fully understand language and use of feminine and all that, the fact remains that “MIA” CAN be translated as “first”. And likewise, one cannot insist that the Greek word, “protos” (as it is indeed translated as “first” several times in other verses), is the only word which would have been used if to convey the meaning of “first”. That is, one cannot exclude “MIA” from being translated as “first” by insisting that ONLY “protos” is the word which would have been used if the meaning of “first” was that which was being conveyed.   After all, if that were true, then what of those eight verses where “first” is NOT translated from “protos”, but rather from “MIA”? So what we have here is a pair of “COULD-BE’s”, with no definitive resolution. It CAN NOT be definitively declared that “MIA wife” in 1_Timothy 3:2,12 and Titus 1:6 COULD NOT have meant “first wife”.

LOTS MORE TO COME ON THIS SUBJECT!!!!