The Bible says "wife" not "wives"

The Monogamy-Only Objection

This objection claims that God's intention for monogamy-only marriage is evident in the language used throughout Scripture:

1. When giving instructions about marriage, the Bible consistently uses the singular "wife" rather than the plural "wives."
2. If God intended to permit or endorse polygyny, He would have explicitly used plural language.
3. The consistent use of singular language indicates that God's design is for one man to have only one wife.
4. Examples cited often include passages like Ephesians 5:33, 1 Timothy 3:2, and Proverbs 5:18.

The Answer

This objection fundamentally misunderstands how language works in instructional contexts and applies a modern linguistic expectation to ancient Hebrew and Greek texts.

Singular Language in Instructions is Normal

1. Instructional language typically uses the singular form even when the instruction applies to multiple instances. This is true in virtually all languages, including biblical Hebrew and Greek.

2. Consider parallel examples:

• Does this mean a father should only discipline one son and ignore his other sons? Of course not.
• The singular "son" is used to establish a principle that applies to all sons a man might have.

3. Other examples of singular language that obviously applies to multiple instances:
   • "Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain" (Deuteronomy 25:4) - Does this apply to only one ox?
   • "Love your neighbor as yourself" (Leviticus 19:18) - Does this mean you only love one neighbor?

The Logical Fallacy: False Dichotomy

1. The objection creates a false dichotomy: either God uses plural language and requires polygyny, or He uses singular language and requires monogamy.

2. The reality is that singular language in instructions:

   • Establishes principles that apply to each individual case
   • Allows for application in both singular and plural contexts
   • Does not mandate either monogamy or polygyny

3. If we applied this logic consistently:

   • Every man would be required to marry (since instructions about "wife" are given)
   • Every couple would be required to have children (since instructions about raising "a child" are given)
   • No one could own multiple oxen, donkeys, or sheep (since singular forms are used in the Law)

Biblical Evidence Against This Interpretation

1. God gave laws regulating polygyny while continuing to use singular language:

2. God Himself uses singular and plural language interchangeably when referring to His relationship with Israel:

The Absurdity of the Alternative

1. If God had used plural language exclusively:

   • It would imply that all men must have multiple wives
   • Single men and men with only one wife would be in violation of God's law
   • This would contradict Paul's teaching that some are called to singleness (1 Corinthians 7)

2. The most sensible interpretation:

   • Singular language establishes principles that apply to each relationship
   • Instructions about how to treat "a wife" apply to each wife a man might have
   • Neither singular nor plural language mandates either monogamy or polygyny

Conclusion

The objection that God's use of singular "wife" rather than plural "wives" indicates His preference for monogamy-only marriage fails to understand how instructional language works. Using this same logic would force us to conclude that parents should only raise one child, farmers should only own one ox, and people should only love one neighbor.

Instead, we should recognize that singular language in instructions establishes principles that apply to each individual case. Instructions about how to treat "a wife" apply to each wife a man might have, just as instructions about raising "a child" apply to each child parents might have.

The Bible's use of singular language neither prohibits polygyny nor mandates monogamy. It simply provides guidance for how each marital relationship should function, regardless of how many such relationships a man might have.