What Does the Bible Say About Polygamy? 

They don't. They worship traditions of men.

Easy, a man having multiple marriages (wives/concubines) is perfectly appropriate and righteous behavior, so God giving David more wives is not a problem from a moral perspective in God's law.

@@BibleMarriages that's not what is said in this video.

@@justjamie6458 Indeed it’s not, but that’s because this video is chock full of false teachings, and Greco-Roman pagan tradition masquerading as biblical truths.

The video said polygamy is wrong in God's eyes. These passages about king David contradict that.

As it should be, at least socially. It's not a wise/ beneficial practice for who we are as a people today. It is not a sin, a person telling you this is ignorant or worships traditions of men. However, it is unwise. We don't have enough faithful people anyway, and those who do exist aren't behaving in a way that this could work without worse outcomes. Its a foolish practice for us today. But not a Sin by the Law.

@@jetrpg22 To claim it should be is to say God did not know what He was doing in giving us the laws that allow for it. It is also a sin to remove the laws that allow for it and add laws that forbid it (Deut 4:2)... There are 20+ million more women in the American churches than men, you think it's not something we need to ensure God's daughters are actually covered in marriages like they should be? To blanket state that it's unwise, indicates that there are no faithful men and women who would benefit from it, and that is simply untrue as I have witness those people personally.

@@BibleMarriages " To blanket state that it's unwise, indicates that there are no faithful men and women who would benefit from it, and that is simply untrue as I have witness those people personally." Insert low IQ meme of general vs specific examples. Come on, you are better than this and you know it. Why do you think there are more women in church? The fix for that is the fix for it. Don't conflate it. We know what weak churches that worship the fem are,. For one they are counted in your numbers. Are you saying those churches would be willing to embrace polygyny? This is just cope. It's foolish because single faithful men and women are exceedingly rare. I think it was Will Spencer (idk his name) on x the other day who made the argument of single childless women into their 30s are sinning. Not because it's a sin, but because they were in that situation as a consequence of their active sin. And that is right, a lot of them are in church, unrepentant being boss babes and Jesus' girlfriends (who they are the boss of). These women don't need husbands, they could have gotten those, they Need Jesus as their MASTER. I never removed a law, did I? Let me hit you with the Word. “All things are lawful,” but not all things are helpful. “All things are lawful,” but not all things build up. The New Testament clearly teaches us to be discerning about the Law. Not to remove it but that its not the food that enters the mouth, but that which comes out of it which defiles you. There is no CALL FOR POLYGYNY. You can advocate all you want against it and it's not a sin, there is NO TEACHING OR LAW AGAINST THAT. You can even make a law that bans, and that is not a sin. You cannot say it's a sin, but you could ban it. As THERE IS NO COMMAND TO ENGAGE IN IT. That is how the LAW works. There is a call/instruction for marriage, but none for polygyny. This looks like a man who has a wife, but goes out and sleeps with a virgin (or eligible women to marry) who then want to be this man's women, to marry her. There ya go the actual case, and he may have been fooling around (ie not looking for a 2nd wife), but this is the ACTUAL TEACHING. Another case would be your 1st wife has apostatized, no longer fulfills her duties and cares not about the church, but stays with you. In this case, a 2nd wife isn't an awful position (look at the destruction this wrought on Christendom via kings in history). It's a bit more wise in some cases. So I am not saying, in every case, but typically and for 99% of cases it's foolish. As, for most all, it only makes the problem of lack of faithful partners worse. Now most men today at their weddings SWEAR an oath of monogamy and if you have done that there is no release. You are bound by that and if you do break it you have sinned. For sure. Are they living in sin? Well, they would have to make amends and repent. What is an unrepentant sinner?

True, but we have literal laws regulating the practice, thus it's permitted and nothing they say can erase them. So they are being dishonest.

Facts! Well said. Couldn't have said it better. Videos like these just confuse men and get them to abide by WOMEN'S mating strategy. Just another form of control over men. Completely unbiblical.

The false teaching here is yours. God always describes Himself as husband of a single bride; and stretching the use of allegory to cover points it was not intended to is a classic interpretive error. The Bible is quite specific that when someone who divorces and marries another (except in the case of infidelity) is committing adultery. Thus, the notion of 'separate one man one woman relationships' being equally valid is Biblically discounted. This is not a biblically valid counter.

@@andrewgilbertson5672 Can you divorce half of a woman? You cannot... So how can you possibly claim that God always describes Himself as a husband of a singular bride and call me the false teacher? Ezekiel 23 describes the "two women" God took to be His (brides) who bore Him sons and daughters, ultimately each of them committed adultery on Him, and one of them was given a writ of divorce and sent away (House of Israel). In Jeremiah 31 He literally says "I was a Husband to THEM" plural. He had two figurative "brides" in Israel and Judah. To claim otherwise, is simply ignoring the plain text. Is it allegorical? Absolutely, but so is "Christ and His bride" ... so is "the Bride of the Lamb" in Rev 21, which, is not the church. So immediately there's a problem with the idea that Christ has "only one bride", a phrase you'll never find in scripture. Sorry but you've flat out told falsehoods, perhaps that works for some that won't go verify it themselves, but the scriptures do not match what you claim.

@@andrewgilbertson5672 Go back to your Bible and read. The only way a man commits adultery is if he marries a previously divorced woman, not if the woman has always been single. Even if it's true (which is not) that God has "only one bride" that doesn't necessarily mean it applies to us. Nowhere in the Bible does God prohibit polygyny or even call it a sin. But you ARE sinning by adding to HIS Word. That is called eisegesis. Christians will encourage tithing because they like to point out it was BEFORE the law, you know what else was before the law? Taking your sister-in-law as wife to raise up a child for you brother. In fact Onan son of Judah was killed by God because he didn't do that for his brother. There is no stipulation though that the next brother in line must be single to take his dead brother's wife. You'd have to read that in. Eisegesis.

@@BibleMarriages I concede, I had forgotten about the figurative story in Ezekiel 23. Jeremiah 31, it appears that there is some ambiguity in the translation; could also just as easily be 'was their master,' so I would have to research the original language more fully before coming to the conclusion. To stretch the notion of the metaphor for New Jerusalem in Revelation 21 to indicate polygamy with the Bride of Christ is, I think, pushing things a bit far in an effort to make a rhetorical point. Regardless, while I admit that I made an error in leaving out the Ezekiel allegory, the initial point still stands. Jesus is quite specific in his standards for marriage, and the notion of separate one man one woman relationships being a valid Biblical model remains untrue. The existence of an allegorical model (stemming from the split of the singular people He initially declared to be His, necessitating a divergent metaphor) does not change the practical nature of actual marriage that Christ commands.