Polygamy has been growing in popularity around the fringes of the very recent theonomist movement that has developed over the last 5 to 10 years, but has dramatically increased since George Floyd and the Covid-19 lockdown.
Explaining this recent theonomic movement starts with the two words “theos” and “nomos” which means “law of God” or “God’s law.” However this term means far more than those who agree with the Psalmist who says “oh how I love your law, it is my meditation all the day” Ps 119:97.
Theonomy is much more than simply loving the Word of God or seeking “all of Christ for all of life” or any of the other popular phrases that have been coined in order to lure theologically immature Christians into this movement.
The recent increase in popularity hinges upon the widespread use of a number of these buzzwords and cliches, built on false dichotomies: “Christ or chaos”, “Theonomy or autonomy”, “God’s law or man’s law.” These expressions have become increasingly effective in the face of such cultural chaos that we’ve observed in recent years. There are other popular phrases but this article is not intended to be a deep dive on theonomy, but merely mentioning it in order to introduce you to this issue of the modern resurgence of polygamist defenders and advocates and a Biblical response, opposing such advocates.
At its core, Theonomy depends on a highly subjective “picking and choosing” hermeneutic. Hermeneutic simply means method of Bible interpretation.
While saying they affirm God’s law for all of life, they use an eclectic method of picking and choosing which of God’s laws they want to emphasize.
One such example is the advocacy for killing rebellious children but not upholding the dietary laws of the OT. I acknowledge some OG theonomists (such as RJ Rushdoony) were more consistent in their near Orthodox Jew-like approach to dietary standards, yet hypocritically lax by his own divorce on spurious grounds such as his wife’s mental breakdown (Heresy in the Heartland: Voiceless Women: Arda J. Rushdoony) and her response - his “extreme cruelty.” I consider this extremely hypocritical, given that modern theonomists scarcely allow for divorce on the grounds of abuse, but they enthusiastically follow a cruel man who caused his wife’s mental anguish, which resulted in her mental breakdown, and he subsequently left her and married the wife of another pastor. But if you find yourself married to a raging psychopath, then divorce and marry someone who is indwelt by the Holy Spirit, good luck being allowed to teach Sunday School at a theonomic church. After all, there’s nothing about unprovoked fits of rage, violent outbursts, threats, knives, or pots of boiling water in Matthew 19. Nevertheless the de facto archbishop of their movement wouldn’t pass their own sniff test for ministerial qualification.
Back to our discussion:
Traditional protestant theology holds to two main frameworks related to Old Testament law: the Threefold Division of the law: Moral, Civil, and Ceremonial; and the Three Uses of the law: 1. To convict us of our sin and drive us to Christ, 2. To restrain evil by making society habitable, and 3. to serve as a guide to show us the way God wants us to live.
Here’s an article that discusses the threefold division of the law: What are the main divisions of the Old Testament Law? | carm.org
Traditional protestants often view God’s moral law as represented by the Ten Commandments in the OT, and the Sermon on the Mount in the NT. The Civil laws have been traditionally understood to have concluded with the end of the Old Testament era, and that the New Testament has a hermeneutical/interpretive priority. Protestants have also typically understood that the Old Testament ceremonial laws were fulfilled in the person and work of Jesus Christ. Some such examples are how Jesus is our sacrificial lamb and high priest. Some civil laws have fulfillment and application in the local church; one such example is how excommunication for the unrepentant adulterer replaces execution. Again the purpose of this section of the article is not to do a deep dive into theonomy, but merely to note how the rise in popularity of polygamy is tied to this elevation of irregular hermeneutics which is necessary to the theonomic movement.
On polygamy:
First, we must acknowledge that the Old Testament does allow for polygamy, but regulates it. This is similar to the Old Testament’s teaching on divorce.
Second, we must be clear that it is not the ideal, or original design, but something that is permitted and regulated to protect God’s people.
A third factor that must be acknowledged is that the many examples of polygamy in the Old Testament serve as a warning to the problems that arise from such lifestyles. Beginning with Lamech in Genesis 4, and moving forward throughout the Old Testament narrative, polygamy continually shows negative outcomes. Some such examples are: unloved and jealous wives (Rachel vs Leah), ungodly wives who turn their husbands hearts away from the Lord (Solomon’s wives), and rebellious children from such divided households (Absolom).
One of the strongest arguments in favor of polygamy is the practice of levirate marriage (Deut 25). Yet this argument is dismantled by the fact that the practice of levirate marriage is reversed from the Old to New Testament. In the OT, a woman whose husband died was instructed to marry her husband's brother. In the NT, Paul instructs the widow to marry any man she chooses, only in the Lord (he must be a Christian, 1 Cor 7:39).
The final word:
Jesus clearly affirms the original creation design for marriage: of one man married to one woman, in a life-long covenant of love, faithfulness, and childbearing in texts such as Mark 10 and Matthew 19. This pattern is reinforced and clarified in Paul’s writings with instructions for marriage, divorce, and remarriage (1 Cor 7, Eph 5). But what is noticeably absent is all allowances for polygamy. The allowance for polygamy simply does not appear in the face of the various bleak circumstances for widows described in the NT (the widows of 1 Tim 5 enrolled in a church program, or the widows food pantry of Acts 6).
As a consequence of these points, Christians should not seek to reintroduce the practice of polygamy into society, as it is contrary to God’s original and good design for humanity, and it is contrary to the teaching of Jesus and the apostles.
Young ladies who are being courted by young men who are cage-stage on theonomy and have started suggesting the abiding validity of polygamy should shut down that romance faster than the angry CN feds will descend on this article.