David had multiple wives ---when did monogamy start?

[AnneTeresa]

Ok, I know Adam and Eve are often used by the church to support the one man/one woman concept of marriage. But if you read the old Testament you see that men used to have multiple wives. King David had several wives with children by each of them. The sin he had with Bathsheba was different (she was someone else’s wife) and so that was why that was a sin.

So my question is, when did monogamy start and when did the church begin to say marriage was one man/ one woman? And when did it become a sin to have multiple wives?

This really concerns me because so many times people defend marriage and the church’s sexual morals by Adam and Eve but apparently it was ok to have different morals at least in OT times.

 

[athenasius]

This has been on my mind too. I am just subscribing to find out.

 

[SonCatcher]

Ok, I know Adam and Eve are often used by the church to support the one man/one woman concept of marriage. But if you read the old Testament you see that men used to have multiple wives. King David had several wives with children by each of them. The sin he had with Bathsheba was different (she was someone else’s wife) and so that was why that was a sin.

So my question is, when did monogamy start and when did the church begin to say marriage was one man/ one woman? And when did it become a sin to have multiple wives?

This really concerns me because so many times people defend marriage and the church’s sexual morals by Adam and Eve but apparently it was ok to have different morals at least in OT times.

A big reason why the Church highlights out first parents as example is because Jesus did so, himself.
[BIBLEDRB]Matthew 19:8[/BIBLEDRB]

 

[Dave_B]

This really concerns me because so many times people defend marriage and the church’s sexual morals by Adam and Eve but apparently it was ok to have different morals at least in OT times.

ONE wife is more than enough

Morality was evolving throughout Biblical times. There are many difficult issues in the OT, which can be put down to the culture and morality at that point in history.

 

[SonCatcher]

Jesus’ explanation that divorce was permitted for a time due to their hardness of heart has been applied to Old Testament polygamy, as well.

Meanwhile, Paul’s description to Timothy of suitable candidates for Holy Orders is also a model for all of us.
[BIBLEDRB]1 Timothy 3:2[/BIBLEDRB][BIBLEDRB]1 Peter 2:9[/BIBLEDRB]

 

[Garyjohn2]

Very interesting inquiry! I am curious about this as well.

So far the responders have giving Bible verses, but only the 1Timothy verse addresses marriage of one woman, and that is directed only to Bishops.

What is the real reason for this discipline among lay people, and when did it start?

 

[JonathonofOhio]

The Law allowed for it just as it allowed for divorce. Jesus explained that this was not the way God made it.

Going back to Genesis we see:
“Wherefore a man shall leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they shall be two in one flesh.” – Genesis 2:24

Jesus in Matthew 19 speaks of the virtues of virginity and marriage, and explains that the TWO become one (not 3 or 4 or 5 or 6)…upon explaining this, they ask about the divorce laws and Jesus explains it was not so in the beginning. In the beginning there was one woman created for one man. God’s Law is that TWO become ONE, not that a man should take on multiple wives. When He came into the world He explained that to us, so now men marry one wife.

And this is also referenced in Ephesians 5:31 when the apostle talks about how a husband should love his wife (not his multiple wives), because his wife is his own flesh.

 

[SonCatcher]

Very interesting inquiry! I am curious about this as well.

So far the responders have giving Bible verses, but only the 1Timothy verse addresses marriage of one woman, and that is directed only to Bishops.

What is the real reason for this discipline among lay people, and when did it start?

I think you misunderstood the pairing.

While St. Paul was discussing Bishops and Deacons specifically (Deacons have the same requirement if you read on), I paired that with St. Peter’s writing that we are all called to be a priesthood. Therefore, St. Paul’s model really is for all. Since the beginning of the Church, converts who previously practiced polygamy were required to give it up. Paul was excluding former polygamists from seeking Holy Orders, as I understand.

 

[TimothyH]

Very interesting inquiry! I am curious about this as well.

So far the responders have giving Bible verses, but only the 1Timothy verse addresses marriage of one woman, and that is directed only to Bishops.

What is the real reason for this discipline among lay people, and when did it start?

Monogamy started at creation. One man and one woman, created in the divine image.

The perfect relationship between Adam and Eve, modeled on the the perfect relationship between God the Father and God the Son (“in our image” Genesis 1:26) was broken by sin. God has been slowy, and patiently putting it back together ever since.

Then God said: “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. Let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, and the cattle, and over all the wild animals and all the creatures that crawl on the ground.” God created man in his image; in the divine image he created him; male and female he created them. (Genesis 1:26-27)

The fact that God created one man and one woman, male and female, in the image of the Trinity, was so important that it is the first thing we are told about mankind in all of the Bible. It was so important that God put it in the 26th and 27th verse of a book with over 35,000 verses. God put this fact in the first chapter, and the rest of the book relies on it.

-Tim-

 

[Mintaka]

Well, you can use “a husband of one wife” to argue against polygamy, but that’s not how it was taken by Christians in the Roman Empire.

The pagan Romans didn’t do polygamy, and they were pretty clear that if you lived in Roman territory, you couldn’t legally do polygamy, either. A man could legally be sleeping with a bunch of girlfriends, mistresses, slaves and/or prostitutes, of course, but they didn’t have any real rights and a slavewoman’s children would be born slaves. There was no future in it, by design. Roman law was pretty strict about one man/one legal wife, and it had many legal penalties pointed against polygamy (even if not against men shacking up with “concubines”, literally meaning “woman you lie down with”).

“A husband of one wife” meant monogamy with no remarriage, either in cases of the wife dying or being put away in divorce. This was a very hot topic in early Christianity, because it was clearly the ideal of marriage for both Jews and Greeks, and pagan Romans too. But it was difficult, and it went against the licketysplit serial divorce and remarriage customs of “modern Roman society”, even if absolute monogamy had been commonplace in the old days of the Roman Republic.

It was a great compliment in Latin to call a Roman widow or matron “a one-man woman” (that’s an “univira”). Apparently, there were some Greek and Roman plays which advocated the corresponding ideal of the “unifeminus”, the one-woman man. (Euripides had Alcestis insisting that Admetus not remarry, seeing as how she was dying for his sake.)

But only Christianity took the “unifeminus” idea really seriously, and made it not just an ideal, but a legal requirement for office!

 

[Big_Dummy]

monogamy started with Adam and Eve. Based on Deut 17:17 Kings in Israel were never suppose to take on multiple wives. The Old Testament records human mistakes, and bad behavior. If you read the stories of OT kings you will see that multiple wives often led them away from the Lord, towards worshipping false gods. Just because a biblical character did something, does not mean God endorsed that behavior. For example, I don’t think any of the Prophets had multiple wives.

Romans 15:4
For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.

Deuteronomy 17:14-20

14When thou art come unto the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, and shalt possess it, and shalt dwell therein, and shalt say, I will set a king over me, like as all the nations that are about me;

15Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the LORD thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee: thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother.

16But he shall not multiply horses to himself, nor cause the people to return to Egypt, to the end that he should multiply horses: forasmuch as the LORD hath said unto you, Ye shall henceforth return no more that way.

17Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away: neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold.

18And it shall be, when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write him a copy of this law in a book out of that which is before the priests the Levites:

19And it shall be with him, and he shall read therein all the days of his life: that he may learn to fear the LORD his God, to keep all the words of this law and these statutes, to do them:

20That his heart be not lifted up above his brethren, and that he turn not aside from the commandment, to the right hand, or to the left: to the end that he may prolong his days in his kingdom, he, and his children, in the midst of Israel.

 

[TMC]

Well, you can use “a husband of one wife” to argue against polygamy, but that’s not how it was taken by Christians in the Roman Empire.

The pagan Romans didn’t do polygamy, and they were pretty clear that if you lived in Roman territory, you couldn’t legally do polygamy, either. A man could legally be sleeping with a bunch of girlfriends, mistresses, slaves and/or prostitutes, of course, but they didn’t have any real rights and a slavewoman’s children would be born slaves. There was no future in it, by design. Roman law was pretty strict about one man/one legal wife, and it had many legal penalties pointed against polygamy (even if not against men shacking up with “concubines”, literally meaning “woman you lie down with”).

“A husband of one wife” meant monogamy with no remarriage, either in cases of the wife dying or being put away in divorce. This was a very hot topic in early Christianity, because it was clearly the ideal of marriage for both Jews and Greeks, and pagan Romans too. But it was difficult, and it went against the licketysplit serial divorce and remarriage customs of “modern Roman society”, even if absolute monogamy had been commonplace in the old days of the Roman Republic.

It was a great compliment in Latin to call a Roman widow or matron “a one-man woman” (that’s an “univira”). Apparently, there were some Greek and Roman plays which advocated the corresponding ideal of the “unifeminus”, the one-woman man. (Euripides had Alcestis insisting that Admetus not remarry, seeing as how she was dying for his sake.)

But only Christianity took the “unifeminus” idea really seriously, and made it not just an ideal, but a legal requirement for office!

I agree that Roman influence is probably what ended polygamy in both the Jewish and Christian communities. In fact, polygamy has been accepted in most cultures during most of human history (and still is in many places), and I think it is mostly the Roman/Christian influence that has changed that in most of the West. Polygamy was allowed, but not common, in Biblical times. It was uncommon mostly because you had to be somewhat wealthy to afford multiple wives. But the Old Testament rules clearly allowed it - see for example the rules about dealing with multiple wives in Exodus and Deuteronomy. As for how long it continued - the practice appears to have continued into Christ’s time as Herod the Great had multiple wives.

 

[NotWorthy]

Ok, I know Adam and Eve are often used by the church to support the one man/one woman concept of marriage. But if you read the old Testament you see that men used to have multiple wives. King David had several wives with children by each of them. The sin he had with Bathsheba was different (she was someone else’s wife) and so that was why that was a sin.

So my question is, when did monogamy start and when did the church begin to say marriage was one man/ one woman? And when did it become a sin to have multiple wives?

This really concerns me because so many times people defend marriage and the church’s sexual morals by Adam and Eve but apparently it was ok to have different morals at least in OT times.

I think this thread has started in the wrong direction.

Just because David had multiple wives, does not mean that God approved of it. I’ll have to do some quick reading, but I think both David and Solomon both violated God’s command when they went out and married any woman who was breathing.

 

[TimothyH]

monogamy started with Adam and Eve. Based on Deut 17:17 Kings in Israel were never suppose to take on multiple wives. The Old Testament records human mistakes, and bad behavior. If you read the stories of OT kings you will see that multiple wives often led them away from the Lord, towards worshipping false gods. Just because a biblical character did something, does not mean God endorsed that behavior. For example, I don’t think any of the Prophets had multiple wives.

Big Smarty, you make a very important point.

Most multiple wife scenarios in the Old Testament were kings who, as part of a military alliance, took the daughter of the king to whom he was allied as a wife. Neither the alliance nor the marriage were sanctioned by God. In fact, God often told Israel not to rely on anyone but Him for military help yet they made military alliances because they were unable to trust God. And more often than not, the woman whom they married led them to sin.

We see the same thing with Sampson in the Book of Judges. And you point exactly, that multiple (and foreign) wives led the OT kings to worship false Gods was exactly Solomon’s downfall.

-Tim-