Why is polygamy wrong?

[AgnosticBoy]

You’ve mentioned the relative morality a few times without expounding on that. Morality does not mean merely the lack of perceived harm, or mere prohibitions based on an arbitrary standard.

Morality is founded on the revealed good, proclaiming that good, upholding it, supporting it. Morality draws a person to beatitude.

For instance, it is good for human beings to live and grow and prosper. So when a human being is hungry, it is moral to help feed them to support that good…their existence and flourishing. Starving people, or letting them starve through negligence, is immoral not merely because my bible tells me so, it is immoral because it detracts from a good. Anyone can see that good, of should be able to see it. Pictures of starving human beings are disturbing for a reason.

All you’ve done here is commit a logical fallacy, i.e. ‘affirming the consequent’, by using your conclusion (your examples) to prove your unproven starting premise. I understand your example but it doesn’t show that morality must involve all that you mentioned in order for us to know what’s good or bad. Perhaps you’re confusing the basis of ‘natural law’ with ‘moral law’ (revealed by God)? Either way, the Apostle Paul simply states in his Epistle to the Romans that the Law informs him on what’s right and wrong:
Romans 7:7 What shall we say, then? Is the law sinful? Certainly not! Nevertheless, I would not have known what sin was had it not been for the law. For I would not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, “You shall not covet.”

If God said that polygamy was right (2 Chronicles 24:2-3; Deuteronomy 21:15-16) then on what basis or logic do you say that polygamy is wrong?

In the area of sexual morality you are addressing, what is the underlying good you are referring to when you talk about morality? That is unclear.

God’s own acts and judgements, which themselves set a moral precedent, if He is all-good. There may be other secular reasons or even spiritual reasons, but I don’t find these necessary in order to establish via theology that polygamy is not a sin.

 

[Rau]

In some states, just claiming to be married and living with all of the partners involved is a criminal offense, e.g. Utah.

I believe even in Utah, it is not illegal for a man to impregnate multiple women. Utah had a law in that space struck down in 2013.

If you aren’t willing to incarcerate every single male who’s willing to impregnant multiple women, and all adults involved are willing to share a relationship, then it only makes sense to make laws that ensure consent, that prevents unequal bargaining power between the adults involved, etc.

There is no logic in creating frameworks and support for all acts and communal arrangements that persons might want to enter. What the law does usually (and properly) require is support for the innocents (children) against the behaviour of miscreant parents.

Once people realize that polygamy is moral, doesn’t cause harm, and aren’t under the threat of imprisonment, then perhaps it will be considered a healthy and responsible expression of non-monogamy and then its demand will increase.

Imprisonment is not a risk for 3 persons choosing to live together sexually. It’s only a risk when fraud and deceit are involved. Today, very few hold your views, and the law sees no merit whatsoever in accommodating them.

…Do you not agree that if polygamy was something God eventually wanted people to repent from, then calling polygamists righteous and helping their relationship function better, is one of the most worse ways for him to achieve his goal?

I take what is moral from the fullness of revelation. God brought a people to himself in small steps.

 

[Tomdstone]

It seems like God did approve of polygamy. If that is so, then it cannot be wrong.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

There is no logic in creating frameworks and support for all acts and communal arrangements that persons might want to enter. What the law does usually (and properly) require is support for the innocents (children) against the behaviour of miscreant parents.

Polygamy is not a behavior that some might engage in, some are already engaging in it. There’s even a non-marital form of polygamy which is just referred to as polyamory and these relationships are more diverse than your typical polygamous relationship. As more research comes out about how non-monogamous our natures are, and how poly can be practiced with no harm, the more unreasonable it will look to mandate monogamous relationships.

Imprisonment is not a risk for 3 persons choosing to live together sexually. It’s only a risk when fraud and deceit are involved. Today, very few hold your views, and the law sees no merit whatsoever in accommodating them.

If it’s not a risk, then why do authorities choose not to prosecute polygamists when they know exactly where to find them? Seems there weighing their options to avoid a constitutional fight. You and I both know that splitting up CONSENTING adults from their children just because of a relationship arrangement would have more harm on the children than keeping the family together. If anything with all of the dysfunctional monogamous marriages and single mothers I see around, I don’t think anyone should be claiming an ideal, particularly in the Church.

I take what is moral from the fullness of revelation. God brought a people to himself in small steps.

This doesn’t answer my objection specifically. How much fullness of Revelation does it take to understand that polygamy is moral when God says it is moral? God’s moral laws are NOT progressive. Bringing people to fullness of a truth does not in anyone’s SANE mind involve blessing Unrepentant sinners (polygamists or adulterers by your logic), helping their relationship function better, and then calling them righteous.

 

[Tomdstone]

How much fullness of Revelation does it take to understand that polygamy is moral when God says it is moral? God’s moral laws are NOT progressive. .

That seems right to me. Of course some things are immoral by the natural law or law of God, and other things are wrong because of a man made law. For example, eating meat on Ash Wednesday is not against the natural law, but is wrong for a Roman Catholic because of a law of the Church. Is it possible that polygamy is not against the natural law, but is against a man made law which could change at any time depending on the circumstances.

 

[Rau]

This doesn’t answer my objection specifically. How much fullness of Revelation does it take to understand that polygamy is moral when God says it is moral? God’s moral laws are NOT progressive. Bringing people to fullness of a truth does not in anyone’s SANE mind involve blessing Unrepentant sinners (polygamists or adulterers by your logic), helping their relationship function better, and then calling them righteous.

When God walked among us- when his revelation was nearly complete - we find no instances at all of polygamy presented in a good light, or advocated. The Church that God gave authority to and which reads the same Scripture as you do, does not concur with you. It may be that only you are sane!

 

[Tomdstone]

When God walked among us- when his revelation was nearly complete - we find no instances at all of polygamy presented in a good light, or advocated. The Church that God gave authority to and which reads the same Scripture as you do, does not concur with you. It may be that only you are sane!

But polygamy was allowed in the OT.

 

[Trident_H]

But polygamy was allowed in the OT.

So was the stoning of adulterers.

It’s funny. Liberal/progressive types always get excited about moving ahead and trying new things. But when a question drops down that makes them stutter they always run back and point to the stone age to justify why we should do it now. Because everything was perfect in the stone age right?

 

[Tomdstone]

So was the stoning of adulterers.

It’s funny. Liberal/progressive types always get excited about moving ahead and trying new things. But when a question drops down that makes them stutter they always run back and point to the stone age to justify why we should do it now. Because everything was perfect in the stone age right?

Is it possible for God to allow something that is morally wrong according to the natural law? I don’t think so, but maybe there is some loophole ?

 

[AgnosticBoy]

That seems right to me. Of course some things are immoral by the natural law or law of God, and other things are wrong because of a man made law. For example, eating meat on Ash Wednesday is not against the natural law, but is wrong for a Roman Catholic because of a law of the Church. Is it possible that polygamy is not against the natural law, but is against a man made law which could change at any time depending on the circumstances.

Good points. This is the same reasoning that some of in the Catholic Church have offered, for instance, Saint Augustine.

Bishop Augustine of Hippo view
Contra Faustum Book 22, paragraph 47:

1. Again, Jacob the son of Isaac is charged with having committed a great crime because he had four wives. But here there is no ground for a criminal accusation: for a plurality of wives was no crime when it was the custom; and it is a crime now, because it is no longer the custom. There are sins against nature, and sins against custom, and sins against the laws. In which, then, of these senses did Jacob sin in having a plurality of wives? As regards nature, he used the women not for sensual gratification, but for the procreation of children. For custom, this was the common practice at that time in those countries. And for the laws, no prohibition existed. The only reason of its being a crime now to do this, is because custom and the laws forbid it

 

[AgnosticBoy]

When God walked among us- when his revelation was nearly complete - we find no instances at all of polygamy presented in a good light, or advocated. The Church that God gave authority to and which reads the same Scripture as you do, does not concur with you. It may be that only you are sane!

Again Rau, completely unreasonable. Do you think a same-sex married couple is going to repent when God blesses them with wealth, calls them righteous, and then helps the relationship function? This goes beyond rewarding a supposed immoral behavior but this is exactly what we find God doing for polygamists.

• God’s moral law revelation was already complete in the OT - the NT just repeats it which is why adultery, same-sex acts, bestiality, fornication are all OT rules and they are still wrong even in the NT.
• Secondly, even if the Jews did not know the Law at any point, but God did, so His moral judgements of polygamists would come from full knowledge - nothing needs to be revealed to Him! God judged polygamists as being righteous.
• And last, God did dump ALL of the Law on the Jews and people were being punished for violating it. Polygamy would’ve be a violation of adultery yet no polygamists were ever called out for adultery while others were. God called out king David for adultery when it came to Bathsheeba and since she was already married to another man. Yet God did not call him out for all of his other wives.

we find no instances at all of polygamy presented in a good light, or advocated

To the contrary, polygamist families were the heroes of the Old Testament. They always seem to prosper and have plenty wealth, posterity, inheritance, attain high positions, and much of this is showered down on them from God Himself. Hek, God portrays himself as a polygamist in Jeremiah 31:31-32 when he says he was a “husband to them”.

 

[Rau]

Since you are reduced to mischievous selective quoting of me - I’ll leave the discussion at this point.

 

[Trident_H]

Is it possible for God to allow something that is morally wrong according to the natural law? I don’t think so, but maybe there is some loophole ?

Is it possible for God to not focus on something that’s not perfect morally while He’s busy focusing on something else instead? Sure. Why not?

Parents do that all the time.

 

[Tomdstone]

Is it possible for God to not focus on something that’s not perfect morally while He’s busy focusing on something else instead? Sure. Why not?

Parents do that all the time.

God is a perfect Being and as such He would not allow something immoral.

 

[Trident_H]

God is a perfect Being and as such He would not allow something immoral.

He allowed you though, right?

 

[Tomdstone]

He allowed you though, right?

God does not allow immoral activity. So for example, if I were to steal a pencil or rob a bank, that would be an immoral act, which is not allowed by God or by the natural law.

 

[Vico]

God does not allow immoral activity. So for example, if I were to steal a pencil or rob a bank, that would be an immoral act, which is not allowed by God or by the natural law.

God permits us to use our free will to do immoral activity.

 

[Tomdstone]

God permits us to use our free will to do immoral activity.

True. But robbing a bank is not a morally acceptable activity according to the law of God.

 

[Trident_H]

God does not allow immoral activity. So for example, if I were to steal a pencil or rob a bank, that would be an immoral act, which is not allowed by God or by the natural law.

He allows immoral activity just fine. I don’t quite see what you’re driving at.

 

[Tomdstone]

He allows immoral activity just fine. I don’t quite see what you’re driving at.

Immoral activity is condemned by the law of God. God does not approve of immoral activity such as robbing a bank.