Polygamist Spotlight #3 - Avraham

One of the most famous, and least understood polygamist in scripture is Avraham.  This man was the first Hebrew (crossed over).  According to history and legend he left his pagan father's house and set out to find and worship the One True El.  Consider the following excerpt from Tom Shipley's "Man and Woman in Biblical Law"




B'reisheet 16:1-4:
1 Now Sarai, Abram’s wife, bare him no children: and she had a handmaid, a Mitsrite, whose name was Hagar. 2 And Sarai said unto Abram, Behold now, יהוה  hath restrained me from bearing: I pray thee, go in unto my maid; it may be that I may obtain children by her. 3 And Sarai, Abram’s wife, took Hagar her maid, the Mitsrite, after Abram had dwelt ten years in the land of Canaan, and gave her to her husband Abram to be his wife. 4 And he went in unto Hagar, and she
conceived...


Of all the examples of polygamy in Scripture, Avraham’s is one of the most relevant to the question of the lawfulness thereof. John Knox, the great Reformer, once argued that the Biblical incidents or examples of polygamy cannot inform us of the issue of law:


“The men that object the same are not altogether ignorant that examples have no strength when the question is of law. As if I should ask, what marriage is lawful? And it should be answered that lawful it is to a man, not only to have many wives at once, but it is also lawful to marry two sisters and to enjoy them both living at once, because that David, Jacob, and Solomon, servants of God, did the same. I trust that no man would justify the vanity of this reason...for examples may establish no law (emph. supp.-T.S.), but we are bound to the law written and to the commandment expressed in the same.” —John Knox, “The First Blast of the Trumpet Against the Monstrous Regiment of Women,” pg. 63-64


I have no qualm with Knox’s logic here. It is sound. An example of conduct certainly does not justify the conduct or establish any kind of norm. I trust that the reader will perceive that such is not the argument being advocated here. It is to be wished that the monogamy-only proponents would be rationally consistent in advocating this point when it comes to the example of Adam’s supposed monogamy, and confess that “examples may establish no law.”


Knox’s comments, however, treat the subject of polygamy as if it exists in isolation, apart from other textual factors which contribute to an understanding of polygamy’s legal status. For example, if all we know about the man is that he was a polygamist, then this tells us nothing about the legal status of polygamy. But if we add to the fact of polygamy the additional fact that the man was declared by יהוה Himself to be a righteous and obedient man of    יהוה , then this certainly is relevant to the question of the lawfulness of polygamy. For if polygamy is disobedience against   יהוה  , then the man who is a polygamist cannot be declared obedient.


If polygamy is nothing but the heinous sin of adultery, then a man’s polygamy must reflect negatively upon the moral evaluation of the polygamist. But if we know that the polygamist was righteous, then a strong presumption, if not certainty, is created in favor of the proposition that polygamy is lawful. Adultery is not a peccadillo in   יהוה ’s eyes. It is a “great” and heinous sin. It is a form of wickedness for which the Scripture commands the death penalty. Adultery, especially continual unrepented of adultery, cannot be simply overlooked or ignored.


John Knox’s valid logical observation that an example of conduct cannot settle a question of law is just too simplistic to answer the question of the relevance of David’s, Jacob’s, and Solomon’s polygamy. David, Jacob, and Solomon (despite later failures) were all righteous men. They were also polygamists. Moreover, when David committed murder and adultery, he was severely rebuked and punished for both of these sins. Yet nowhere was he (or anyone else) ever condemned for polygamy. How is this to be explained except by the proposition that polygamy is lawful? If it be objected that, “If the polygamy of a righteous man implies the lawfulness of polygamy, then why can’t we turn the logic right around and conclude that the polygamy of an unrighteous man implies the unlawfulness of polygamy?” We have already touched upon this question in regard to Lamech. Many aspects of the lives of the righteous and unrighteous are the same. The fact that many of the unrighteous do many of the lawful things that the righteous do does not make them righteous. The unrighteous are so by virtue of the fact that there remain other sins unrepented of. If, then, polygamy constitutes adultery, or is otherwise unlawful, then he who practices polygamy and does not repent must be counted among the unrighteous. If a polygamist is otherwise unrighteous (i.e., Lamech), this tells us nothing of the status of polygamy. But if we know both that a man is righteous and also a polygamist, then we may rationally conclude that polygamy is lawful. There is another exegetical factor in regard to Avraham and Ya'akov which makes the lawfulness of polygamy virtually certain even without any other supporting evidence.


Consider B'reisheet 18:17-19:
17 And   יהוה  said, Shall I hide from Avraham that thing which I do; 18 Seeing that Avraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth blessed in him? 19 For I know him, that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of   יהוה  .


And one more relevant statement regarding Abraham:
Because that Avraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws. —B'reisheet 26:5


יהוה’s statement to Ya'akov in B'reisheet 26:5 plainly shows that His revelation to Avraham of His laws was very extensive. Unquestionably, the proper regulation of marriage is included in this statement (e.g. Genesis 20). We are explicitly told directly from the mouth of   יהוה   Himself that both Avraham and his household would “keep the way of   יהוה  ,” and then after the fact, that Avraham had in fact done so. Now “keeping” the way of   יהוה   obviously excludes the notion that Avraham violated the way of   יהוה  , yet if we are to believe the traditional line about polygamy, then Avraham was an egregious unrepentant violator of   יהוה  ’s Law. And, indeed, if polygamy constitutes adultery, or is otherwise unlawful, then that conclusion is inescapable. One cannot commit a “great” sin and live in it for many years without repentance, and still be said to be obedient or righteous. The conclusion to be drawn from these considerations is inevitable: if Avraham and Ya'akov kept the way of   יהוה   and were also polygamists, then it follows by logical necessity that polygamy must be lawful.


Shipley does a beautiful job here of illustrating the lawfulness of polygamy through the example of Avraham. However, I think that two very important points are left out.


1)  As I have pointed out several times in past posts, Avraham, who had at least three wives, is used as an example of righteousness by our Master, Yahushua.


Mattithyahu 8:11 And I say to you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Avraham, and Yitzchak, and Yaakov, in the malchut ha shamayim.


The very company of these men (at least two of the three were polygamists) is promised by our Master as a reward for the faithful.  If these men were perverted adulterers, would Yahushua have made such a promise?


Rav Sha'ul, who warned many times about adultery and sexual perversion included our father, Avraham in his list of the faithful in Ivrim 11.




8 By emunah Avraham, when he was called to go out into
a place that he would later receive as an inheritance,
obeyed; and he went out, not knowing where he
was going.
9 By emunah he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a
strange country, dwelling in tents with Yitzchak and
Yaakov, the heirs with him of the same promise: 1
10 For he looked for a city that has foundations, whose
Builder and Maker is  יהוה .


Avraham is sited as a man who obeyed on faith!

So we have the testimonies of יהוה, Moshe, Yahushua and Sha'ul that Avraham was a righteous, obedient man of faith.  How dare anyone claim that polygamists are perverts who only want to satisfy the lusts of the flesh!  Shame on you!  These men were MARRIED according to  יהוה . They were righteous according to יהוה.  If your definitions of marriage and perversion don't align with  יהוה 's, then YOU need to repent and fall in line with Him - not the other way around!


2) While not technically a polygamist, I think much can be said about Sarah in the life of Avraham.  Sarah was also listed by Sha'ul in the roll call of great faith.  She gave her husband her maid to be his wife in order for him to  be able to produce children while in her barren condition.  She obeyed her husband and called him "Adon" (Master).  She is sighted as the role model for wives everywhere.  So much can be said about Sarah that I want to devote an entire article about her at a later time.  For now, let us all pray that women everywhere will follow her example and become obedient wives submitted to the authority of their patriarchal heads.